/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.22639472]

was he really a genius

[Anonymous No.22639475]

>>22639472
No.

[Anonymous No.22639480]

>>22639472
No, he had nothing insightful to say about the US political system,, either because he was a plant or bc didn't want to be cancelled avant la lettre.

[Anonymous No.22639507]

>>22639472
Yes

[Anonymous No.22640060]

Don't know, don't care. Love the way he writes and that's good enough for me

[Anonymous No.22640077]

>>22639480
>say something insightful about a circus
alright, you say something 'insightful' about the US political system then lmao

[Anonymous No.22640084]

>>22639472
Doubtful, IJ failed to impress me, it's a very generic pomo work, just very long. Delillo without the talent, more erudite with no cleverness or humility to hide it.

[Anonymous No.22640097]

>>22639472
Yeah probably. He got a bunch of degrees, did a bunch of papers, got a bunch of awards, probably had like a 200 IQ.

Can't bring that up doe because people will just say "n-no that stuff doesn't count you don't need to be smart or talented to do that!!!!". These topic just ends up being a circle jerk in one direction or another.

[Anonymous No.22640111]

>>22639472
Yes.
New Sincerity was ahead of its time and leapfrogged the Post-Irony (which is transitory/cathartic between Irony and New Sincerity).
Also no.
He blew his brains out cowardly through impatience.

[Anonymous No.22640243]

>>22640111
Trips of truth.

[Anonymous No.22640296]

>>22639472
yeah. the jest was a work that both accomplished an incisive but still vast/all-encompassing analysis of the contemporary US as a society and culture, as well as an exploration of deeper themes/ideas of the hUmAn ConDitIon that is typically understood as the purpose of great literature.

>>22639480
sure, politics weren't a big part of the book. so maybe not "all-encompassing". but politics != people, even if they're related.

>>22640084
cringe. delillo is great though.

>>22640097
qualifications don't mean that much. you can find a bajillion (predominantly white) woman english professors that have gotten similar accolades. the difference is that his body of work isn't trash.

>>22640111
reducing his suicide to cowardice regarding his work, literature in general, or the future of either is just plain stupid. no matter how important literature is as an art form to humanity, it still is not the same thing as everyday life, and his suicide probably had more to do with his personal/mental issues than any kind of abstract "cowardice" about literature/art or culture/society at large.

[Anonymous No.22640305]

>>22640296
>reducing his suicide to cowardice regarding his work, literature in general, or the future of either is just plain stupid. no matter how important literature is as an art form to humanity, it still is not the same thing as everyday life, and his suicide probably had more to do with his personal/mental issues than any kind of abstract "cowardice" about literature/art or culture/society at large.
perhaps I'm a selfish man, but I felt robbed by the lack of his presence/work due to actions of his own will.
while I empathize with those under such despair, I will not romanticize their folly as justified. A rejection of his own life is a rejection of us and I took offense to that.
But it's his choice, much as my judgement is mine.

[Anonymous No.22640332]

>>22640305
one of the most famous sections of infinite jest is about suicide and how nobody but the suicidal can really understand the act. not that his word is gospel or anything--but is the idea in that part something you disagree with specifically?

[Anonymous No.22640341]

>>22639472
As has been proven by several of the intellectuals in this thread, DFW was merely a hack fraud. Anonymous, in his incisive critical work, slammed DFW for not saying nearly enough about his particular political interests, which have known to range widely across the /pol/ board. DFW’s critical opinion further suffered a major blow when he failed to impress Anonymous, a noteworthy arbiter of postmodern fiction, who complained of his shameless show-offy erudition and preferred DeLillo. From the opinions of these intellectuals, we must agree with the assessment of the at least equally noteworthy Harold Bloom, that it is self-evident that DFW was actually incapable of thought or writing, and had no discernible talent, and that, to be very frank, the realm of literature suffered no major loss with his death.

There are however a growing number of dissenting opinions from this critical consensus, that contend in fact that DFW was not only capable of thought, but was in fact a genius, and therefore at the very pinnacle of thought. Anonymous attempted a critical salvage of his reputation in his assessment of his intelligence, claiming that from the evidence of his degrees and papers, DFW “probably had like a 200 IQ”. This pronouncement shook the literary world of this thread to its core, as it suddenly rediscovered a genius in its midst. Another theorist of literature, Anonymous, praised his development of the New Sincerity movement, which he saw as pre-empting and transcending the Post-Ironic, making him, as it were, simultaneously the figurehead of the Post-Post-Ironic as well as the Proto-Sincere, and no doubt comprehending as well the Pre-Post-Ironic and the Post-Proto-Sincere. However, he found fault in his suicide, which he attributed to, among other things, impatience.

In the mix of these battles between critical titans, Anonymous, a notorious dunce, disclaimed any interest in the question of whether or not DFW was in fact a genius, and only expressed his love for his writing. Unfortunately the world is full of such dunces who have no capabilities for the judgement of genius, but thankfully it is easy to ignore them while we contemplate more serious questions.

[Anonymous No.22640350]

>>22640341
screencapped, thanks lol

[Anonymous No.22640422]

>>22640341
Based DFW enjoyer.

[Anonymous No.22640434]

>>22640296
>but politics != people
Nah. Politics is just people with ideas

[Anonymous No.22640459]

>>22640077
That's why they frequently invited him on Charlie Rose, because he was innocuous

[Anonymous No.22640469]

>>22640332
Because it was in contrast to the plot device of Infinite Jest: how does one escape the seemingly inescapable?
I didn't agree with his thesis (both in theory and in praxis) that suicide was a mysterious and/or equitable solution; it is non-transcendent to those that can't see beyond the wall of their own thought-horizons and even the meta-cognizance of their own emotional states.
That's why I accuse him of impatience and anyone else of the act of self-termination vis-a-vis this seeming metaphysical prison of Reality.
I can't condone nihilistic faith; the "mystery" there is just easy self-sophistry applied to one's own existence (or lack thereof).

[Anonymous No.22640527]

>>22640111
>blew his brains out
I thought he hung himself?

[Anonymous No.22640631]

>>22640527
You're probably right.
I don't know which is worse frankly.
Just comes down to aesthetics...

[Anonymous No.22640653]

>>22640296
Was it hard to read his books as an ESL?

[Anonymous No.22640727]

>>22640341
A hero rises to reclaim lit’s dignity.

[Anonymous No.22640745]

>>22640469
To add, I think Pynchon had more faith in the methodology to the seeming Absurdity of Existence: that we must sort it out even when we are at our worst/most-confused. This was how we both embrace and master Post-Modernism even when we find ourselves in the nadir of paradoxical confusion of endless refrents: we have to assume that eventually the System will produce more clarity for us in our attempts then the suffering we put into it. Else, imagine if every protagonist "check out" when they found themselves in their own living hells searching for meaning; I'd be the end of metanarrative (both literally and Literally).
We're all called to be Maxwell's Daemons (aka Knights of Faith/Saints).

[Anonymous No.22640786]

>>22640745
>that we must sort it out even when we are at our worst/most-confused. This was how we both embrace and master Post-Modernism even when we find ourselves in the nadir of paradoxical confusion of endless refrents: we have to assume that eventually the System will produce more clarity for us in our attempts then the suffering we put into it. Else, imagine if every protagonist "check out" when they found themselves in their own living hells searching for meaning; I'd be the end of metanarrative (both literally and Literally).
We're all called to be Maxwell's Daemons (aka Knights of Faith/Saints).
This is a child's understanding of the subject, which suits pynchud.

[Anonymous No.22641761]

>>22640786
>This is a child's understanding of the subject, which suits pynchud.
Good.
I'm not impressed with adult interpretations.

[Anonymous No.22641831]

>>22639472
Yes

but he was still a cringey liberal faggot who couldn't get laid and killed himself.

[Anonymous No.22641847]

>>22640341
This is better than anything DFW ever wrote

[Anonymous No.22641868]

>>22641831
90s DFW got more pussy than everyone on this board probably will in their entire lifetimes combined, times two

[Anonymous No.22642041]

>>22641868
That is still zero anon

[Anonymous No.22642094]

>>22642041
shrekkled

[Anonymous No.22642155]

>>22639472
Not judging by The Pale King or the choice of direction for lack of ideas with where to go with 'the novel' in Infinite Jelq.

[Anonymous No.22642162]

>>22640332
>one of the most famous sections of infinite jest is about suicide
One? Here's three: JVD's attempted suicide, JOI's actual felo de se, and Eric Clipperton. There are way more. To the novel, suicide is about as referential as it is with Eric Clipperton, which is to say you can't excise it from the novel if you tried.
>>22640341
AI slop
>>22640469
>I didn't agree with his thesis (both in theory and in praxis) that suicide was a mysterious and/or equitable solution
Here's the beautiful thing: you don't have to agree. I don't even think the thesis would apply to his actual suicide. He was depressed. Logic may or may not apply. This isn't literature and his death isn't some postmodern thing. One doesn't need a peer-reviewed thesis to graduate.

[Anonymous No.22642258]

>>22642162
>Here's the beautiful thing: you don't have to agree. I don't even think the thesis would apply to his actual suicide. He was depressed. Logic may or may not apply. This isn't literature and his death isn't some postmodern thing. One doesn't need a peer-reviewed thesis to graduate.

[Anonymous No.22643096]

What Wallace was to Pynchon I hope to be to Wallace.

Murakami had an epiphany at 29. If I reach 30 and do not produce my first major work I may givr up on writing.

[Anonymous No.22643112]

>>22641831
>>22641868
has anyone else read DFW's biography "Every Love Story Is A Ghost Story?" includes a quote from DFW where he says his purpose on this earth is to stick his dick in as many women as possible. that's a direct quote. apparently he fucked all the time on book tours. just a constant stream of liberal pussy. incessant bedding of twentysomething poetasters and wannabe novelists. body count easily in the high double digits, probably triple.

[Anonymous No.22643156]

>>22643096
Post some of your writing

[8hts8 No.22643274]

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. We can’t measure it. 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.
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.”

[Anonymous No.22643281]

>>22639472
>reference upon reference upon reference

Its a pseud crutch, in the coming centuries postmodern literature will be largely forgotten. It's very much "of the times" rather than something with everlasting value.

[Anonymous No.22643285]

>>22642155
You can tell by the time of his Kenyon College commencement address that his creativity was dead

[Anonymous No.22643788]

Depends on the definition but he was objectively a highly intelligent man who got shit done.

[Anonymous No.22643934]

>>22639480
>What do you mean he doesn't talk about the Jewish liberal elites? Arggghhhhh I see right through his psyops

[Anonymous No.22643946]

>>22640060
my man :)

[Anonymous No.22643966]

>>22641761
Manchild

[Anonymous No.22644146]

>>22640097
200 IQ doesnt make you a genius, fag

[Anonymous No.22644275]

>>22643112
>body count easily in the high double digits, probably triple.
Anon, I'm in the high double digits and am pretty bland all around.

[Anonymous No.22644402]

>>22640060
The most based man on /lit/

[Anonymous No.22644432]

>>22639472
he was brilliant and intelligent but I think not quite a genius. Love listening to his interviews.

[Anonymous No.22644441]

>>22640084
>>22640296
I read White Noise and found it underwhelming, except for the first third or so. Then I heard an interview with DFW and he said Delillo is the greatest living American writer. What should I read to give Delillo another chance?

[Anonymous No.22644450]

>>22640341
based /encapsulatingtheessence/post

[Anonymous No.22644481]

>>22640434
Politics is more than people with ideas, it is people with guns and a monopoly on force. You don't pay taxes or go to jail because you think it's a good idea.

[Anonymous No.22645888]

bump for DFW

[Anonymous No.22646042]

>>22643096
>Murakami had an epiphany at 29
You know he just made that shit up, right? Good grief

[Anonymous No.22646055]

>>22643096
https://lithub.com/haruki-murakami-the-moment-i-became-a-novelist/

Pretty cool. Makes me want to watch baseball even though I have no interest in it.

[Anonymous No.22646074]

>>22640097
Good point. I think one of his problems was how scared he was of asserting his superiority. A lot of young men have this issue, you don’t need to be a dick about it but don’t be a little bitch either. I remember watching his interviews and he’d be all worried about sounding pretentious or something like that. He was definitely a little odd in some ways.

[Anonymous No.22646078]

>>22639472
Yes. It's a shame he killed himself. He inspired many good conversations with people I've met. It's unsettling that his suicide undermined much of what he wrote about.

[Anonymous No.22646412]

>>22644441
Mao II.

[Anonymous No.22646460]

>>22646412
thank-you

[Anonymous No.22646478]

>>22644275
bullshit post physique and your secret ways with women

[Anonymous No.22647319]

Absolutely, his insight into the map/territory dichotomy in IJ is illuminating.

[Anonymous No.22647326]

>>22639472
He was a big fish in a dying pond, but not a genius

[Anonymous No.22649177]

smart people don't kill themselves