|
ProperCoochie posted:Didn't Dave Eggers originally dislike the novel but he changed his tune 9 years later so he could fit in, expand his brand and market, and seem smart and cool? Lol. Such a hack. i tried to read "a heartbreaking work of staggering genius" and couldn't get past the first hundred pages, he's completely loving insufferable
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
Those On My Left posted:i tried to read "a heartbreaking work of staggering genius" and couldn't get past the first hundred pages, he's completely loving insufferable Agree 100% hated it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
I've been going through IJ for 4 years now and I'm about 400 pages in. I'm thinking of restarting at the start of the summer and finishing it over that period, but is there any schedule or known way to keep myself interested? I slammed TPK in about a month and I would have finished BotS in a month as well if it hadn't been kinda boring and poorly-written. I really enjoy DFW's essays and short fiction, as well as TPK, but IJ really is only connecting in sporadic segments across several hundred pages. So yeah, any suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
Why would you keep reading a book if it's seriously taking you 4 years to read 400 pages, maybe it's just not for you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
quiltyquilty posted:I've been going through IJ for 4 years now and I'm about 400 pages in. I'm thinking of restarting at the start of the summer and finishing it over that period, but is there any schedule or known way to keep myself interested? This is starting up soon, and it may help. http://infinitewinter.org/
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
I plowed through IJ in 5 weeks after a couple restarts in the past few years. Sometimes you just have to be in the mood to tackle something. Skip it and move on with your life. Alternatively, make a commitment to get through the first couple hundred pages and then re-evaluate. The book starts coming together a lot more after that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 04:52
|
|
|
ProperCoochie posted:Didn't Dave Eggers originally dislike the novel but he changed his tune 9 years later so he could fit in, expand his brand and market, and seem smart and cool? Lol. Such a hack. Whatever you think of him as a writer, 826 Valencia is pretty cool of him. Is that picture you talking about the one used on Society of the Spectacle? That cover would've been awesome for IJ.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
Sup broom-goons, been reading through DFW's first novel this week and I'm about 300 pages in. It seems much more Pynchon flavored than Infinite Jest and is simultaneously easier to read but less accessible in my opinion. The way he uses dialogue only chapters and continuations of conversations/monologues isn't as satisfying, fragmentation-wise, as the footnotes in IJ (but still good, don't get me wrong). Characters are also largely vehicles for philosophy ideas/references, which I don't mind too much. I love Rick Vigorous's stories and dreams and how they reflect the characters in the book. The tree-frog lady god drat  I also love that meta-geography seems to be a Wallace staple. This is scratching my DFW itch very nicely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
I just got Girl with Curious Hair, my first of his. I was struck first by its readability, contrary to what I've heard. The variations in style are impressive, and all of them so far are really masterful. I've read I think four of the stories, skipping for now one which was a bit tough for me. Goddamn, this guy's brain! Looking forward to Infinite Jest.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:13
|
|
|
Mescal posted:I just got Girl with Curious Hair, my first of his. I was struck first by its readability, contrary to what I've heard. The variations in style are impressive, and all of them so far are really masterful. I've read I think four of the stories, skipping for now one which was a bit tough for me. Goddamn, this guy's brain! Looking forward to Infinite Jest. The eponymous story with the young republican was etched into my brain in one read. Expressionless Animals was also really really good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:24
|
|
|
Little Expressionless Animals is one the best short stories I have ever read and it was the first one he published. That makes me angry as a failed fiction writer
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
blue squares posted:Little Expressionless Animals is one the best short stories I have ever read and it was the first one he published. That makes me angry as a failed fiction writer Perhaps it was because he was so self critical that he got rejected, packed away or just burnt a hundred stories before it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Perhaps it was because he was so self critical that he got rejected, packed away or just burnt a hundred stories before it. If you read the DT Max biography, that's not really true. He wrote several, sure, but he was pretty much good instantly
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
blue squares posted:If you read the DT Max biography, that's not really true. He wrote several, sure, but he was pretty much good instantly I was just speculating but I'll have to check that out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:54
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:I was just speculating but I'll have to check that out. He didn't start writing fiction until college, and didn't take it seriously at all until he wrote his senior thesis, which was an early version of The Broom of the System, as far as I can recall
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
I only liked the one about the guy having a heart attack - "Luckily the Account Representative Knwe CPR"?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
Wallace's fiction is best when he's writing the hell out of a singular scene. The other short stories just don't play to his strengths.
BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 11:54 on Jan 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 10:41
|
|
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/books/review/everything-about-everything-david-foster-wallaces-infinite-jest-at-20.html?_r=1 Here's the foreword to the new edition, so you don't have to buy that ugly covered thing unless you need a new copy. It's about as good as Dave Eggers' introduction was, which is to say a lot of hagiography and not a lot of substance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
Look Under The Rock posted:It's wallpaper and it's in the office of JOI as "professional conversationalist" iirc It's the waiting area outside the offices of Tavis and Avril at ETA, which is covered with candid photographs of ETA players and staff (though only coaches and prorectors, not teachers, I think).
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
Justice Scalia Was Apparently A Huge Fan Of David Foster Wallace
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Endnotes and footnotes... of course!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Weirdly, Scalia's televisual taste only extended to 24 and Duck Dynasty. E: his recent tastes He could have been really big into M*A*S*H back in the day, or maybe Hawaii 5-0 syscall girl fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
Bryan Garner talks a bit about this in his interview on the podcast The Moment from a few months back, if you're interested. The rest of the episode is mostly about DFWs essay, it's fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Happy birthday, Dave. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
Criminal Minded posted:Happy birthday, Dave. He's moving furniture, cameras and exercise equipment with the angels now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Another goon recommended Oblivion as a good place to start with Wallace. I'm 22 pages into the first story (Mister Squishy) and to be honest I don't like it. It just seems to be nothing but bizarre, meaningless details that might be interesting if they were used sparingly, but that's all there is. There doesn't seem to be any plot at all. It's like he's so concerned with writing intelligently (and he does come across as extremely intelligent) that he forgot to write well. Are all his books like this? Monday_ fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Feb 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Monday_ posted:Another goon recommended Oblivion as a good place to start with Wallace. I'm 22 pages into the first story (Mister Squishy) and to be honest I don't like it. To me it just seems to be nothing but bizarre, meaningless details that might be interesting if they were used sparingly, but that's all there is. There doesn't seem to be any plot at all. It's like he's so concerned with writing intelligently (and he does come across as extremely intelligent) that he forgot to write well. Sort of. Try Good Old Neon, in that same collection. It's much less concerned with hyper-detailed environments and spends more energy describing psychology in an interesting way. The titular story is also great for that. His ability to parse out the most granular dance maneuverers of social interaction can be really marvelous. Also, if you don't enjoy either of those, do try Wallace's non-fiction before you dismiss him. His fiction and non-fiction have their own separate champions, and offer pretty distinct types of enjoyment. I read Mister Squishy for the first time this summer, after having read IJ 5-6 years ago, and I have to say, Mister Squishy is a great example of some parts of IJ, and the difficulty in getting used to his style. It can be very off-putting and anxiety inducing for me if I'm not in a focused state of mind- Mister Squishy is the kind of story that needs to be read on a couch with no distractions or interruptions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
Monday_ posted:Another goon recommended Oblivion as a good place to start with Wallace. I'm 22 pages into the first story (Mister Squishy) and to be honest I don't like it. To me it just seems to be nothing but bizarre, meaningless details that might be interesting if they were used sparingly, but that's all there is. There doesn't seem to be any plot at all. It's like he's so concerned with writing intelligently (and he does come across as extremely intelligent) that he forgot to write well. That's a terrible place to start. First, read some of his nonfiction. I highly recommend A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again, and read the title essay. It really is hilarious and a great insight into his views on culture. (I may go read it again just because I'm writing this post. It's fantastic.) Oblivion is in many ways a summation of what Wallace wanted to do with fiction, and it has great stuff---but for a lot of people, Mr. Squishy is not that great. If you bought Oblivion and don't want to spend any more money, read Good Old Neon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
Read incarnations of burned children. It's like a page and a half long and is also in that collection. Also FYI I also read Oblivion as my second DFW after I read IJ and the first story was by far my least favorite at the time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
blue squares posted:That's a terrible place to start. First, read some of his nonfiction. I highly recommend A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again, and read the title essay. It really is hilarious and a great insight into his views on culture. (I may go read it again just because I'm writing this post. It's fantastic.) A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again is super depressing. Really well written, but the moment he declares he's not enjoying but instead feeling guilty about the luxury treatment from Carnival and also envious of a more luxurious vessel docked across from him in Jamaica. That's when you could pinpoint you were going to outlive DFW. He puts it much better of course but that one moment epitomizes him, in retrospect at least.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 06:57
|
|
|
Incarnations of Burned Children is really good, and I enjoyed The Suffering Channel (from the same collection) a lot, too. I love Oblivion as a whole, but Mr. Squishy almost seems like a deliberately offputting way to start the collection. It might flat-out be his densest story. I read it all in one sitting and by the end, the sheer volume and tediousness of the detail became this sort of oppressive force that really complements the subtle, quiet dread that is building up. I really like the story, but I can totally understand why some people might just bounce off of it / rate it among the weaker stories in the collection. For nonfiction, aside from A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again, another solid pick is Federer Both Flesh and Not, which is pretty easily in his top 3 essays for me. I think it's still up on the New Yorker website under the title "Federer as Religious Experience," so you can check that one out for free.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
It's really interesting how everyone likes different bits and pieces of DFW's writing. Mr. Squishy is one of my favourite DFW stories, it's amazing and hilarious, to me. Other bits of that collection that I like are Good Old Neon, Oblivion and Another Pioneer. The Suffering Channel and Incarnations of Burned Children I think are quite dull. But in general, yes, Oblivion as a whole is not a good place to start. Back in the day, I started with Infinite Jest. I spotted it in the English-Language-section of a local bookstore, I guess they put it there because he had just killed himself, which I did not know at the time. I wanted to read something big and clever because I had just enrolled at University, majoring in English and German, and that turned out really well. I mean I didn't get laid because of it, but it's my favourite read of all time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
sicDaniel posted:It's really interesting how everyone likes different bits and pieces of DFW's writing. Mr. Squishy is one of my favourite DFW stories, it's amazing and hilarious, to me. Other bits of that collection that I like are Good Old Neon, Oblivion and Another Pioneer. The Suffering Channel and Incarnations of Burned Children I think are quite dull. But in general, yes, Oblivion as a whole is not a good place to start. I too am in the pro-Squishy camp. I'm not sure how many times I've read that story and yet there are still new things I pick up on every time that I re-read it. It's definitely one that needs more than one reading in order to fully comprehend - kind of similar to IJ in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
Just finished Brief Interviews with Hideous Men. Wonderful. Not wonderful. Difficult, a slog with intermittent payoffs that don't necessarily make you feel better but provide a little relief and give you something to think about. In contrast with Girl w/ Curious Hair, my first DFW which I read most of recently, BIWHM feels like a novel rather than "here's some stories." It's a concept album about the problem of males. Gave me a lot to chew on as a male feminist who struggles with being human and sometimes hates men. The last piece in the book seemed to be saying "Yeah, this is all me, I'm a hideous man as well, and I hate being confronted with that fact." I'd like to read more about this book. It's a little hard to digest. Responses, reviews, etc. Any tips?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
Mescal posted:Just finished Brief Interviews with Hideous Men. Wonderful. Not wonderful. Difficult, a slog with intermittent payoffs that don't necessarily make you feel better but provide a little relief and give you something to think about. In contrast with Girl w/ Curious Hair, my first DFW which I read most of recently, BIWHM feels like a novel rather than "here's some stories." It's a concept album about the problem of males. Gave me a lot to chew on as a male feminist who struggles with being human and sometimes hates men. The last piece in the book seemed to be saying "Yeah, this is all me, I'm a hideous man as well, and I hate being confronted with that fact." I'd like to read more about this book. It's a little hard to digest. Responses, reviews, etc. Any tips? I absolutely loved it. I think it's the most accessible of his fiction, and I came it at from a similar angle as you (male feminist, not a big fan of my own gender). A lot of it has really stayed with me. I should probably read Girl w/ Curious Hair.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
Those On My Left posted:I absolutely loved it. I think it's the most accessible of his fiction, and I came it at from a similar angle as you (male feminist, not a big fan of my own gender). A lot of it has really stayed with me. You definitely should. It doesn't even have a compulsive masturbator who wears out the skin of his penis. Always a plus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 06:44
|
|
|
Those On My Left posted:(male feminist, not a big fan of my own gender).  Congratulations on missing the point of feminism I guess. Is this the gender equivalent of white guilt? BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 09:47 on Mar 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 09:45
|
|
|
Equality and feminism are different things though. Some feminists have just tried to overwrite equality with feminism in orwellian manner. Being feminist and hating men is entirely possible, in certain places even preferable.(understandable, I hate men too)
mallamp fucked around with this message at 10:08 on Mar 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 10:05
|
|
|
Okay, correction: worthwhile feminism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 10:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
Quickly going back a bit to avoid a conversation about feminism on the internet, an always worthwhile endeavour, I just re-read Mr. Squishy again for an essay I'm writing at uni. I have to say, I really enjoyed it this time. Mostly because I had more of an idea of what was going on. We read Oblivion for one of my modules, which I enjoyed most of although not as much as some of the other Wallace I read, which mostly consisted of a handful of essays and a few short stories from Brief Interviews. I found Oblivion exhausting but interesting when I first read it, but now having read some of it again I really do love it. I'm not a fan of authorial intent, but if you're struggling with Mr. Squishy (and perhaps some of Wallace's other more consumer-focused writing which I haven't read but have heard is similar), try reading his essay E Unibus Plurum in the collection A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again. It makes his ideas a lot clearer, even if I personally don't agree with about half of it. Fascinating nonetheless. HHammond fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Mar 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 17:53
|
|