vimes

Infinite Jest

Recommended Posts

I don't even know what the opinion means. Describing things as "white" has become so vague as to be meaningless as far as I'm concerned. It just seems to be some kind of criticism having to do with wealth, or hipsterism, or privilege, or SOMETHING, depending on the context, but at this point I just read it as general snark.

See, I wasn't trying to express any of those things, although 'privilege' gets close. It's more that everything in the scene - the interview, the tennis/tennis academy, the social anxiety of the viewpoint character - bears the mark of huge obsession over the most inconsequential shit. I associate that, more than anything, with that kind of semi-enlightened privileged person who is dimly aware they have such advantages but are still more or less willing to milk it, for instance by not having a lot of perspective. Which is way more effort to describe than just saying 'so white you guys' given that I hadn't really read very much.

Although now this discussion is going to inform my reading of it a bit. I think I'm disappointed more than anything that there's drug abuse in the book, as I'm kind of not a fan of that subject matter.

Edit: yeah, let's not say that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't really understand this either. You criticized the book for appearing 'white.' People interpreted that as a criticism against the perceived 'privilege' of the character who is introduced in the first few pages of the book, and attempted to counter that criticism by mentioning other parts of the book that involve people from 'less-than-privileged' background, who just happen to be living in a halfway home. After your initial criticism, the issue of race was never explicitly referenced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was pretty clear from the context of those first three pages what you meant by white, my response wasn't about seeing it as a racial criticism, but noting that the opening perspective is coming from a hyper-specific privileged position, the part of the book I brought up is actually the story of a white woman, but as a contrast from the life you see at the ETA, it's to me one of the most humbling stories in the book.

I'm bummed that you were disappointed in the response. For me at least it's never about wanting to defend the book, but rather that I just really want people to read it. Whenever I see/hear someone with a problem with it (or perhaps when I mistakenly think they have a problem) I'm always too eager to leap out and be like "keep going! there's something different further in! it can be a rough start! trust me".

There's enough different stuff in it that everyone is going to get something out of it. It would be cool if you kept posting thoughts every so often as you read it, there's so much detail in the book, that some of the best comments/thoughts i've heard come from people who haven't finished it yet, because they tend to pay attention in a way that people don't on a re-read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just past the first 100 pages, and it feels pretty silly to write anything about this book when there's so much left -- but man those first few chapters just worked for me personally. I think Wallace nails a particular brand of hypertension and anxiety that often seems excessive or forced when others attempt it.

I think I'm disappointed more than anything that there's drug abuse in the book, as I'm kind of not a fan of that subject matter.

I thought the same going into that second chapter with the unnamed dope-addict, but it won me over entirely. I have no idea if the addict mindset described is accurate by any means, but I really found it engrossing. I can see why his use of repetition would grate on others though.

Also, at times it seems almost like Neal Stephenson narrative - except where Stephenson slaps you in the face with the oddities of the fictional world, then gradually peels them away, I get the sense Wallace is slowing revealing these weird quirks that will eventually build to something larger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the same going into that second chapter with the unnamed dope-addict, but it won me over entirely. I have no idea if the addict mindset described is accurate by any means, but I really found it engrossing. I can see why his use of repetition would grate on others though.

Kind of tangental, but related. Recently I was watching The Wire for the first time and got to an episode where one of the addicts is mandated to attend AA classes. The atmosphere and the dialogue in that scene was amazingly similar to all of the AA sections from Infinite Jest, which I always interpreted as fairly realistic (the guy did spend a lot of time going to those same meetings) if not slightly exaggerated for the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm only 80 pages in and I'm surprised at how engrossed I already am in these stories. The usage of footnotes is interesting though, because Wallace not only uses them for the more "essayist", descriptive sections of the book, but also the narrative, dialogue parts. Being enthralled by the first appearance of

Kate Gompert

, it was strange seeing a footnote appear in the middle of one of her sentences to expand on some drug nomenclature. In fact, the amount of detail he uses for drugs throughout the whole book is unusual (not in a bad way).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been pulling myself through the first chapter for a couple of months now, returning to it briefly in between other books, appreciating the (deliberately) stilted scene from a great distance, but never feeling the drive to keep going.

 

Finally, 19 dense pages in, the narrator finally opens his mouth.  And so does David Foster Wallace.

 

Wow.

I think I get it now.

Suddenly, the remaining 1038 pages are a very exciting prospect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad that you were able to connect with the book so quickly; I remember that it didn't quite click for me until well after the first 100 pages, but after that, it was surprisingly easy to read.

 

There's always a kind of 'is this worth finishing?' calculation that goes into reading books that are widely known as 'challenging' or 'esoteric.' Even though many, many people love and praise Infinite Jest, when I first started reading it, I felt this very real fear that I would reach the end without ever connecting to or understanding the book. When I finally made it past the writing style (which is amazing starting on page 1, but still incredibly intimidating) and the weird structure, it all fell into place for me. Everything that once seemed random and meaningless becomes clear, and I realized that every detail, every character, was meticulously written and not just haphazardly thrown into the story. At the end, I actually found myself wishing the book was a few hundred pages longer (even though the actual ending is perfect, I just wanted an excuse to continue living in this whole world that DFW created).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I too had a lot of trouble connecting until I'd made it through the first hundred pages or so. After that, though it still took a lot of time, it was a breeze to read. Still get to hold it over my girlfriend's head that I borrowed her copy to read and she still has never made it through the first 100 herself. My usual cut off for "will I finish a book?" is 100 pages, but I'd extended that to 300 for IJ. Turns out I didn't need to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fell of the wagon for a while, but starting to pick up the pace again. One of the reasons I slowed down was that each vignette felt so satisfying that it kind of stood on its own and never pressured me into starting the next one. The first 200 or so pages is basically a party where you're constantly introduced to people, but you don't really know anyone. Getting to the point where viewpoint characters are starting to reappear is pretty exciting.

 

Random spoiler thoughts up to ~pg 400:

 

That fake midterm paper that begins with "KEEP YOUR ANSWERS BRIEF AND GENDER NEUTRAL" is the goddamn best thing.

Also loving the callbacks to the filmography.

The second Madame Psychosis chapter was horrifying. At first, the return to a known character was a surge of relief, and then she announces her intent to kill herself and, over the course of the chapter, seemingly follows through. Very few narratives ever occupy that suicidal brainspace. I think a lot of media portrays the suicidal as being broken down messes with no higher functions left, and it was fascinating (and a bit unnerving) to have MP portrayed as someone you could still sympathy towards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fell of the wagon for a while, but starting to pick up the pace again. One of the reasons I slowed down was that each vignette felt so satisfying that it kind of stood on its own and never pressured me into starting the next one. The first 200 or so pages is basically a party where you're constantly introduced to people, but you don't really know anyone. Getting to the point where viewpoint characters are starting to reappear is pretty exciting.

 

Random spoiler thoughts up to ~pg 400:

 

That fake midterm paper that begins with "KEEP YOUR ANSWERS BRIEF AND GENDER NEUTRAL" is the goddamn best thing.

Also loving the callbacks to the filmography.

The second Madame Psychosis chapter was horrifying. At first, the return to a known character was a surge of relief, and then she announces her intent to kill herself and, over the course of the chapter, seemingly follows through. Very few narratives ever occupy that suicidal brainspace. I think a lot of media portrays the suicidal as being broken down messes with no higher functions left, and it was fascinating (and a bit unnerving) to have MP portrayed as someone you could still sympathy towards.

 

David Foster Wallace wrote some of the most painfully realistic depressed/suicidal characters in literature. I know that he drew a lot from his own personal experience with depression--especially with the character Kate Gompert--which is probably why the depression feels more genuine, and therefore much more difficult to read.

 

I see Infinite Jest described as a comedy a lot, and I think that's a very misleading description. Sure there are some truly funny parts in this book, but it also so overwhelming sad, so raw and sincere, that calling a comedy really undercuts the emotional impact this book can have on a person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Foster Wallace wrote some of the most painfully realistic depressed/suicidal characters in literature. I know that he drew a lot from his own personal experience with depression--especially with the character Kate Gompert--which is probably why the depression feels more genuine, and therefore much more difficult to read.

 

Another great thing around pg. 400 (im around 450) is the section about the

kid who threatens to kill himself if he loses a game of tennis. It's not presented in a particularly frightening way but as he describes the pristine condition of the glock as he puts it up to his temple the scene gets extremely tense for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm about 300 or so pages in (according to my Kindle)... and, well, it's intense. I kind of wish I hadn't read the blurb on the book before reading it though.

 

When I'm not reading it, it is all I can think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I just finished reading this today. It's interesting taking a step back and thinking about the themes and reasons why DFW wrote it. I read this (a transcript of his Kenyon College commencement speech "This Is Water") partway through, and I think that framed a lot of what I took away from the book -

not so much the puzzle that you can attempt to piece together at the end of it, but the journey that he takes you on, and the honest exploration of clichéd ideas and human processes.


 
I really, really enjoyed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing Gately dominate the book more and more as it proceeded was wonderful, and probably the closest to how DFW wished he was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw this, an explanation/summary of what happens at the end. Interesting, and covers a number of things I remember not getting (like what happened with The Entertainment):

 

http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/ijend

 

I really love Swartz's interpretation, sad that I only discovered it after he committed suicide. What a terrible loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His other writing on that blog is excellent, especially his annual book recommendations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw this, an explanation/summary of what happens at the end. Interesting, and covers a number of things I remember not getting (like what happened with The Entertainment):

 

http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/ijend

This is exactly what I came here to ask for after having just finished this book. Man, I can't believed I missed so many of those puzzles/hints. Kind of feeling bad about myself, but great about the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished this monster. Staggeringly beautiful novel! 

 

I'm sure some of the pictures that the novel paints will remain in my memory long after I have forgotten the plot, such as the aforementioned Joelle Van Dyne scene with smoke curling above the claw-footed bathtub, Gately in a crib under Herman the Ceiling that Breathed, and - strangely - Pemulis with a flashlight in his teeth climbing to inspect the struts of the ceiling whose panels have fallen down.   

 

David Foster Wallace wrote some of the most painfully realistic depressed/suicidal characters in literature. I know that he drew a lot from his own personal experience with depression--especially with the character Kate Gompert--which is probably why the depression feels more genuine, and therefore much more difficult to read.

 

Agreed. The various depictions of depression and addiction were downright soul-crushing, especially considering the author's own background. Conversely, the warmth with which he describes the AA is elating.

 

I see Infinite Jest described as a comedy a lot, and I think that's a very misleading description. Sure there are some truly funny parts in this book, but it also so overwhelming sad, so raw and sincere, that calling a comedy really undercuts the emotional impact this book can have on a person.

 

Also agreed. Infinite jest is one of the saddest, most sincere books I have ever read. Most of the laugh-out-loud moments were of the hysterical-inappropriate-laughing-between-tragical-and-stressing-events variety.

 

I just saw this, an explanation/summary of what happens at the end. Interesting, and covers a number of things I remember not getting (like what happened with The Entertainment):

 

http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/ijend

 

"Mind blown." -books.ign.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely! Consider the Lobster and The Pale King are already sitting on my bookshelf and I'm doing market research on the best cover for A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again. I think I will tackle Pynchon's Bleeding Edge first, though. Possibly something lighter, like Chandler, before that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Broom of the System (if you haven't read it) is essentially DFW-does-Pynchon and might be up your alley too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now