I see a lot of people interested in Infinite Jest here. Some people are eager to jump in, others are intimidated. I've read the book about eleven times, so I just want say a few words and address people who are thinking about reading it or are just beginning.
Before you embark on your journey into the mind of a genius, you have to understand a few things that are very important. When we talk about David Foster Wallace, we’re talking about a man whose I.Q. could not be measured. Past 200, I.Q. tests get imprecise. We don’t know whether we’re dealing with a man with an I.Q. of 200 or 300 or what. When it comes to Wallace-tier geniuses, the standard tests simply don’t apply. You see, Wallace could have entered any field he wanted. He was a real-life Will Hunting. He could’ve been a doctor or a lawyer, or both, if he wanted. He could’ve been a pioneer in physics. He could’ve been a codebreaker for the NSA. But no. He decided to be a writer. He decided to devote his life to aesthetic beauty and to illuminating for us the way to live. That was the beauty and the tragedy of his life. In one way, it’s a blessing to have been born in Wallace’s time, to be able to hear his voice in interviews, to hear him delivering his famous commencement speech, which is already transforming people both intellectually and spiritually. On the other hand, I will surely die before we know even half of the secrets buried within the labyrinth of Infinite Jest. That I consider a curse.
It’s been eighteen years since Infinite Jest was published and scholars have only begun to come to terms with its full implications. This is what you must understand. Wallace reverse-engineered not only the novel, but all of Western literature as well as language itself. Packed within Infinite Jest is Hamlet, The Brothers Karamazov, Gravity’s Rainbow, Ulysses, and everything else. Hell, it even serves as an overview of human history, from dawn to today. It’s a book you could spend a lifetime studying. A lifetime spent in bliss, no doubt. It would be more worthwhile to spend one’s life reading and rereading Infinite Jest than to achieve being “well-read” in the traditional sense. I don’t say this to intimidate you, but to encourage you. You must understand that, on your first time through, you will not understand everything Wallace is trying to communicate to you. Don’t worry. He knew things about life that we won’t discover for decades. Your job is merely to get on the road. In the decades to come, we may, if we’re lucky, discover scientific applications for the new ways of thinking Wallace gave us. We may have to throw out science altogether. We simply don’t know. For now, we have to be content with our vanguard roles. We are the ones who will break the ground and loosen the soil for Wallace’s future interpreters. This is not only our pleasure, but our duty. And for that, as Wallace famously said, “I wish you way more than luck.”
DAVID FOSTER WALLACE GOOD GOOD AMERICAN WRITER YEAH YEAH YEAH INFINITE JEST BRIEF IN-TER-VIEWS, WITH HI-DE-OUS MEN DAVID FOSTER WALLACE, YOU'RE THE BEST WRITER IN THE WOOOORLD DAVID FOSTER WALLLACCE, YOU'RE THE BEST PERSON TO EVER LIVE ON THIS EARTH
Nathan Sanchez
Poor man's Kafka.
Wyatt Thomas
Is this a meme now? Is it more than just jeremy1122 posting it?
Jose Powell
tru
Wyatt James
anyone have that youtube video of 3 or 4 guys in a car, one shouting "DA VID FOS TER WAL LACE" out the window?
Jace Morales
So true.
How many people have you met with an IQ over 200? Not even Einstein had that level of IQ. He was about 192.
See, David Foster Wallace was smart enough to realize that scientific progress is something that the current human population cannot handle, so he used his talents on what might bring humans to the state of being able to handle future technology.
If you read infinite jest, you will become smarter.
By at least 1 or 2 IQ points.
Every re-readings continues to add more IQ points, but of course there is a decay factor.
Jaxson Campbell
we get it dude you want to bone avril
Jaxson Campbell
>If you read infinite jest, you will become smarter.
>By at least 1 or 2 IQ points.
>Every re-readings continues to add more IQ points, but of course there is a decay factor.
For that method now i have 300
Xavier Green
Shit you read on American bookcovers
Dominic Mitchell
...
Carter King
>I've read the book about eleven times Here you go, friendo.
Levi Fisher
Can you put sheet music in a novel without it being a gimmick? I think the only place I've seen it done is in some science fiction book I read as a kid.
Bentley Kelly
Why do you want him to shoot you?
William James
yeah, of course.
Carson Morgan
What are some examples of it being done well?
Robert Flores
I know at least two other books where it's done well.
Juan King
...
Andrew Hill
Cut your nails you filthy animal.
James Bennett
>that hand
Will you stroke my dick?
Levi Cox
I want to lick underneath your fingernails at the end of every day.
Jace Long
Wow that is some ugly notation
Nicholas Hernandez
...
Leo Ramirez
Here, the subject asserts his superiority to David Foster Wallace, the state of American-run consumerism, and literary criticism that could be declared sensationalist.
Bravo!
Jason Adams
is that finnegan's wake
Juan Perez
Since this is an IJ thread, what's this lock and stop thing that Mario seems to be carrying?
>Wallace, David Foster. Incredible. Really good. Love him. What a writer. Inimitable (though many try). Handsome. An exquisite delight. Love his book Infinite Jest. A favorite of mine between 20 and 20 and a half. Nobody takes his sincerity seriously. A genius.
Joseph Stewart
great
Carson Ramirez
Wo wast du enmitating?
James Sullivan
Stop meming
Landon Campbell
How did you fuck this up so badly. This is such an embarrassing attempt.
That article was cancerous, but there's a comment on the article that is way better:
The most important thing for Wallace, Franzen, Vollmann et al. is coming across as smart and deep. For all their purported concern with spiritual torment and authentic redemption, the writing itself is shockingly shallow. Clearly what matters most is the appearance of depth–even if there is nothing underneath–because that’s just a postmodern commentary on the emptiness of existence, or the inherent limitations of symbolic communication, or whatever facile observation passes for profundity these days.
Whenever I hear people compliment this kind of fraudulent writing, I’m always at a loss–because while I may be cynical and nihilistic, I still refuse to believe that people are really so easily fooled. With critics, it’s understandable: they’re afraid that if they call out someone like Wallace, they’ll be accused of “not getting it”–which, for a critic, is truly the worst fate imaginable–and end up like Glazov/Dolan, correct but doomed to obscurity (which isn’t much consolation). But for readers, I always wonder–what’s the point? Is it really worth all that effort to carve out a niche away from the “mainstream” (the rejection of which, in the present cultural climate, is not rebellious in the least)? I just don’t get it.
Remember when a generation’s literary heroes were legitimately literary and intellectual–Baldwin, Vidal, Dr. Thompson spring to mind–when an author’s intellectual credentials (not necessarily in the academic sense) were actually evident from his work and not from the opinions of academic hermits, smarmy critics and hipsters? The current critical perspective dictates that any work of genuine substance–as opposed to the pretension of substance–is scorned as “unrealistic,” while charlatans like Wallace, Frey, Eggers and whomever else this generation anoints as literary idols (I stopped paying attention a long time ago) are applauded for their insight. At least this irony isn’t lost on Glazov/Dolan. Too bad it’s lost on everyone else, though.
Isaac Ross
they think they're soooo smart and deep, but they're really not... back in my day...
>The current critical perspective dictates that any work of genuine substance–as opposed to the pretension of substance–is scorned as “unrealistic,” while charlatans like Wallace, Frey, Eggers and whomever else this generation anoints as literary idols (I stopped paying attention a long time ago)
a good book hasnt been published since 1959!! these kids arent as smart as they think they are!! btw does it look like i care about this stuff because i typed three angry paragraphs about it? does it seem like i dont really know what im talkong about? haha, well, that's because i actually stopped paying attention long ago...
Isaac Wilson
According to the audiobook, Infinite Jest is about 55 hours long this means that OP spent about 605 hours solely on Infinite Jest
Andrew Price
There's a difference between being very intelligent and being very thoughtful. DFW was the latter.
Colton Miller
It's important to keep in mind how Wallace saw himself.
