Washington University lecturer and "Infinite Jest" enthusiast Michael O'Bryan gives an introduction to David Foster Wallace's encyclopedic novel. Part 3
I come from a Christian worldview and I find this book particularly excellent because mostly Wallace's honesty about the human condition is infinitely informative.
I've been watching this and remembering all the same thoughts I had reading Infinite jest for the first time about 10 years ago. Then you mentioned reading Gravity's Rainbow as an undergraduate in UCSB. I was also a student at UCSB and I read Gravity's Rainbow my first time during a summer in Isla Vista.
Ha, I've kept my head out of the comments section of all these vids, because never read the comments, but someone who watched the videos told me about this and I had to respond! When did you finish? I graduated in '02 but stuck around a bit, so I think it was actually the next summer, '03, that I would have finished GR for the first time. What if we were reading it in IV at the same time, lol. A coincidence worthy of the man himself, lol.
Thank you Michael O'Bryan. I get the sense that there is much work behind your observations. Is there any way you would be interested in establishing a book club for the book (maybe on reddit or any other board) I would love to have a direct line to your brain, when it comes to this book.
WELL! I learned a lot about a lot and arrived at one firm conclusion: I won't read Infinite Jest. This is really a great and erudite presentation, more or less this time's "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here."
I think you're projecting your own anger. This guy seems very objective. FYI, it's OK to criticize a work of literature --- you don't have to parrot everyone else and worship DFW. He was an over-rated fraud.
@@deliciousvegans4505 Millennial snowflake can't accept the reality that people can disagree with each other, and that criticism isn't always grounded in anger, jealousy, or vengeance --- it can be purely objective. Time to grow up, son.
I'm on part 3 of this lecture and I don't interpret it as a hit piece at all. Its quite interesting and well framed I think. Why do you think its a hit piece?
Lol what is going on in this comment thread? I'm not seeing at all how this lecture is criticizing either DFW or the book, it seems to me to be rather objective, humanizing, and empathetic about his darker side, and loving and appreciative of the book itself.
