
The Journalistic Legacy of David Foster Wallace - samclemens
https://longreads.com/2017/12/07/derivative-sport/
======
simen
I've heard a lot of bad things about Wallace's journalistic ethics - basically
misrepresenting the actual story, not the big lines but lots of the details,
for stylistic effect. He was not a rigorous searcher of actual truth, just
some kind of idealized "emotional truth", and in an era where "alternative
facts" is considered an acceptable way to respond to an outright lie, that's
not something to emulate. It's been a while so I don't have the exact links to
the articles that mention this. (I think some of it was in the biography of
Wallace by DT Max.)

Also, that cruise ship essay makes him look like a complete asshole.

It kind of reminds me of that book, The Lifespan of a Fact, about the
protracted struggle between "literary journalist" John D'Agata and fact-
checker Jim Fingal.

This kind of thing pisses me off, even if it's considered great writing. I've
personally been interviewed by a rather well-known journalist (my only
interview of my life, I am neither famous nor notable), and in the resulting
piece there were questions I was never asked and answers I never gave.
Thankfully the false words he put in my mouth were not so bad, but what if it
had been something actually important? So this kind of stuff leaves a bad
taste in my mouth.

~~~
jackstraw14
Have you read David Lipsky's "Although Of Course You End Up Becoming Yourself"
or seen The End of the Tour? It may not change your opinion of DFW much, but
it shows what it was like trying to get answers from him on some of the stuff
you mentioned (not the ethics stuff as much as what his style means, maybe).
It's a pretty detailed account of a Rolling Stone writer (Lipsky) following
and interviewing him right after Infinite Jest was published, but it ends up
mostly being about the stuff in the last few lines of your comment.

------
pklausler
Read Wallace's fiction, especially his novels, for serious (but laugh-out-loud
funny) literature. The non-fiction is somewhat hit-and-miss, with the glaring
brilliant exception of his nearly-always-overlooked book on mathematics
("Everything and More"), which should be required reading.

~~~
laxatives
String Theory is one of my favorite essays of all time. Discusses the
incredible gap between journeymen, low-ranked tennis pro's and the elite
players in both ability and quality of life, as well as the gap between
journeymen and highly competive amateurs.

Definitely recommend Infinite Jest like probably anyone else in this thread,
but would recommend reading his non-fiction first. Jumping into Infinite Jest,
I thought Wallace was some wierdo crank for a long time before I "got" his
style and what he was going for. Even then, it took a long time before I
enjoyed it and he very quickly became one of my favorite authors.

I think Infinite Jest and GEB are two of the only epic books that accomplishes
so much, but in two entirely different contexts. They both build intense, well
founded and well structured frameworks that lead up to epic resolutions,
despite being respectively fiction and non-fiction.

------
ashark
I'd agree with the more critical takes. I've read something like 3/4 of his
collected short non-fic at this point and it's _very_ uneven, and the gems one
does find among the rest tend to be of the semi-precious sort.

~~~
frgtpsswrdlame
Who do you like for short non-fiction? Just collecting recommendations.

~~~
majos
Not the parent, but I like String Theory [1], which is about non-superstar pro
tennis, and A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again [2], which is about a
vacation on a cruise ship.

The second one looks a lot like snarky "I'm the only cool person here"
journalism, but IMO that sort of (typically bad) journalism exists in large
part because Wallace could do it really well.

Oops, I misread your comment as "what", not whom. For whom, I dig George
Saunders. Here's a piece he wrote about a visit to the mysterious "Buddha boy"
a while back [3]. Saunders to me is pretty much Wallace's spiritual successor
as far as style and tone goes.

[1] [http://www.esquire.com/sports/a5151/the-string-theory-
david-...](http://www.esquire.com/sports/a5151/the-string-theory-david-foster-
wallace/)

[2] [https://harpers.org/wp-
content/uploads/2008/09/HarpersMagazi...](https://harpers.org/wp-
content/uploads/2008/09/HarpersMagazine-1996-01-0007859.pdf)

[3] [http://reprints.longform.org/the-incredible-buddha-
boy](http://reprints.longform.org/the-incredible-buddha-boy)

~~~
mohn
I'll second George Saunders! I highly recommend his "CivilWarLand in Bad
Decline" (a novella plus a collection of shorts). I have not heard him
compared to DFW before. Maybe I should give DFW another try.

~~~
majos
Please do. They're similar to me as adept mixers of high (both are plenty
virtuosic/"pretty" when they want to be) and low (both are great at slapstick)
style and write with a kind of scientific eye for details. Saunders has
described this as "if you put a welder to work making dresses". And there's
almost always a basically earnest emotional core underneath everything.

------
everybodyknows
On a trip to coastal Alaska some years back, I saw a small launch packed
shoulder-to-shoulder with cheerless, unprosperous looking people, motoring
along the shoreline -- but away from the harbor. A local explained that these
were cruise ship workers out for a sightseeing tour, a perk of their jobs. The
boat would however never land on shore, because the workers had no visas. And
might perhaps try to escape.

"Supposedly Fun" brought that moment back for me in a rush. Wallace could not
feel at ease being "pampered" by workers themselves forced to maintain a
facade of permanent delight. Such a feeling could only make alien to him most
of his fellow passengers. Unlike them, he had to see the workers as complete
human beings coequal with himself every way, except for what opportunity the
world had denied them. With such empathy, he joins Dickens, Melville, Orwell
-- and in other ways as well, Hunter S. Thompson.

So yes, DFW chooses sides, and his contempt for callous, oblivious passengers
shows. But the real vitriol he reserves for interviewees in the management
class, none of whom will give a straight answer to his plain questions about
the crew's welfare. A certain whip-wielder in the officer's quarters -- "I
wish him ill".

And best of all, the Press Liaison at corporate who tells him "The people on
board -- the staff -- are really part of one big family..." To which DFW
responds: "...the preterite staff lived in mortal terror..." (footnote 13)

