Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 82 posts

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#61

Post by Arubis »

redtexture wrote: post #33
Arubis wrote: post #8

I wish I could still love DFW's work the way I used to, but it's colored by [allegations of significant relational abuse]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Foster_Wallace#Personal_... ).

From the article. > Subsequent first-person accounts came from Wallace’s friends... >...They also produced a fairly consistent picture of a selfish friend, a manipulative—and likely abusive—boyfriend, and a jealous and self-mythologizing writer. Even were we to desire to do so, there is no way to read Wallace today without knowing these things about him. > It’s worth noting, though, that for attentive readers of Wall…

This is fair, and familiar. A common sensation over the last half-decade or so is to be shocked without being surprised.

That this was a predictable facet of DFW's character doesn't make his purported actions less saddening and hurtful.

It's okay--expected!--to struggle. It's common--awful, but repairable!--to hurt others in the process. The open question is whether that repair would have ever been available had he lived.

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#62

Post by Arubis »

Invictus0 wrote: post #56
Arubis wrote: post #8

I wish I could still love DFW's work the way I used to, but it's colored by [allegations of significant relational abuse]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Foster_Wallace#Personal_... ).

I don't get how people can care about things like this. The American Constitution was written by slaveowners, and MLK cheated on his wife. It doesn't make the Constitution worthless nor does it make the I have a Dream speech a fraud. Never meet your heroes.

Nuance! You can do better than black and white, good/bad binary decisions.

I totally care about those other factors. And I am acutely aware of the effect that physical abuse has on real, actual people. It's unavoidable that this would effect my reading of someone's work.

That the writers of the Constitution were morally fallible means they weren't the final authority, and we should be willing to grow. They had wisdom; we should take what we can of it, and take a nuanced view. This is no different from my take on DFW: there's art and learning to be had, but it's no longer the pure and innocent enjoyment I would have had prior to knowing how personally hurtful he could be.

The MLK stuff is uncertain as yet; the FBI was clearly trying to blackmail him, but the records remain sealed. We'll know more in a couple years: https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1997/summer/e...

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#63

Post by MissionInfl »

dailyrorschach wrote: post #28
iggldiggl wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My favorite scene […] Eschaton […] And a band that apparently has some David Foster Wallace fans amongst its members did a music video based on that chapter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ni7T18UUBUI (The Decemberists - "Calamity Song")

And directed by Office, Parks Rec, Good Place Mike Schur - who once definitely owned the film rights to Infinite Jest, not sure he still does or not.

An additional Mike Schur Infinite Jest connection: https://www.vulture.com/2013/04/last-nights-parks-and-rec-wa...

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#64

Post by closedloop129 »

tanseydavid wrote: post #6
themisto wrote: post #2

I haven't read any books by David Foster Wallace, though every time he comes up I feel obliged to share a fantastic speech of his about finding joy in the monotony of life. I heard it years ago and it's always stuck with me. Video[1], transcript[2] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI [2] https://jamesclear.com/great-speeches/this-is-water-by-david...

I want to second this recommendation. This commencement speech that Wallace gave is deeply moving and thought-provoking to me every time I listen to it -- and I have probably heard it at least 10 times. I have shared it with others, most of whom have had a very similar reaction to it.

How should one interpret the speech in light of his suicide? [1] He didn't shoot his head which suggests that his mind wasn't a master. Still, it makes me a bit worried that his thoughts could be the structure that made him suffer.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Foster_Wallace#Death

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#65

Post by rcktmrtn »

Arubis wrote: post #8

I wish I could still love DFW's work the way I used to, but it's colored by [allegations of significant relational abuse]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Foster_Wallace#Personal_... ).

The fact that he killed himself colors every bit of his work to me. Whatever people may say about depression being a chemical phenomenon outside of our control, there will always be something perverse to me about learning why not to commit suicide from an author who did.

That said, I found Infinite Jest to be very insightful when I read it at a low point in my life, but I went into it knowing who the author was.

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#66

Post by floxy »

themisto wrote: post #2

I haven't read any books by David Foster Wallace, though every time he comes up I feel obliged to share a fantastic speech of his about finding joy in the monotony of life. I heard it years ago and it's always stuck with me. Video[1], transcript[2] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI [2] https://jamesclear.com/great-speeches/this-is-water-by-david...

Getting off topic here, but is there a word for the concept of an anti-joke? Along with examples? As in, a joke consists of a setup story, and then there is a lull or pause, enough time for the listener to contemplate what going to happen next. And then the joke teller says something unexpected but somewhat related, and it is funny. There is a moment in the speech that I would classify as sort of the opposite. DFW starts relating about the ugly people sitting in traffic with the large SUVs with religious and patriotic bumper stickers, and the crowd starts cheering and laughing, seemingly agreeing that those "others" deserve mockery. But then there comes the punch line, that maybe the others have some worse hardship like bone cancer, which is definitely not funny. Or stated another way, for a joke, the setup story is neutral, and the after effect is funny. For the anti-joke, the setup is funny, and ends somber, and maybe makes you feel bad for laughing at the beginning? The anti-joke start at about 13:28:

https://youtu.be/8CrOL-ydFMI?t=808

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#67

Post by Hallucinaut »

floxy wrote: post #66
themisto wrote: post #2

I haven't read any books by David Foster Wallace, though every time he comes up I feel obliged to share a fantastic speech of his about finding joy in the monotony of life. I heard it years ago and it's always stuck with me. Video[1], transcript[2] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI [2] https://jamesclear.com/great-speeches/this-is-water-by-david...

Getting off topic here, but is there a word for the concept of an anti-joke? Along with examples? As in, a joke consists of a setup story, and then there is a lull or pause, enough time for the listener to contemplate what going to happen next. And then the joke teller says something unexpected but somewhat related, and it is funny. There is a moment in the speech that I would classify as sort of the opposite. DFW st…

There is definitely the concept of the anti-joke. Anti-humour has the wiki page.

The sadly-late Norm Macdonald was a good proponent.

Fwiw though I watched this after your post and I'd say that's not really the same. I'm not sure what you call this technique in speeches with such a setup but it adds great emotional gravity and is something I see and appreciate a lot in speeches like this (or even shows like The Good Place which is incredible but can't be described further without spoilers).

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#68

Post by Invictus0 »

Arubis wrote: post #62
Invictus0 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get how people can care about things like this. The American Constitution was written by slaveowners, and MLK cheated on his wife. It doesn't make the Constitution worthless nor does it make the I have a Dream speech a fraud. Never meet your heroes.

Nuance! You can do better than black and white, good/bad binary decisions. I totally care about those other factors. And I am acutely aware of the effect that physical abuse has on real, actual people. It's unavoidable that this would effect my reading of someone's work. That the writers of the Constitution were morally fallible means they weren't the final authority, and we should be willing to grow. They had wisdom…

> it's no longer the pure and innocent enjoyment I would have had prior to knowing how personally hurtful he could be.

All you crave is ignorance. The reality is that everyone has personal failings of some kind. All the bridges, all the books, all the artworks were made by imperfect people that were sometimes assholes.

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#69

Post by zafka »

themisto wrote: post #2

I haven't read any books by David Foster Wallace, though every time he comes up I feel obliged to share a fantastic speech of his about finding joy in the monotony of life. I heard it years ago and it's always stuck with me. Video[1], transcript[2] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI [2] https://jamesclear.com/great-speeches/this-is-water-by-david...

Thanks much for this! First time I have heard this. Now saved for repeats.

Re: David Foster Wallace’s final attempt to make art moral

#70

Post by tanseydavid »

closedloop129 wrote: post #64
tanseydavid wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to second this recommendation. This commencement speech that Wallace gave is deeply moving and thought-provoking to me every time I listen to it -- and I have probably heard it at least 10 times. I have shared it with others, most of whom have had a very similar reaction to it.

How should one interpret the speech in light of his suicide? [1] He didn't shoot his head which suggests that his mind wasn't a master. Still, it makes me a bit worried that his thoughts could be the structure that made him suffer. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Foster_Wallace#Death

I agree this is a very complex matter to consider but I dwell on the parts where he emphasizes the degree to which his own "default thinking mode" was like everyone else's, any you can choose to either suffer it or manage it.
Post reply on HN