Disagree with your closing point. DFW is Hal. DFW read the dictionary when younger, was active in tennis and was also academically gifted. He also committed suicide at age 46 after 20 years of depression and failed medical treatment with drugs. Compared with Don who went on the have a successful life, getting the girl, and finding god, despite being dumb as a stump. Your point about this being an uplifting book depends on your closeness to the two protagonists. If you identify with Hal and DFW, the book is a real downer, bro. If you are like Don than woohoo world. That's the infinite jest. That's the joke. DFW did everything that was supposed to make him successful and yet he suffered from depression and finally ended up killing himself, like Hal, metaphorically. The people who are like Don won't read this book. Can't read this book. Too busy working, bowling, fishing, and fucking the prom queen. TL/DR; Reading is for losers.
That was a truly incredible summary. I would say this is the most helpful I’ve found any literary resource to be. You really capture the essence of the book while not missing any plot devices either. I physically can’t not subscribe to you after watching this. Thanks!
I love Pynchon. Inherent Vice is in my top 5 favorite books list. I tried GR recently and got 90 pages in then gave up in defeat. I picked up Mason and Dixon and am loving it. I have sworn to myself I will get through GR at some point!
@@CalebSmith3 Perhaps listening to the Audible version. I read it this way twice back to back. You have to be okay with not being able to make sense of large sections of GR. I'm listening to IJ at the moment. Gately has just gotten shot. I would say I neither love or hate IF. I've had the same reaction to GR and 1000 years of solitude.
@@CalebSmith3 I recommend listening to the pynchon in public podcast while you read gravity's rainbow. They do chapter by chapter analyses of the book so you have some other voices discussing the novel that can help you to stay on pace and motivated to keep at it.
For some reason, this whole summary feels like some kind of prequel to Fahrenheit 451, not the characters or story, but how the world is set up and the philosophies that are explored.
hi, just to anyone watching this video: if you haven't read infinite jest, don't watch this video. it ruined my experience whit the book, because the part of the book that i most enjoy is the part in which you, the reader, need to connect different characters and situations to make sense of everything: this video did this for me for most of the plot lines and characters. every time that a new character was introduced, i already knew who was, what was gonna happen, there was no mystery for me. believe me, there is a plot, there are spoilers. this video could be good after reading the book, to see other person's interpretations, but for me, it totally ruined the experience, it left me no space to interpret the book. seriously, i'm really mad because at the intro this man says that he'd have wanted a video like this when starting to read the book, and i couldn't be more against that. this video will always be for me one of those things that you wish you never encountered.
Joelle actually puts on the veil because she's been disfigured by acid being flung into her face semi-accidentally by her mother. I know people say it's a bit ambiguous whether or not the acid story is true, but on my most recent reading I came across a bit where Hal mentions Joelle's disfigurement, which in my opinion lends some truth to the whole thing. Also, maybe a small point, but I don't think there being two types of people in ONAN was the point that DFW was trying to get across. I think the point is that the different types of people you mention are really driven by the same impulse, that is, the impulse to give yourself over to something. Media and entertainment, tennis, academics, drugs... it's all the same thing
There's room for the theory that the acid enhanced her beauty. I'm partial to this idea for it reflects how people who overcome adversity become stronger.
Don doesn’t end up dating Joelle. He has feelings for her but acknowledges that it’s predatory to pursue a relationship with anyone who’s newly sober. Joelle is only 2-3 weeks sober in the end of this book.
@@jacobrubio6667 No, he doesn’t die that we know of, although he was in intensive care after a gunshot wound. It’s implied that he recovers. Anyways, this is a plot summary. People shouldn’t come to this video if they don’t want the book spoiled.
@@antichrist.superstar yeah, he may be dying, but Hal (way back at the novel's beginning, but the timeline's ending) speaks of a scene involving Gately and John N.R. Wayne digging up Himself's head. Which may or may not be an accurate memory on Hal's part.
@@ma-mo Exactly. In the first chapter Hal has memories of being in the graveyard with Gately, which could only have happened after the events in the final chapter. Whether Hal’s memories are real is up to interpretation. But in an interview DFW mentions that there is resolution to the story, but that it occurs just outside the frame of the narrative we are provided with. This makes me think the master copy of the entertainment is eventually found, which makes Gately’s recovery seem likely. Just my interpretation.
Fun fact: in the Roman Calendar, years had the name of that year's elected consuls. You weren't born in -54 BC, you were born in "The year of Caesar". And people would be able to list all the names of all the consuls since the year they were born, like kids with multiplication tables today. So there you go, not so weird. Thanks for the summary, this looks chaotic as fuck.
@@annakonda6289 Kai-sar, in Roman times, yes. It means "elephant" in Carthaginian, because an ancestor of Julius Caesar was in the Punic Wars and killed an elephant in an act of bravery, so his whole family inherited the title. Crazy stuff.
Ive been looking for something on Infinite Jest that could possibly be un-spoilable while being 50 pages in. Your description less than a minute in got me hooked. Thanks!
Great video; but you forgot the MAIN POINT! The crux of the book is a father-son tale: with JOI feeling disconnected from the person most similar to himself, his son Hal, and trying to connect with him through a series of very bizarre methods. When Hal eats the mold as a child, he becomes outwardly very communicative, but very unfeeling and cold on the inside, JOI recognises this, and hears all of Hal's speech as a murmuring/groaning, because it doesn't come from anything; JOI then spends the rest of his life and the entire novel trying to connect with his son, by making Infinite Jest to reverse Hal's condition, by killing himself to become a wraith and communicate with Hal on a spiritual plane, by getting Hal to neglect his teeth so a yeast infection occurs and sneaking DMZ onto his toothbrush so it reacts with the infection and makes Hal once again feeling on the inside, yet outwardly incommunicative, so the wraith of JOI has some worthy mind to communicate with in the afterlife, and the last chronological point of the book takes place just before Hal would be playing Stice, who has become possessed by JOI's wraith, and thus the father and son may finally bond over a game of tennis.
Father and son being able to finally communicate through a tennis ball over a net with the non-verbal language of tennis is the most touching image to end the book
I read it in English as a non native speaker, which was a pretty hard task sometimes, but also a fascinating experience. For sure I missed out on some details, so here is what I have to ask. What confused me a little bit about this great summary (congrats to that!), was the part of you describing Hal as a genius. For the most part of the book to me he seemed to be an intelligent but not at all exceptional young man. He wasn´t even good in mathematics (mind he needed a lot of extra help by his friend Pemulis to get him through the exams). The description of Hal as a genius was just in the first chapter, so didn´t he became one due to whatever happened to him during the year between the last and the first chapter of the book?
@@LucasNauan its mentioned towards the end that the AFR, stationed in the deceased Antitioi's shop, scoop him up off the street with the intention of showing him the entertainment for research purposes but he cuts off all the fingers of Poor Tony while they are both in captivity, enraging the AFR leader. last mention is one of the leaders considering just killing him since he's obstructing their research. No definite end but you can imagine he's probably dead.
When you mention Don is drinking the alcohol his mother leaves in the bottle after she passes out- you say it’s to help her so she maybe will drink less. That’s inaccurate, he drinks it so it will be gone and she will have to go to the store the next day and replenish her supply enabling him insurance for himself to have access to the vodka again thus the cycle continues.
Fantastic summary. I would only argue that Hal does not become an animal on the inside in chapter 1. Instead, we can see that he thinks clearly and in the most logical way, but loses his ability to communicate with the outside world. That is the reason why, when he speaks, nobody can understand his sounds. This is a very interesting way to see this because, as you said, he represents this kind of philosophy where the language is the key to understanding the universe, and it seems that, perhaps, just like a guy named Cobb said on a paper about it, instead of involving into an animal, he could have reached a point in which his knowledge is non comunicable, thus developing a private language.
kinda reminds me of the idea of that king somewhere in old english history that put twins on an island on their own in order to learn what the "language of eden" was. the twins did develop their own language but obviously nobody could understand them cause nobody else knew the "language of eden".
i actually have a lot of problems with this video but its wildly impressive nonetheless that you could summarize the plot so accurately in 20 minutes . its like you were scrambling to get all this information out , video has a manic feel that i like a lot and i send this to friends as an introduction to the book sometime
Wow. This was the most thorough summary I've ever heard. It makes me want to read Infinite Jest again :). The one important aspect you left out (imo) is how the characters communicate. DFW spent a while discussing how vanity influenced things like video chatting. The book began with Hal unable to communicate and ended with Gately having a tube in his throat, unable to speak to the people around him. I think the methods of communication used by the characters is important enough to be included in such a summary. For real, this was amazing. Thanks for putting it ou!
And it's worth noting that Hal winds up in a hospital bed next to Don at the end of the book, and the two of them form an important relationship, which his referenced in the opening section. One other important detail--we are only given a glimpse into Hal's inner life after Pemulis negotiates the delayed drug test, giving them 30 days to detox. Hal's story switches to first person narration at that point, and it's mentioned a couple times by Hal's classmates that Hal's voice sounds strange. His deteriorating ability to communicate coincides with his rediscovered ability to feel and believe.
Book has been sitting on my shelf for months (years?) and I’ve always been too intimidated to venture much past the first chapter. This summary gave me hope, thank you. I shall try again
I’m only halfway through and this is the most compelling video I’ve ever watched. An awesome summary! Thank you! Thinking about starting my second journey through infinite jest. Can wait to see Lateral Alice again!
It has been years since I read IJ, but I have read it at least a dozen times... possibly twenty or so. My memory of the "end of the book," which I define as the last chronological event is this: Hal and Don standing over the exhumed body of James O. Incandenza, ostensibly in search of the fabled antidote to Infinite Jest. Secondly, a group of Canadians unrelated to les assassins shot Gately because he was protecting Lentz. Lentz killed a large pet dog belonging to one of these massive Hawaiian shirt wearing Canadians. While this was happening, Gately spied JVD's legs climbing out Green's window. Lastly, what's your story?
I just finished the book and totally agree with this analysis. The value of this book is in the experience of reading it and the broad but accurate view of how the world is evolving. Forget about the plot. It is merely a delivery vehicle.
Just finished the book. Does Hal eating the mold have any particular meaning for the actual plot or his character? Is this what makes him so smart? With how many times it’s mentioned, I cant help but feel like I’m missing something about it.
Was Gatley shot by a wheelchair assassin? I thought he was shot by one of the Hawaiian-shirt-wearing Canadian college bros that were after Lenz because he killed their dog.. And is it concluded that Don and Joelle end up dating? I thought it was left ambiguous. Also left ambiguous: Joelle's reason for the veil. The story about her getting the acid in the face is told by her friend who I assumed was made to be an unreliable source..
Also, I'm reading my comment back to myself and I want to assure you I'm not being snooty. I'm sincerely asking, I wouldn't be surprised if I missed something. Either way, seriously good video. I'm guilty 1000 times over of referring to this book as unsummerizable when asked what it's about..
There are numerous places in the book that back up the acid in the face and that Joell is actually deformed. For one Joell refers to Orin as the acid dodger early in the book. Her friend’s account is actually a reliable source.
@@marqkey5063 I firmly believe this issue is made to be left ambiguous. If you have a moment just Google search 'is Joelle Van Dynn deformed or beautiful?' (One of many quotes from the internets literary community on this very issue): "Many aspects of the novel of course impel us to read suspiciously, to gather clues like detectives, to interrogate the veracity of claims. Consider, for example, the compounded conflicting accounts of whether Joelle van Dyne has been horribly disfigured by acid, or is sublimely beautiful (compare, for instance, the explanation given on 538 with that on 795). Yet ultimately, recalling the AA ethos, the narrative makes it difficult for us to successfully execute these suspicious reading practices. Similar to a text like Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow, that for Brian McHale ultimately resists any attempt to answer the many questions it poses (90-91), Infinite Jest frequently invokes a logic of what we might call epistemological equivocation. Either the veil-wearing Joelle van Dyne is hideously and improbably deformed or is superlatively beautiful; either AA is a vapid institution of brainwashing or is the key to recovery from substance abuse; either the novel’s matriarch, Avril Incandenza, is a sinister “black widow” or a superlatively caring mother. The list goes on."
@@seanladden6304 your belief doesn’t impact my knowledge and understanding. The book literally goes into detail how Joelle’s mother threw the acid which ended up on Joelle’s face. Plus she calls Orin the acid dodger plus other references. If you can’t trust what’s written then you might as well have the hypothesis that Joelle doesn’t actually wear a vail at all. Make up something like, the perceived vail is symbolic of how we all fail to truly see people for who they are and we all wear a vail to some extent and whatever new-age philosophic concept you’re can dream up etc, etc, etc. Why would you believe Joelle wears a vail, which is written in plain English, if you aren’t going to believe the explanation for why she wears the vail also written in plain English ????? If you’re going to pretend DFW writes detailed explanations of something only for them to be false, what’s the point? Throw your Google analysis out the window and find the truth by reading the book.
Terrific summary. I read Infinite Jest in high school and then a second time in college. You pointed out a lot of details I never noticed. I’ve got to make time to read this big chunk of paper and ink a third time.
This book sounds incredibly dumb. People say Wallace is a genius but he clearly didn’t understand politics. This sounds more like a fantasy young adult novel.
This is awesome! I read the whole book and your explanation really helps to put it all together. I will read again but probably skip the end notes next time.
I think Joelle isn’t actually unbearably pretty, but actually deformed because of the acid thrown to her face by her father. Which also seems to be the real reason why Orin left her. Being too pretty is just a sort of joke she has. Nice summary anyway, just finished the book trying to figure out what happened.
Acid was thrown at her face by her mother, not her father. The acid was intended for her father, but he ducked and the acid landed on Joelle’s face. This is what caused her to put on the veil. Joelle’s mother’s motive was to get back at Joelle’s father for falling in love with Joelle. Despite being his own daughter, he fell in love with her in a very weird, predatory way. He attempted to cope with this desire for his daughter by treating her in an infantile way, even when Joelle got to be a grown woman. This infuriated Joelle’s mother, causing her to throw acid on Joelle’s father in a fit of rage. Since Joelle’s father was a chemist, there was acid on hand at all times at their family home. To end the extremely sad story of Joelle’s mother, she ended up killing herself shortly after this incident by shoving both of her arms into the garbage disposal in their family’s kitchen.
this sounds exactly like the one short story i made in my creative writing class in 7th grade that ended up being 16 pages long bc it was a never ending stream of consciousness i did at the last minute with no consistent plot
I want to say thank to you Caleb, because you clarified to me a lot of things that I didn't get through my first reading and others that I thought I have misunderstood but not.
You read it right. Some people think she wasn't really deformed and just used the veil for other reasons, but the book is very clear on this point. She is deformed but she also doesn't mind the veil and wishes she had had it her whole life because of her own issues.
I would highly recommend not watching a summary before you read infinite jest because like idk I feel like I'm happy that I didn't know anything going into it and was surprised by all of the surprising things.
You're officially the only RU-vidr to properly summarised the plot of IJ (not just discuss its many themes -- which you do amazingly btw 😊 I had no idea about post modernism & linguistics stuff) I think this content will actually make ppl want to read IJ. It has a bad reputation for being inaccessible and defying explanation You've certainly inspired me to finish it. Thanks!! 👏
Well done!. Someone who can speak from familiarity on the subject clearly, concisely, comprehensively-unlike the other brand-without turning his back to the audience to read from his own slides!
15:48. "...Does just giving in to your animal pleasures make you... (tongue-tied "gear shifting")... gay." Freud would notice that slip of the tongue. I have yet to hear/watch a review of this "great" work of art that has compelled me to try it again. But you came the closest. Good job. Excellent way to elucidate dark areas of this nearly impossible to parse tome. I'm sure it's an awesome piece of lit, but I have cat and dog videos to watch. First try I got 200 pages into it, but just had to stop. "Consider the Lobster," otoh, is a masterpiece.
A most excellent summary! I listened to the audiobook version of Infinite Jest while thru hiking the Pacific Crest Trail and fell absolutely in love with it. I need to revisit the book in physical form, as the audio version doesn't include footnotes, which are no doubt a big part of the book.
I enjoyed this analysis. Another theme of the novel is "addiction". Many characters are in 12 Step programs or recovery facilities. The novel's funny and brilliant second chapter describes how a person addicted to marijuana relates to the drug and to his dealer. The video which the Saudi Arabia counselar official watches is the ultimate drug, in essence a process addiction. which is so appealing, that it's the only activity he wants to do and he cannot stop watching even to eat and drink, causing him to starve to death. It's a metaphor which covers many possibilities in contemporary culture, drugs of intense euphoria like methamphetamine, heroin, and fentanyl or even nicotine, whose addictive hold on users is as irresistible as harder drugs. In some ways it describes the experience of Internet users who check their Facebook page 10-20 times per day, even when they don't enjoy it. It also anticipates current concerns about artificial intelligence, which may produce programs and technologies which lead to the downfall of human civilization.
David Foster Wallace was deeply opposed to cynicism, which the internet delivers to millions many times per day. Instead of giving themselves to meaningful pursuits, they watch many hours of cringe videos, or curating subreddits devoted to hating on this group or that group talking about the "world these days." Instead of feeling inspired and called to action, they get lulled into nihilism and fear and cynicism. We spend much more time ironically watching things we don't like than on pursuits that fulfill us.
It took me three years to read this book. I don’t know how I feel about finishing it. There is nothing happening inside me particularly at the moment. I just finished it 20 minutes ago. But i know it has been important in my life for quite some time now. Thanks for this recap. I missed a lot of info you pointed out. Wow. What an accomplishment. What kept me going for these three years was DFW’s voice. Wildly intelligent but also kind and caring, like a loving big brother. I don’t know what I will do now. This leaves a big void in my life.
Read it again. I have read it many times in many different ways. Two suggestions: read it chronologically. Read it by character, aka follow Don or follow Hal.
Thank you so much for this. I was struggling to read this book on and off for some time, confused mainly with the structure of it all. But now understanding why its written such a way, I think Ill have another (proper) go at it! Cheers!
Brilliant summary. I've read it a couple of times but could never have summarised it so coherently. It added to my understanding as well e.g. the point about Steeply and Marathe's Platonic dialogue. A couple of other points occured to me as I listened: the 'infinite' in the title refers to the return to chapter 1 (perhaps I missed you saying this), Secondly, on a plot level, the title's Shakespeare reference may relate to the Incandenza family structure following 'Himself's' death i.e. half-brother takes over ETA / moves in with Avril, Hal's existential angst and James' return as a ghost. But hey, one could mine this book for decades for intertextual references!
I've read it twice, one with endnotes once without. Never made too much sense to me but loved it nonetheless. Always thought Don was a good guy. Also, people hate it because they aren't up to the challenge of reading it.
Thank you SIR for adeptly summarizing an “unsummarizable” tome! Glad you emphasized Wallace’s superior development of the many characters. No spoiler alert possible, as you mentioned, given snippets like Siamese twin doubles tennis team, delicious smell issuing from kitchen of microwave suicide, giant mirror on interstate at night, mail fraud as occupation for one afflicted with kleptomania and agoraphobia, etc I was slow on the subsidized government calendar. Foster’s voluminous effort makes one wonder if he did it to “kill time” deflecting his frenetically fast mind from what appears to be an inevitable suicide. Would enjoy an effort on your part regarding his suicide and to what extent it might detract from his oeuvre, if any? Do you concur with “ post modern “ view that reality is only reality to the extent it can be described via English?
Wait wait, Don Gately gets shot by a wheelchair assassin? Did we read the same book? I thought it was one of the Nuks who had beef with Randy Lenz while Gately was defending Lenz (wish he wouldn't have). Or did I miss something here.
Thank you for the neutral and simply informative way you discribed current or not so recent politics. It's nice to not get a polorized opinion when all you want is information and entertainment.
Could the cause of Wallace's death, as complex a thinker as he was, come down to the simple fact that, if you distrust everything that makes you feel good, you're going to feel bad?
Back in the mid nineties many of us were using the internet. The idea of the Vushityu was a commonplace notion. Google Glass was outdated when it was released. The only people surprised by new technology are people who know how to live with out it. The FOMO inherit in capitalism is what drives people to choose hiding out over volunteering in their neighborhood. This novel sounds like the near future of 1990's. Minneapolis in 1995.
This video is insanely insightful and talented content creation, wow. I was admitting defeat and putting the book (Audible) down some 20% in and this review has made me commit back into it.
Great summary but a couple of innacuracies: A canadian refugee shoots Don, not a wheelchair assassin. Joelle wears a veil because her mother accidentally splashed acid on her face (although prior to this incident she *was* almost fatally beautiful)
Where are the hints in chapter 1 that gately goes on to live a good life? The only mention of him I can see is Hal thinking about when they dug up James Incandenza's head.
I got 7:55 into this video but have “Infinite Jest” sitting next to me, bookmarked at page 34. What should I do next? A) Stop watching the video and continue reading B) Finish watching the video and pretend like I read the book
DFW was doing tiktok loops before they were cool. Just finished the book and now need to go back and read the first chapter again. I’ll probably read the whole thing again just slower
Theres a few writers where I much prefer their short fiction to their long fiction. Melville, Wallace , Pynchon all imo read SO much better in short stories and up to novella sized chunks. I've read longer works like collected Shakespeare, War and Peace, Ulysses, Dhalgren and the Hyperion Cantons but I don't think I've ever finish Moby Dick, Infinite Jest or Mason & Dixon.
