1. Spoils
As mentioned previously, this is my second time through IJ. I should mention also, though I’m unlikely to mention it again, that as I think out loud here through this reread, there will be spoilers aplenty. I must confess to the following two deficits of character: I actually like spoilers and have difficulty mustering sympathy for those who do not. To those of you who aren’t always skipping to the end like me, this may very well be your last warning.
2. Notes on the beginning-end and some Moby Dick-ishness.
It hadn’t previously occurred to me that literal end of the (non-endnote) text (p. 981) and the chronological end of the story (p. 17) have Gately and Hal, respectively, both relatively aware of being trapped in their own heads (Hal’s “red cave,” for instance (which may as well be Plato’s)), peering outward, flat on their backs, and contemplating the sky. This peering out the head theme is something that I noticed a lot in Moby Dick, which I’ve read only recently. Another parallel to MD is the violence toward the sky in the Hal sequence (p. 16). Ahab threatened to stab the sun, I recall, and Hal observes cell phone antennae stabbing the sky and a jet’s contrail slicing blue sky-skin.
3. Infinite Rainbow
The sky-slicing aerial violence also makes me think of Pynchon’s opening, “a screaming came across the sky” in Gravity's Rainbow. Two other bits of GR-ish stuff in the early pages of IJ: (1) Ray Gunn and I are both convinced that IJ’s annular glyphs at section openings are evocative of GR’s “sprocket holes” (see here for Ray's nice remark about the glyphs of both authors as signals of unfilmability). (2) When, toward the end of their session, the conversationalist is going off about the polycarbonate found in both Hal’s racket and JOI’s cranial cartridge, the mutual proximity of descriptors like “polycarbonate,” “gyroscopic,” and “priapistic” just screams (across the sky!): “imipolex-g.” The confluence of cybernetics and pleasure embodied in GR’s Slothrop-hounding V2’s turn into IJ’s “entertainment” which, in varying degrees of literalness (with the excessively literal instance being JOI himself (“Himself”)), really gets inside one’s head.
4. Total Foreseen Horror
DFWs breathless super-long sentences are often put to their best effect in describing someone dying, leaving their body, and or, just transcending the local action. (See for example, the end of the essay “a supposedly fun thing…” where DFW ascends to bird’s eye view of the cruise ship, or the story in Oblivion about the victim of the scalding diaper). Consider the hilarious and terrible section on the paranoid schizophrenic (PS) in the show Orin is watching who, the PS, afraid of radio active fluids, is injected with such fluids and subjected to a PET scan. Here the sentential breathlessness is pressed into the service of conveying absolute terror (the PS ends up screaming his mind away). Note too the strange-loop-y-ness of what happens to the PS. The PET scan generates and image of the fear, a fear of radioactive fluids and large machines that, the object of the fear, is pretty much definitive of the processes of PET scanning.
5. On Quote Marks
6. DFW CATS
See also this. And this:
moar funny pictures
Did you see in that thread how we were semi-debunked on the Pynchon sprocket theory? I say semi because that theory was still prevalent when Wallace published IJ. The article the semidebunker references is pretty cool. It's stuff like this that convinces me the Infinite Summer project was a fantastic idea.
ReplyDeleteI did see the semi-debunking, but I like your reasons for regarding it as only 'semi'.
ReplyDeleteOK, I'll avoid the threads until I'm deeply in. I just started it last night. I'm embarassed to admit I had to read the first chapter three times before I felt truly oriented. This is some funky weird shit so far. I like it (though frankly if I didn't already know I was supposed to like it I'm not sure I would have put in the effort to orient myself properly).
ReplyDeleteDude how can you not sympathize with spoiler haters. Half of the point in many movies/books is that there is a dramatic tension that is resolved at a specific point in the book. If that is done prematurely, it destroys (spoils) the buildup, the mystery, the narrative trajectory designed by the author/director.
I literally close my eyes and put my fingers in my ears when trailers come on for movies I know I will see.
With books I just avoid reading about them. :) Of course, if it is philosophy there is no need, but for literature it is important to maintain a veil of ignorance.
@Eric:
ReplyDeleteWhat I care about is whether it is interesting or lame that e.g. (spoiler alert) Vader is Luke's father. It doesn't make it any more interesting or less lame if I spend 100 minutes of slow dramatic build to learn what happens. If what happens is cool, then I'm just as happy to learn it sooner than later.
Relatedly, one of my all-time favorite websites is
http://www.moviepooper.com
Spoiler haters: beware!
P.S. In The Crying Game, the lady is a dude.
Now imagine he is white.
ReplyDelete