I have to apologize in advance, I will not do a very good job of answering my question from the post title. It was just one of the many I was left with after reading Infinite Jest and I have to admit, it sounds pretty good. I still am not sure what to make of the book and how much I can say without totally spoiling it.
Nevertheless, here are my thoughts. I can't help but see its slightly twisted connections to the epic tradition since I just finished a class on them. It has the same tropes but turned on their head-- one of the more pitiable characters emerges at the end as the true hero, while the original protagonist begins his fall around the climax of the book (if it can be said to have a climax at all). Heaven and hell are unexpectedly convoluted in the halfway house and tennis academy. Its similies are never grandiose, in fact they are usually only ironic, and the muse invoked is painfully basic yet fails to hear its call.
Infinite Jest does however, present an impressive insight into American entertainment and values. We get this through a serious of interrelated yet unconverging stories of drug use, tennis, family history, and other miscellany. These are interspersed with the philosophical discussions of a single encounter between an undercover American agent and a handicapped Canadian assassin.
Infinite Jest poses the problem of what we chose to enjoy versus what we are drawn or often succumb to enjoy and further the negative effects that succumbing can have. These discussions as well as the more immersive examples in the stories form the substance that I think the book seeks to communicate, that is, a greater agency within the limits of ones own life.
In each situation the limits of each character are clearly defined, but what is truly loveable about the book is how each one manages to express himself in a totally unexpected way. My favorite example is Mario, the third brother of the Incandenza family and the only one not to be enrolled in the elite Enfield Tennis Academy. He is afflicted with an unspecified mental illness, despite which he is incredibly cheerful and manages to explore his own personal interest in film. He hobbles around in the tunnels between tennis courts with a camera strapped to his forehead taking pre-match footage of the students. It is this simple, unconventional type of charachter that I think gives the reader a great sense of joy in reading, one that is easily translatable to one's own life.
Although the realism and understanding with which Wallace portrays each of his characters and their actions is truly impressive, the most innovate technique with which he creates a sense of realism is his use of climax and anti-clamax. The book covers a wide range of experiences that it would be hard for one person to experience, yet it remains entirely accessible. This is because each persons story is beleivable, it sounds like the wild anecdote one might share over a few drinks at a party. Yet this "epic" doesn't cash in on its dramatic conclusion. Even the meeting of Bloom and Dedalus in Ulysses is more of spectacular occurance than what we see in Infinite Jest.
It seems to be teaching then, in addition to the message I mentioned earlier, which one picks up rather quickly, that it is not about the top of the mountain, or the epiphany moment, but more about the steps it takes to get there. It orients the readers towards the possible future of the book, rather than the problem solved in it. Which I think makes it quite unique and definitely puts it in the running for social science fiction/ epic of the decade. Though I really should have explained what that means....
No comments:
Post a Comment