/lit/ - Literature

Im going to bring my posts over from the other thread so people have something to get mad about:

When I was 16 (c. 2011), I read Infinite Jest very intently trying to find the existential meaning people said was in there as my first big boy book, and just kept coming up short.

I went online, used a companion text, re-read whole sections many times, etc. In short, I read the book "the right way;" there was no plot detail or cute connection I was unaware of, but this was a decade ago so I will probably be fucking it up now. I just don't want people to say "oh but didn't you realize that JNRW was actually the brother of the one guy who didnt jump and when Don and Hal dig up the body they allude to him getting got in retaliation and starting the international incident which the jets are being scrambled towards in that interview scene..." Again, I'm sure someone is screaming at me that I fucked up and misread the book, but whatever opinion you think is Objectively Correct just assume I understood that back then.

I left the experience feeling misled. Meandering, parallel stories with cryptic and cute cross-connections used to illuminate themes by their juxtaposition is a respectable story structure. However, the way it was done felt like a promise that, when I got the central mystery "solved" (which of the many supported theories actually happened to Hal), I would understand the key to what I was reading, whether that was some thesis of Wallace that he felt he could only communicate indirectly or just why he structured the book this way. But there was no key. And the lack of key was not a profound revelation--"wow I guess he is saying some stuff truly is unknowable!"-- but a frustrating one. Okay, sure, this is a childish way to read a book: I agree, I was a child at the time. But I still feel like the text promises that one *should* be reading like this by including all of those solveable mysteries, by having solveable mysteries be necessary to even understand the plot. Off of the top of my head (a decade later), I remember that Lyle was a ghost, that the uncle killed the dad while fucking his sister, that they caused an international incident which precipitates the war alluded to in that first scene where Hal is being interviewed, that Joelle was burned by the acid Orin dodgd but pretended she was too beautiful to be seen, and so on. All of these required careful reading and re-reading to pick up on. Joelle is one of my favorite characters ever, and when I realized she was lying to Don my gut wrenched. However, Wallace did not need to obscure her actual state for that scene where she tells him she is too beautiful to be seen to have that effect on me. In fact, it was only on my re-read did I realize that she indeed was lying, because it was also thematically fitting for Don to have another potential addiction right there. [Cont.]

>>15815839
By making such core character information (Joelle's real state) a puzzle to figure out, he was validating the sort of textual analysis that Game of Thrones fans do to figure out who Jon Snow's mother is. Given that I had significant questions as to the big ideas of the book, it seemed natural that since the central incident of the novel is similarly hinted at but not shown, finding it would allow everything to click into place, or at least provide another insight. And in the end I realized that there was no central cryptic message. DFW had started the book writing about Hal and his family, and by the end he had taken too long and now wanted to write about Don and his addiction. He did not want to do the hard work of editing out most of his earlier work, or making himself finish the Hal storyline, so, noticing that he had similar ideas bouncing around even if the stories he cared about changed, he decided to just keep the two works together and include other anecdotes he liked. That's fine, I guess, but I do think he then intentionally obscured events to hide his own failure as a writer and provide a bridge between these stories.

I still think about the fact that Hal claimed to be an expert of byzantine erotic mozaics and then there is a erotic byzantine mozaic in the attaché's house: this seems exactly the sort of coincidence that should mean something, but I genuinely think that was just put in there for the sort of superficial connection that would allow a college freshman to point that out and get a good boy point in an intro class. There were some interesting bits in there (I love the Eschaton game, for example), but I just feel like if he was writing this 50 years earlier he would have had to cut out 40% of the story, added another 10%, and would have ended with a really compelling book about addiction, technology, and isolation. But the structure fundamentally does not add to that theme.

And look, someone could write a book about trying to find meaning in a post-truth age where the structure reinforces the difficulty of having Too Much Information. I think The Crying of Lot 49 is a book which could have gone that direction. But Infinite Jest is not about the post-truth internet age (and I'm glad it's not, that would be a boring over-done theme): it's about the world created by cable and cheap opiates, about the intersection of Bowling Alone and American Empire. I just don't think there are strong parallels between the kind of miscommunication mediated by technology and the miscommunication mediated by the literary structure unless you really stretch. And it misled young me into thinking that "solving the plot" was the point to understanding how the stories fit together.

Again, I would not be surprised if I am wrong on this. Please try to convince me I didn't waste all that time. [Cont.]

>>15815849
I liked huge parts of the book (Pemulis is based), especially with Hal's family, but I did not think the book benefited from the structure, and it felt like it made a false promise to me.

And honestly, from what I've read of Wallace's own life, he too felt this way about his work sometimse. That more was being read into it than he wanted, or that his insecurity about his own ability to communicate led him to keep repeating the same thing over and over, causing other people to read more and more ideas not there into them. I remember a radio interview where they ask him to read a piece of his work and he said, "it's not really meant to be read outloud" then awkwardly does so. After his death, there was an event in his honor at Harvard's Emerson Hall where he was briefly a student. Some Harvard asshole says he wanted to read some of Wallace's writing, saying in a knowing tone, "it's meant to be read outloud." This is the shit I think has attached itself to Wallace, and part of why I am so uncomfortable with the way Infinite Jest is talked about, as though it was not the creation of some guy who famously was unable to figure out a way to finish/resolve any of his projects.

I tried to get into IJ twice but never got farther than page 100ish.

After reading pic related I think I finally "got" the motherfucker

>>15815997
Starting at almost exactly page 200 it became much, much more readable with more consistent characters with a plot that made sense. Given what I posted above, though, I'm not sure if I would really recommend it.

I've never read BotS. What was your takeaway from it? Was it interesting?

over-analysing much?
the book is funny, that's why people like it

>>15815839
>I still feel like the text promises that one *should* be reading like this by including all of those solveable mysteries, by having solveable mysteries be necessary to even understand the plot

Seems like the basic problem here.

I think you're right about IJ basically being two books in uncomfortable parallel, and that they could have been turned into two separate and more perfect novels. But I think you're wrong in assuming that your method was the right way. The aim is for you to disconnect from the plot payoff structure of an entertainment, not to chase the plot.

The fact that the plot parts, as you say, can be solved and linked, doesn't mean that the conclusion of that busywork is the goal of reading the book. The goal is to frame the several key addiction/depression related passages, rather than use them as a lead in to an ending which is either happy or sad.

>>15816449
That seems fair and probably right. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

>>15816303

>I've never read BotS. What was your takeaway from it? Was it interesting?

I think it's just more fun and takes itself way less seriously. It's more about him playing with concepts such and coming of age, familial and romantic relationships, virginity and modern society than really having a big message or a point even. That's not to say it's necessarily better, since you are left with a nagging sensation that you didn't go anywhere, even if the isolated situations of the plot are usually very gripping by themselves.

It's also way more approachable, for those reasons and for it's shorter length.

>>15816528
Damn that sounds great. Thanks for the suggestion, anon. I might check it out.

>>15816303
going to interject and say that tbots sucks. I traded it in at a used bookstore before I finished it

>>15816543
What did you not like? Was it just boring/pretentious, or was there something else?

>>15816565
It was all the goofiness from IJ but way more reddity

>>15815826
>But the structure fundamentally does not add to that theme.
That is because its theme is none of those, they all support the main theme, along with the parent/child relationships asked about in the other thread. That plot diagram is painful.

The reading guides I have seen are flawed and along with much of the internet speculation on the novel go too further support that theme in a wonderful bit of irony. I assume this is part of why DFW started talking about new sincerity and the problems with irony, it certainly is part of why he wrote The Pale King which in some ways is just a reworking of Infinite Jest writen for that new and unexpected audience he gained with the novel.

I do not have time to really give this the attention it needs right now but will do so this weekend as I mentioned in the other thread, I am aiming for Saturday around this time so we can have the weekend for discussion.

>>15815826
Hey /lit/, decide for me which one I should read next:
>Infinite Jest, DFW
Or
>The Demons, Dostoyevsky

>>15816810
What do you think the main theme is? You don't have to give details until the weekend

>>15817026
My reasons to start from a fresh thread is to make things easier, I realized most of the problems I have had in past threads is integrating in the conversation as it stands. So if I answer that now there will likely be discussion, I will see that and have to adress that as well, those anons will just scan through my post for how I dealt with their point and ignore the context. I have no idea if this is going to work out any better, but for the time being I am going to limit my posts in IJ threads to prodding people to think instead of converse.

>>15817245
Lmao fair. Gl friend. I just don't think I'll be free this weekend and I wanted to hear your thoughts.

>>15817633
Even if you are not about this weekend you are certainly free to pull it from the archives and start a new thread referencing it when you do have time. I just do not have time until Saturday to go into any depth or field questions so I am going to wait.

>>15816993
IJ

>>15816628
>way more reddity

You don’t actually think this counts as an intelligible criticism, do you?

>>15817920
Addressing such an 'argument' is almost as bad as making it.

>>15815826
>still hasn’t mentioned the wraith
Tripfags get the rope

>>15818199
Was a better post than yours by a long shot.

I personally can't stand wallace, but there's good discussion in this thread so here's a bump.

>>15815997
I remember you have to get to Don Gately before it becomes a little faster paced. The book can really be a slog at times, but overall it's great

Bump

>>15815839
>when I realized she was lying to Don my gut wrenched.
She did not exactly lie, she fed Gately the line he expected, he knew it was bullshit and she knew he knew.

>>15816303
>>15816528
Been on a DFW kick and working my way through his works since I finished IJ earlier this year (IJ>ASFT so far>GwCH>BotS>SR). I only got into reading for pleasure a year and a half ago so consider my analysis surface level and take it with a grain of salt.
I think the fun parts of IJ are far more fun than the fun parts of BotS. BotS does not slog as much as parts of IJ did (although, yes, blah blah the slogs in IJ are intentional blah blah the intentional fatigue from the parallel information streams is designed structure blah) but I think it offers the same general class of reading experience as IJ without quite the reward or poignancy. Black Cat, if you didn't like IJ, you likely won't like BotS. It's not as refined. I think I liked/disliked the same ratio of characters in both books, but since IJ had more room to operate and develop, it felt better. And worse yet, I didn't really click with BotS' protagonist. I'd only read it if you were really trying to explore the mind of the author like me. If you're like most people and want to jump from one good book to another with only a thematic/philosophical connection, I hear there's superior postmodern fiction out there.

>>15821263
>I hear there's superior post modern fiction out there.
DFW is not really post modern, has post modern elements, but that is about it. He most likely will either be considered transistional between post modern and what ever movement comes next or foundational to that movement, depending on how influential he ends up being on that movement when it coalesces.

>>15815826
>Subsidized Time
>In the novel's world, each year is subsidized by a specific corporate sponsor for tax revenue. The years of Subsidized Time are:

>Year of the Whopper
>Year of the Tucks Medicated Pad
>Year of the Trial-Size Dove Bar
>Year of the Perdue Wonderchicken
>Year of the Whisper-Quiet Maytag Dishmaster
>Year of the Yushityu 2007 Mimetic-Resolution-Cartridge-View-Motherboard-Easy-To-Install-Upgrade for Infernatron/InterLace TP Systems for Home, Office or Mobile [sic]
>Year of Dairy Products from the American Heartland
>Year of the Depend Adult Undergarment (Y.D.A.U.)
>Year of Glad
>Critics have debated which year Y.D.A.U. corresponds to in the Gregorian calendar, with various theories supporting 2008, 2009 and 2011 [20][21][22]

>Locations
>The novel's primary locations are the Enfield Tennis Academy (E.T.A.) and the Ennet House Drug and Alcohol Recovery House (separated by a hillside in suburban Boston, Massachusetts).

>The fictional E.T.A. is a series of buildings laid out as a cardioid atop a hill on Commonwealth Avenue. Ennet House lies directly downhill from E.T.A., facilitating many of the interactions between characters residing in the two locations.

>The Massachusetts Institute of Technology student union also figures quite prominently in the novel, wherein the structure is built in the shape of the human brain.

>Some of the novel's action also takes place in Arizona, various Boston-area Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings, as well as several locales in New England and Canada.

>Plot
>There are four major interwoven narratives:[23]

>A fringe group of Québécois radicals, Les Assassins des Fauteuils Rollents (English: The Wheelchair Assassins; A.F.R.), plans a violent geopolitical coup, and is opposed by high-level US operatives.
>Various residents of the Boston area reach "rock bottom" with their substance abuse problems, and enter a residential drug and alcohol recovery program where they progress in recovery through Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA).
>Students train and study at an elite tennis academy run by James and Avril Incandenza, and Avril's adopted brother Charles Tavis.
>The history of the Incandenza family unfolds, focusing on the youngest son, Hal.
>These narratives are connected via a film, Infinite Jest, also referred to in the novel as "the Entertainment" or "the samizdat". The film, so entertaining to its viewers that they lose all interest in anything other than repeatedly viewing it and thus eventually die, was James Incandenza's final work.

I almost nothing about Infinite Jest before reading the wikipedia page and what the fuck is this shit? Why would ANYONE write this? This is not even sincere.

>>15821379
>>The Massachusetts Institute of Technology student union also figures quite prominently in the novel, wherein the structure is built in the shape of the human brain.
Yes, such a prominent role, it almost comprises a fifth plot line.

All of the DFW related wikipedia is a joke these days, it used to be decent, but some computational linguist writes a program that decides it has 4 narratives and they jump, who cares if the structure of the novel falls apart and nothing makes sense anymore.

>>15821472
Is the book even good?

>>15821539
Sure is.

>>15821379
>four major interwoven narratives

"interwoven" is a kind way of putting it

>>15821539
Absolutely, but not as a single cohesive work. Certain scenes from it are hilarious and memorable - love the part like 800 pages in where Hal finds Ortho Stice with his face stuck to the glass, also always loved the first Orin scene where it's just talking about the heat and the roaches for ~3000 words - but it doesn't function as one piece. You gotta have Stephen Dedalus meet Leopold Bloom - in the actual text, not offscreen.

>>15818302
"Better" doesn't really matter if OP is missing the basic of plot. There are levels of comprehension and its hilarious all these years later to still see /lit/izens frustrated over a book that truly has been figured out for many years. Just learn how to google shit you dirty pleb.

DFW admitted to Franzen on the phone that the plot of Infinite Jest can't be fully made sense of. He also said deny he ever said this if Franzen would try to tell anyone else

Source: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=lrd8rdgKeFQC&pg=PT74&lpg=PT74&dq=david+Foster+Wallace+Franzen+infinite+jest+plot+email+deny&source=bl&ots=JNvsZFiaAT&sig=ACfU3U10vTtrIk9CYh38yYc5MCw5QFujKQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiV79u1hcPqAhXoShUIHRnMC5EQ6AEwAHoECAsQAQ#v=onepage&q=david%20Foster%20Wallace%20Franzen%20infinite%20jest%20plot%20email%20deny&f=false

>>15823054
Another great post. Upvoted!

>>15823150
As far as I know, DFW never said the plot could be fully made sense of, if he ever did the authors of A Companion to David Foster Wallace certainly could not find it, they had to force their view by mixing quotes of DFW talking about resolution with out of context phone calls and emails regarding an early draft of the novel. Pretty sloppy work, highschool tier.

That email does have an interesting little hint as to what the novel was before editing regarding the locker room, suggests a very different structure.

>>15824298
>mentions reddit in an unprompted way
Yeah, you’re gonna have to go back plebbit. Sorry you lack the most fundamental reading skills.

>>15824298
But I’ll help you out because you’re probably just a new summerfriend. Look up Aaron Schwartz blog post. He does a pretty concise job at explaining things. Or go to warosu and search “wraith” with older posts showing first. Some guy pieced it all together thoroughly back in 2011.

>>15824932
>t. doesn't understand irony.

>>15824956
It was pieced together back in the late 90s, plenty of academic writings on the topic from those days and plenty of us manage to work it out on our own. Not that this maters, it is not even remotely a plot driven novel, the structure of the plot is more important than getting from a to b, not to say that the structure is of vital importance, just that it plays a larger role than the plot itself.

There are THEORIES

No one knows for sure what happens.

If you think you know POST IT

The Schwartz blog is a theory. There is a lot of evidence pointing different directions

If you think you know what happens so bad post it bitch

>>15825169
You can get the vast bulk of it figured out, there are still a couple gray areas that I am fairly confident can not be fully solved, but what happens to Hal is fairly concrete. I will be covering a good amount of this in the thread I will be doing this weekend, still aiming for tomorrow about this time, but not quite sure, I want to have time to field questions so it will be posted when ever I finish the weekends chores. I will not be giving away the plot but focusing on the themes and structure for the same reasons DFW never went much into the plot in interviews, understanding the novel solves the plot and being given the plot will lead never having anymore than a superficial understanding of the novel.

>>15825169
>”that’s just your theory!!”
soiwojak.jpg
low effort nigger

>>15815826
>reading good old neon
>wow he's literally me