[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 499 KB, 1653x2560, infinite jest.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11421569 No.11421569 [Reply] [Original]

Just bought this book because the /lit/ Top 100 books favors it. What am I in for?

>> No.11421614

>>11421569
I'm about 470 pages in, and it's ironically entertaining.

>> No.11421619

>>11421569
Prescription-drug banality and gimmicks that go on for way too long.

>> No.11421715

>>11421569
It gets annoying and boring, but gets good after that. Where exactly it gets annoying and boring for you depends on your patience.

>> No.11421732

youre in for a lifetime of midwit engagement with literature if you continue down the path of buying whatever book 4chan told you to buy

>> No.11421814

>>11421732
Honestly, IJ is helping me be more empathetic towards upper-class athletes and ivy league academics. Before, I viewed the affluent as coddled and sheltered, protected from most of the tribulations of the middle and lower classes. But, no matter you're status, none of us our safe from the compulsory inclinations of a ravenous mind. Sometimes, midwit literature can aid in general understanding of the commonalities we share. That's why authors like PKD are so successful; it's their accessibility. Although, IJ is a doorstopper of pretentious literary merit, there is something to gain.

>> No.11421824

>>11421569
You won't be able to understand it if that's why you bought it

>> No.11421829

>>11421569
I like DFW's nonfiction like Big Red Son, Consider the Lobster and Host, but I fucking hated this shit.

>> No.11422504

>>11421569
Actually my favorite book. First ~250p don't really make much sense as a whole but just keep reading

>> No.11422509

>>11422504
First 250pages are meant to be re read after

>> No.11422741

>>11421569
is this book really all its cracked up to be? from what ive seen i expect it to be like the best novel of the past 100 years

>> No.11422802

>>11421569
Its a very good book. It gets hate because its hype got out of control. But its absolutely worth reading

>> No.11423193

>>11421569
where can I see this Top 100?

>> No.11423228

tennis, drugs, and a whole lot of US/Canada politics

sad, funny, pretty great

>> No.11423320

>>11421569
once you get past the first 100 or so pages it's good. it's a pleb filter.

>> No.11423352

>>11423193
i want to know too

>> No.11423410

Giving it up 200 pages in and it sitting on your bookshelf for years

>> No.11423512
File: 2.68 MB, 1820x4348, lit top 100.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11423512

>>11423193
>>11423352

>> No.11423613

>>11423512
>no Hegel
>no Kant
yep, thats lit

>> No.11423626

I love the Tennis chapters

>> No.11423750

>>11421569
Wacky scenes delightfully just a shade removed from reality
Drugs drugs drugs look how good I can write, prose experiments that usually work but sometimes fall flat
Engagement with a plot that you slowly realize may not be going anywhere besides crypticness
Great characters and unexpected poignant gut punches about friendship, loneliness, and being human
Shocking stuff in there for no clear reason but engaging nonetheless
Wheelchair assassins
Masterful scene setting
The sinking realization that once you’re done you want to do nothing more than read it all again

This thing will suck you in. There’s an initial hump to get over but it truly does start to come together and I can’t think of a better way to spend your reading time if you have never read it before. Get ready for a ride

>> No.11423763

>>11421569
The scene with the self-insert character when he locks himself in his flat to smoke pot, jerk off and watch TV is the best scene. It's one of the reasons I no longer smoke pot.

>> No.11423815

>>11421569
It is worth it for non americans?

>> No.11423818

>>11423512
such pseud

>> No.11423823

>>11423763
it's why i started

>> No.11423954

>>11421569
mediocre writing - entertaining like t.v. - turn off your brain and read - fun characters

>> No.11423968

>>11421569
Probably would be the best book of the century if "The Pale King" didn't come out. I've read Infinite Jest 3 times. The first and second time were lit af. However, Pale King is better writing, more mature, and captures the imagination in a way that is beyond words

>> No.11423972

>>11421569
Ignore the shitposting. Most /lit/ tards are insanely jealous of DFW and the only way they can validate their existence is by pretending he's a meme

>> No.11423979

>>11421814
PKD is the only author I can think of where nearly every moviebased on his writings is better than the shit he wrote

>> No.11423981

>>11423954
Says the tard who loves Cormac McCarthy

>> No.11423986

>>11423979
Agreed. Adding to that, Cormac McCarthy is the only author where every movie based on his writings is exactly the fucking same as the shit he wrote.

>> No.11423990

>>11423954
>mediocre writing - entertaining like t.v.
It's meant to be like TV. The writing style reflects that.

>> No.11423999

I've just finished the dialogue between Gately and Joelle about her veil. His dialogues are so enjoyable. It is just getting better since page ~300.

>> No.11424005

>>11423986
Indubitably

>> No.11424020

>>11423999
Who the fuck put the cassette in the skull? That's what I want to know. According to DFW himself (though he only admitted this 10 years after the publication date) it's impossible to understand based on the text itself.

>> No.11424042

>>11424020
What are you talking about?

>> No.11424070

>>11423999
I just got to page 300 so I'm excited cause all I hear is how it gets better and I have already liked most of what I've read so far
Especially the chapters about the Tennis tournament. There was a chapter focusing on Schacht that I loved, great character

>> No.11424078

>>11423972
I will readily admit that DFW is a way better writer than me, made way more money than me, and was, in fact, a pretty smart dude. He probably even had had a spark of genius kicking around in that drugged-up, depressed head of his.

But that doesn't obligate me to bow down to his works. I would rather read a truly great book than a book by "a genius" every day, and none of Wallace's stories rise above puerility and stylistic dilettantism. They are held back by DFW's constant need to sidle up next to you and remind you how "smart" he is. Sometimes smart people are just assholes. I'll readily admit that they are smart, but I'm not going to hang out with them on the weekend because they're assholes. Same thing with reading: I can acknowledge that a book was written by a genius but I'm not going to force myself to say it's good out of some sense of deference for that accomplishment.

>> No.11424091

>>11424042
You have to read the book to understand what I'm talking about... can I say "duh"?

>> No.11424113
File: 42 KB, 502x443, 1518121258847.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11424113

>>11424091
I'm in page 548 at the moment. Still didn't get it.

>> No.11424117

>>11424078
Understood. Three objections. 1: He really is smart, and I see no reason why he could be called a "dilettante" based on a reading of IJ. I would say quite the opposite, that he's a master of English letters. What makes him a "dilettante" other than you thinking that? Where is the proof? I don't understand it. By my reading, he's the greatest writer of our time. And I've read hundreds of books, all the great literature.
2: What writer is not trying to be as smart as they can be, and trying through their writing to prove they're smart? All writers do that. If a writer does that so well that you can't sense it, I suspect you'll call them a dilettante.
3. His fiction after IJ, namely "Oblivion" and "The Pale King" are both better than IJ. So he has show he is always growing and improving as a writer. No one is perfect. But most well known authors don't get better and better.

>> No.11424123

>>11424113
You have to read the entire novel twice. Or, if you want to cheat, read the first chapter again, where Hal explains how him and Gately dug up his father's skull to find the disc (or something like that). Protip: the first chapter is the last thing that happens in the book chronologically and has some juicy hints on to how to understand the book

>> No.11424129

>>11424117
You have yet too read my unpublished master work entitled The Wagon Carnade
Once you have them we will talk

>> No.11424133

>>11424129
I would love to read it. In exchange you read my unpublished master work. Deal?

>> No.11424137

>>11424113
Protip: Orin put the master into JOI's skull, but how did he get it, and why did he put it into his dead father's skull?

>> No.11424149

>Im writing about a really smart kid cuz thats basically what i am inside, you know? a kid who is just too smart. i just dont have this life thing figured out how do i adult again? oh yeah, AA is pretty cool when you think about it.... well my dad was there for me, but he wasnt THERE, know what I mean? i could probably be a director if i really wanted to. also what if its the plot of halloween 3 but i use as bad guys eccentric terrorists with xyz quirks to make it so unbelievable that the reader just KNOWS that I know that he knows that i know that he knows that i know that he knows that i

>> No.11424156

>"My mom wouldn't let us open the fridge. She said there'd be consequences. She threatened us with grounding. Not like it mattered. Not like there was anything to do anymore. I spent most of my time in my room anyway, especially for that first week, while people didn't know what the fuck was going on.

>> No.11424171

>>11424133
No deal I can't be humiliated again by /lit

>> No.11424191

>>11424171
Fair enough. These autists are way too harsh, largely because of jealously I suppose. Been there myself. Try to ignore the super-jealous ones that are relentless in attacking you for no apparent reason, is my advice on posting your own stuff on /lit/

>> No.11424198

>>11424117
>What makes him a "dilettante" other than you thinking that?
One sentence later:
>By my reading, he's the greatest writer of our time.
So my question to you is, where's the proof, other than you thinking that? I'm not pointing this out to be cheeky, but rather to just say that we are dealing in art, here, and it's going to be pretty hard to get an objective measure of "greatest." You and I might disagree on what art is supposed to "do" and in that case we won't get very far in to a discussion about specific writers. We can have that discussion but it's going to take us far beyond DFW.

Concerning your specific points:

1) I will say that puerility seems pretty obvious, since most other writers bandied about as "the greatest" don't spend long passages describing characters pissing on themselves, their farting habits, or or how thick their nose-hairs are. Dropping in a line about a character farting is totally fine for a laugh but it's not worth much beyond that and probably should have been left on the editing floor after the 50th time. It's not infrequent that DFW will just drop in really grotesque scenes with loose connections to the plot. It's one thing if (like in "Blood Meridian") scenes like this exist to drive you away from some specific ideology or character but DFW uses them just for their repulsive qualities. It's like he is trying to outdo himself on how much he can wallow in the depravity of mankind but after the 10th time it's like "I get it" and it's just not pleasant to read.

I'll continue in another post.

>> No.11424206

>>11424191
I am working on a short story called the buffalo runner based on native Americans running buffalo over ledges. Maybe it'll be done someday.

>> No.11424223

>>11424198
You still haven't posted proof. You've just attacked me for doing the same exact thing you've done. Cool.
1) He's describing the world in the detail in which we experience it. Which is meant to emulate how we are overexposed to things which are of not at all use to us, just distract us, and keep us from any real meaning in life. Which is, in and of itself, the entire point of the novel. The fact that you didn't understand how he emulated the point of his novel through his prose proves you are not at all smart enough to even begin to debate about it, you teenager. Read. Learn. Expand your knowledge. Enjoy reading. Bye

>> No.11424240

>>11424206
Also, isn't the fact that there is at least one thread of DFW every day, if not more, plus all the shitpostster hating on him constantly, in a lot of threads, proof enough that he is the greatest writer of our time? Who amongst us wouldn't want exactly what he has right now? And we all know how insanely jealous writers our (we our, ourselves, right?) So of course all the hate. Based on just the existential facts we see before us, we have to except DFW's greatness. If you're not able to read his books and see it and feel joy from it, then I feel sorry for you.

>> No.11424255

>>11424240
>what he has now

>a throttled neck and maggots eating his decayed flesh.

Oh you know my fetishes

>> No.11424260

>>11424255
Sorry. I responded to the wrong post!!!

>> No.11424268

>>11424117
>>11424198
"Dilettante" is going to be trickier and I think it's tied into the "self-aggrandizement" angle you mention in 2). There's no denying that DFW wrote in a bunch of styles (which takes guts, to his credit) and was convincing in most of them (again, credit). Where it gets thorny is that it feels to me like he is writing in a very self-conscious way or in an explicit effort to "do as much as possible." Writing 5-page-long paragraphs do not convey any additional information (through style) to the reader but they are highly noticeable, so DFW drops a few in here and there just to show he can do it. Same thing with "ebonics" texts or incredibly long, convoluted sentences. There is no broader plan as to why they are presented to the reader other than to overwhelm them with stylistic information to take in and go "wow, that was pretty weird so it was probably Important." This, in effect is the entire plan of IJ, where writing a 1100 page novel gets you a lot of attention and spares you the (in my opinion, necessary) work of editing down your manuscript and cutting the fat. Plenty of other authors have written 1100 manuscript pages but they pare it down to 600 because they respect their reader's time and know that getting a refined point is more important than letting the reader have a peek at all your stylistic experiments.

Concerning 2) itself, I legitimately think that the great artists are almost exclusively trying to point beyond themselves to things that are bigger. Certainly they are willing to accept accolades for their work (and they probably needed the money) but they would be happy if people never knew their name. When I picture Dostoevsky or Tolstoy (for example) writing something I don't see them thinking "man, people will think that I am so smart when they read this!" I think that they are picturing people's souls being uplifted by their works and that the reader is grappling with something important. Kierkegaard, for example, wrote under pseudonyms so that people wouldn't lionize the "author" of the works but instead contended with them on a philosophical level. Or, more trivially, an author may want to point to himself but instead have it be about something other than intelligence (i.e. "he is so spiritual," "he is so romantic"). So on a basic level I don't agree with the premise of 2).

To be concluded in another post.

>> No.11424279

>>11423981
I don't like Cormac McCarthy.

But comparisons between DFW & Pynchon, even between DFW & Gaddis are ridiculous.

Doesn't mean he isn't fun, but he isn't the pomo god il/lit/erates think he is.

>> No.11424295

>>11423990
DFW felt T.V. was a blight on the American public.

Also I wasn't saying the book wasn't entertaining or worth your while in the comparison with T.V., only that it is on shaky ground in terms of its substance and the cracks are very visible at times.

The good think about DFW is he is the Velvet Underground of Maximalism 'cos the process is visible in his writing, the cracks are there, it is by no means perfect, some sentences are well crafted others are cringe-worthy, overall the effect is that he makes you want to sit down and write yourself. In a way he makes it look easy, not to say he isn't skilled at times.

The trouble is, when you sit down to write, you'll write like DFW, a Crying shame.

>> No.11424300

>>11424117
>I've read all the great books
>Hundreds
>hun-reds
>hughn-weds

>> No.11424310

>>11424268
Thank you. Cool. I like a arguing with you. You're clearly smart. I will repost this because I think it explains why he's written so many words. Before that, however, I'll say I agree with you on Dosteyevsky and Tolstoy, both of whom I adore, but I think DFW is doing the same thing is terms of our society:

He's describing the world in the detail in which we experience it. Which is meant to emulate how we are overexposed to things which are of not at all use to us, just distract us, and keep us from any real meaning in life.

That's why he has the longwinded explanations of things. He has to bring you into the actual minutia of it to make you understand it. Unfortunately we don't live in a pre-industrial society. We live in a world where people are constantly trying to get our attention, because that's how you make money. DFW knew that and exposed it in 1993 (when he claims the novel was finished). That is unheard of.

>> No.11424313

>>11424223
Okay, it's clear we are not going to have a valuable discussion here so I'm not going to bother typing out the third part of my critique.

>You still haven't posted proof. You've just attacked me for doing the same exact thing you've done. Cool.
Basically you are saying "yeah, so I'm a hypocrite, so what?" Uh, yeah, that was the point. If you are comfortable with that idea, then I guess more power to you.

> He's describing the world in the detail in which we experience it.
Yes, I am aware of this but I am saying that it is not of as much value as you think it is. I already experience the world in the detail in which I experience it, I don't need someone to do to same thing in text and then call it a valuable commentary. Hitchcock used to say "film [art] is life with the dull parts cut out." DFW didn't cut the dull parts out, and perhaps unsurprisingly, it was dull.

> The fact that you didn't understand how he emulated the point of his novel through his prose
Except I did, and I'm even willing to give DFW some credit for having "accomplished" it. It's like when person A doesn't like a painting, and person B says "you just didn't get it." I can understand something and dislike it; that's not in any way contradictory.

> you teenager. Read. Learn. Expand your knowledge. Enjoy reading. Bye
C'mon, friend. It obviously matters not one iota to you or this conversation but I'm not a teenager, I do try to expand my knowledge, I do love reading, and it just so happens that in light of all that I haven't drank the DFW Kool-aid. Maybe one day you will look back at your "DFW phase" and cringe. Maybe you will always feel this way, I don't know. But I hope you at least get the maturity to think that other people can hold differing opinions in a sincerely and maturely. I think it's what DFW would have wanted.

There was really no need for my post and every time I try to have a civil discussion on /lit/ it turns out like this where it's just frustrating for everyone. I should know better by now but still I sling my thoughts into the void, hoping that someone's reading life is affected for the better.

>> No.11424316

>>11424300
You understand irony and are able to use it. Sweet. Do you realize how many important thinkers have said irony is the crutch of the weak? No. You don't. Because you don't read. You shitpost.

>> No.11425530

What is the fucking point of being exactly like the object of your critique? That's not how art works.

>> No.11425651

>>11421569
Does anyone have the Spongebob 50% Tennis 50% Weed meme?

>> No.11425668

>>11423986
Child of God is much better than the Franco adaptation.

>> No.11425697

>>11424316
It's good that you admit the irony of your post.
>irony is the crutch of the weak
Every writer has used irony.

>> No.11425893

>>11423986
Reading Suttree now.

>> No.11427061
File: 139 KB, 566x806, d4ba1911507c85290b9969452fead5ca--disposable-camera-famous-photographers.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11427061

>>11423352
>>11423193
>>11423613
>>11423818

>> No.11427066

>>11421715
It’s good because it’s annoying and boring

>> No.11428137

>>11423763
That section is fucking amazing and I relate to that way too much

>> No.11428143

69 replies and nobody said neverending laughs. I am appalled by the state of this board

>> No.11428149
File: 192 KB, 384x405, dfwhappy.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11428149

>>11423512
>that gene wolfe autist proxied fifteen times to get book of the new sun on there
lmao

>> No.11428202

>>11427061
is this bjork?

>> No.11428382

>>11423763
my favorite as well, I was Ederdedy at the time of reading it, fucking stellar writing