/lit/ - Literature

>>5003545
>Do you think an entire plot takes place outside the page via hidden clues throughout the piece?
Yes. I've read it 2 and a half times, and yes.

>>5003545
>Do you think an entire plot takes place outside the page via hidden clues throughout the piece?
Yes. I've read it 2 and a half times, and yes.

4chan (and me) hates it because the book is too realistic. It's a perfect portrayal of a massively fucked up, sadistic, insincere culture where people communicate about important things by not communicating about them at all, and then even after admitting all this, DFW has the gall to state the only possible (and completely crappy) solution: work out your psychological issues and contribute to society as much as you can.

I liked the book. There's some guy who posts here and has figured out the plotline supposedly that you might want to look for in the archives. Supposedly something about wraiths and DFW killing himself while he kame and exkarnating as a gnostik kum demon which I liked better than this interpretation: >>5003567

Footnotes were great fun. As someone who's been to AA I think it captures the cult-like atmosphere pretty well. Tennis matches weren't bad. The thing that annoyed me was all the Canadian bullshit. Wheelchair secret agents was kinda funny but seriously fuck Canada.

Favorite character? I liked Hal. (yup, I'm lame, sorry)

I hated the whole ONAN / Johnny Gentle / Concavity / Quebecois terrorism aspect of the book. Some of it was kind of funny but it got tedious, especially Mario's film. Overall I'm glad I read it though.

>>5003567
> Do you think an entire plot takes place outside the page via hidden clues throughout the piece
maybe i need to read it again, but that one went over my head, please explain it?

>>5003832

“....there is an ending [to Infinite Jest] as far as I'm concerned. Certain kind of parallel lines are supposed to start converging in such a way that an "end" can be projected by the reader somewhere beyond the right frame. If no such convergence or projection occured to you, then the book's failed for you.”

― David Foster Wallace

>>5003863
a quote, that explains everything

>>5003882
The storyline of the book has no ending. But if you can listen to the quiet-talk there is a secret storyline that is told around the peripherals and explicates the oddities of the book's storyline.

Of course, it is basically all pomo hurr durr look how much more cleber i am than my audience bullshit.

>>5003892
and what is that storyline?

I... uhm...eh... I actually struggle to find something meaningful to say... uhm - most of this will be cut out, right? Ehm...Wittgenstein said that...

>>5003925
:( mean

>>5003903
Some sort of implied omega point that involves bald eagles with sombreros sippin' on maple sizzurp and starting nukular warz. I dunno tho. I was like homie don't play when I got to the ending and was like wow none of my questions were answered about what happens to the characters.

The alternate explanation is that DFW was a troll and the whole book is bait for pretentious people. This possibility makes me reluctant to go back and try confirming my suspicions.

Among people on /lit/ who enjoyed this,is it considered a masterpiece or just a good book to you?

I was hugely disappointed by so many little things like using unnecessary synonyms which frequently make the rhythm of the lines almost insufferable,the excessive need to entertain the reader which is blatantly obvious and when DFW tries to talk about things he has no idea about---the idea which immediately comes to mind is of the two meatheads in the gym spotting each other while doing curls (although he probably did go to the gym he still slipped up here).

If you did/didn't enjoy it I also wonder what were the last few books you read?
I'm almost in agreement with Harold Bloom's idea of the massive decline in literary standards since I've finished IJ.
In my opinion,it was just okay. Had good moments but bad moments were even more frequent.

>>5003925
kik

Before any serious discussion of Infinite Jest can commence, it's important to establish a few things. When we talk about David Foster Wallace, we’re talking about a genius of the highest calibur. A man whose I.Q. could not be measured. Even the most prestigious I.Q. tests cap out at around 200. Beyond that, they get imprecise. So when we talk about Wallace, we really 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, everything goes out the window. 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 about 85% a history of Western philosophy as well. It’s a book you could spend a lifetime studying. A lifetime spent in bliss, no doubt. Indeed, 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.

Of course we don't understand everything about the book yet. He knew things about life that we won’t discover for decades. Our 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 paradigms of thought Wallace gave us. We may have to throw out science altogether. We simply don’t know yet. 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 the Wallace’s future interpreters. This is not only our pleasure, but our duty.

>>5005597
nice copy pasta.

>>5005597
>>5005597
Go to bed, faggot.
http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/280xv8/an_introduction_to_infinite_jest/

>>5005597
>most prestigious IQ tests
top kek

>>5005602
I wrote that.

>>5005608
And you probably made this thread just so you could samefag and post your pointless, contentless writeup here too.

>>5005622
No, I didn't make the thread.

Just bumping cause I'm probably going to finish IJ today or tomorrow and I want this thread to not be dead for when I do

I could not for the life of me figure out what the hell I was reading.

I'm gonna give it another go sometime soon. Seems like the kind of book you really have to analyze. Or maybe I'm just an idiot? I don't know.

funniest book I've ever read
>The whole part when Hal accidentally goes to the Inner Infants meeting
holy shit

anyone else think that Orin was the really the antagonist of the novel?

>>5003545
So, was Joelle disfigured or beautiful?
Did Hal take the DMZ?
Was JOI possessing Ortho Stice in the Whataburger?
What was the important thing that Pemulis had to say to Hal?
Did the Moms sexually abuse Orin?
How did Don, Hal and Joelle meet to dig up JOI's grave, and who got their first?

>>5003937
>>5008186
dudes...

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

The beast has killed and gorged and now lies in the shade of the Baobab tree. - the greatest line ever written.

Shakespeare be cry.

>>5008193
OK. Lesssay its all true.

Then what? What is teh point? Dads fuck us all up? Dont dig up ghosts else dads will fuck us all up? Is that it?

Some conflagration ends subsidized time. Orin cuts a deal. AFR gets the tape. Undoes the Gent[i]le administration. ONAN ends up dead in front of their teleputer thingys? What is the fucking point?

Why is it not schlock is the damn question.

wtf is the point of the projected ending

>>5003545
>behemoth
>he hasn't read In Remembrance of Lost Time

>>5009841
It's a holdover from modernism taken to an extreme. It's meant to draw attention to the themes, and characters rather than the plot.

>>5009892
How the fuck does leaving the book thinking about the unresolved plot and how to resolve it draw attention to the themes/characters presented? Also WHAT themes and characters does it draw attention to?

>>5003925

>w/r/t
>and but so
>h/t/t

>>5009855
At least Proust could write well and was an actual genius, not some hack like DFW with awkward prose who has to use cheap tricks to seem smarter than he really was.

>>5009954
Not saying it works, but you're supposed to consider where he ended it in regards to what came before, and then draw conclusions as to what the the book was thematically about.
Take Nella Larsen's Passing. That novels plot is resolved without ever confirming if the main character is a murderer, or if she ever gets caught. This draws attention to the fact that you, and she are convinced that she could do such a thing, as well as the stresses of passing.

>>5005597
You're right, but I can't read Infinite Jest yet.

>>5009855
> In Remembrance of Lost Time
I'm calling it this from now on.

>>5011882
> to seem smarter than he really was

I actually feel as if DFW was smarter than Proust. Proust was really a stylistic/artistic genius more than an intellectual one.

>>5012357

>I actually feel as if DFW was smarter than Proust.

These summerfriends really need to leave now.

Did anyone else notice/imagine similarities between J.O. Incandenza and William Klein?

>>5003545

There is an ending, should be an old html website with all the theory on it. Try google.

>>5005622
>pointless, contentless

>>5012412
>>5008193

>>5005597

I just saw the Lion King musical. Holy shit, guys, I never realized before but the similarities between the plots are freaky.

hyena=wheelchair assassin

father comes back as a ghost

baboon with stick=that yogic mystic dude who licks sweat

Scar=equals that uncle with the creepy relationship with Hal's mum

Hakuna Matata=Simplistic moralistic philosophy of sincerity

when does this book become good? I enjoy some parts, mainly the ones about addiction, but a lot of it is too long winded.

>>5014359
>Infinite Jest is based on Hamlet
>The Lion King is based on Hamlet
>They're similar?!

>>5005597
Is this parody? If it's parody, it's first-rate. If not, then I feel sorry for and a little bit disgusted by the person who wrote it.

>>5005597
>this fucking guy
http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/280xv8/an_introduction_to_infinite_jest/

>>5014580
>http://www.reddit.com/user/jeremy1122
>I'm disappointed to find that Infinite Jest didn't make it. I guess this is a list of books that are ONLY about music. Very disappointing. The 'jest' in Infinite Jest is not only the dance of life but the music that incites the dance.
>If you dig tragicomic books about addiction, I recommend David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest (1996). It's a novel that's partly about Alcoholics Anonymous, although the addiction in the novel is really a metaphor for attachment in all its forms: love, the self-preservation instinct, the religiospiritual impulse, Velcro. In that sense, it's a Buddhist novel, but in every sense, it belongs to every religious tradition.
>You claim to have read Infinite Jest—the most harrowing book about alcoholism ever written—and yet you also claim to drink. This cannot be anything but a contradiction.
>It's interesting you mention J.D. Salinger, because I was just thinking about how David Foster Wallace in Infinite Jest reverse-engineered the Glass family in Infinite Jest.

My sides, what a genius