RECLAIMING DAVID FOSTER WALLACE FROM THE LIT-BROS

[Danny Weltman]

I suppose I should have clarified that my reasons for hating it with a
passion go beyond the short description I gave. For instance I'm in full
agreement with Tommy that what Wallace has to say is "within sight of
anyone who is perceptive in the slightest." When I feel like I'm being
force fed the inside of my brain I'd like it to come in a package that is
less obfuscatory than* Infinite Jest*, or, if the package *is *obfuscatory,
I'd like it to be interestingly difficult, like Pynchon, rather than
blandly and conceitedly disheveled, which is the best I can say about *IJ. *The
book often feels like it contains every interesting thought Wallace ever
had which could conceivably be shoehorned into the narrative (read some of
his non-fiction and you'll notice much of what shows up in *IJ*). Compare
to, say, Pynchon, who writes very dense books with a ton of stuff in them
but who never feels like he's simply thrown the kitchen sink into a novel.
There's nothing in *GR *or *M&D *that's there just because it's an
interesting idea that can be stuck into someone's mouth (or someone's
internal monologue, in the case of *IJ*)  without warping the narrative too
much.

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 12:08 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:

> The only DFW novel I read was "The Broom of the System."  I hated it for
> all the reasons Tommy lists.  I've avoided IJ because it it.  Looks like my
> opinion is shared by some.
>
> David Morris
>
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Tommy Pinecone <endaflynn345 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Like Danny, I have a blinding hatred of the book. Not for any of the race
>> business, but because of how gimmicky and full of cheap thrills it is.
>>
>> Mark mentioned Pynchon's worldview: from that perspective of reading for
>> the author's views, Wallace has some interesting things to say; though they
>> are within sight of anyone who is perceptive in the slightest.
>>
>> Harold Bloom said it best when he commented that he cannot think and
>> cannot write, no matter how charming he is, it's just the way it is.
>> Infinite Jest read next to Hamlet, Anna Karenina, The Recognitions or GR
>> should make it clear that the mere fact he is mentioned so often, let alone
>> here, is an absurdity. He may be the best among the like of Eggers and
>> Franzen, but it doesn't mean he is a good writer in any sense of the word.
>> On 20 Aug 2015 17:37, "Danny Weltman" <danny.weltman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I read it and hated it with a burning passion. It's as if someone read
>>> Pynchon and said "these books would be better if they were basically only
>>> about white men, and anyone who isn't white should probably be a racist
>>> caricature. Oh, and footnotes - that is what Pynchon is missing. Lots of
>>> footnotes. That'll really kick the postmodernism up a notch."
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Jacob Carey <aristotle114 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I read it, I didn't know that people lied about it. So weird.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Johnny Marr <marrja at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have read Infinite Jest. I once mentioned this in passing to my
>>>>> girlfriend, who instantly accused me of "posturing".
>>>>>
>>>>> THIS IS A GAME NOBODY CAN WIN.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, August 20, 2015, Dave Monroe <against.the.dave at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY READ INFINITE JEST?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://lithub.com/reclaiming-david-foster-wallace-from-the-lit-bros/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why Literary Chauvinists Love David Foster Wallace
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/08/david-foster-wallace-beloved-author-of-bros.html
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150820/105dcb28/attachment.html>