/lit/ - Literature

[NewEuropa !98IwwMqhE6 No.2416438]

What's a good David F. Wallace text for an ESOL chap?

[NewEuropa !98IwwMqhE6 No.2416444]

>>2416438
entry level text *

[Behemoth !!Twl3DmqEY/B No.2416449]

Unless you're pretty good with English, none. He uses very convoluted language, and sometimes it's not even convoluted with good reason.
I'd suggest A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again, although I wouldn't recommend going for anything else in the book except for the titular article.

[NewEuropa !98IwwMqhE6 No.2416460]

>>2416449
Well, that's a bummer.
Thanks for the advice, nevertheless.

[Anonymous No.2416472]

Read Consider the Lobster.

Actually don't, because it's fucking horrible, but it's easy, simple writing.

[Behemoth !!Twl3DmqEY/B No.2416477]

>>2416460
You seem like you're not bad with English, I'd say just give the essay I mentioned a try, and maybe one of his collections of short stories. Oblivion might be an easier read than Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, try that one. He's not a terribly difficult writer to "get," he just uses difficult vocabulary.

[Anonymous No.2416507]

OP, you should keep in mind that David Foster Wallace wanted nothing more than to be taken seriously, so his writing is this strange, clunky, atonal mess of words that disjointed to the point of being hideous. Wallace had no sense of rhythm, so he always opted for the erudite word that jarred against the fabric of the text rather than the common word that nestled in seamlessly. This is usually called "try hard" in the 4chan community.

It comes as no true shock to me that DFW has a huge fanbase on /lit/, because I imagine this board is chockablock with kids who have the same backgrounds and ambitions as DFW did--the intelligent, white American stock that would like to be noticed, and taken seriously as an artist.

Ultimately, I think DFW is the epitome of that lecturer in the first section of "Steppenwolf," where Harry Haller turns to the narrator and gives him a look that signifies:

[Anonymous No.2416510]

>>2416507

"...the Steppenwolf threw me a quick look, a look which criticized both the words and the speaker of them- an unforgettable and frightful look which spoke volumes! It was a look that did not
simply criticize the lecturer, annihilating the famous man with its delicate but crushing irony. That was the least of it. It was more sad than ironical; it was indeed utterly and hopelessly sad; it conveyed a quiet despair, born partly of conviction, partly of a mode of thought which had become habitual with him. This despair of his not only unmasked the conceited lecturer and
dismissed with its irony the matter at hand, the expectant attitude of the public, the somewhat presumptuous title under which the lecture was announced- no, the Steppenwolf's look pierced our whole epoch, its whole overwrought activity, the whole surge and strife, the whole vanity, the whole superficial play of a shallow, opinionated intellectuality. And alas! the look went still deeper, went far below the faults, defects and hopelessness of our time, our intellect, our culture alone. It went right to the heart of all humanity, it bespoke eloquently in a single second the whole despair of a thinker, of one who knew the full worth and meaning of man's life. It said:
'See what monkeys we are! Look, such is man!'
and at once all renown, all intelligence, all the attainments of the spirit, all progress towards the sublime, the great and the enduring in man fell away and became a monkey's trick!"

This is the long way of saying that if you're going to go through the effort, you should first make sure that the effort is worth it. Pick your battles wisely. Some skirmishes are better left in retreat.

[Anonymous No.2417164]

>>2416507
5 star post(s)

[Anonymous No.2417168]

>strange, clunky, atonal mess of words that disjointed to the point of being hideous. Wallace had no sense of rhythm, so he always opted for the erudite word that jarred against the fabric of the text rather than the common word that nestled in seamlessly.
Much like your post, then?

[Anonymous No.2417171]

>>2417168
But it's well-written, duder.

[Anonymous No.2417173]

>>2417168

>/lit/ kiddies resorting to Ad hominem as usual

[Anonymous No.2417181]

>>2417171

[Anonymous No.2417188]

>>2417173
>citing ad hominem against something that is a gigantic ad hominem

[Anonymous No.2417189]

the only thing that properly explains /lit/s obsession with DFW is that its average user is teenaged

[Anonymous No.2417190]

>>2416507
>>2416510

good posts. thanks for sharing.

[Anonymous No.2417196]

>>2417188
DON'T WORRY, DFW! I WILL PROTECT YOUR HONOUR!!!!

I touch your book, and feel absurd. Saving all my boners for you, bro. RIP!!!!

[Anonymous No.2417203]

>>2417196
You seem a bit upset.

[Anonymous No.2417229]

>>2417203

[Anonymous No.2417247]

>>2417229
Speak for yourself.

>>2416438
His 'simplest' text would probably be This is Water, which is a speech he gave. Incarnations of Burning Children is a short story that he wrote in a simple way.