Infinite Jest

So, it’s happening again. This book gets celebrated at every major anniversary. And there’s a good reason.

Many years ago, a student recommended a graduation address on YouTube delivered by David Foster Wallace. I listened to it, liked it, and decided I would road-test it for some students. They enjoyed it, too. It’s basically a meditation on Stoic philosophy. I started playing it for many of my classes. Just one problem.

I had read nothing by Wallace. I felt like a fraud. This had to be fixed. I went to a friend who is something of an authority on contemporary literature. I asked him, “What do I need to read by Wallace?” He replied, “The major work is Infinite Jest, but there are shorter works if you just want to enter the shallow end.”

I began (of course) looking into Infinite Jest. I found a bunch of articles on it. Seemingly every major periodical was doing a twentieth-anniversary review of the book. Why is that?, I wondered. Cripes, they’re all doing it! I began reading them, and I noticed something. A number of the people who penned these reviews made comments like “In 1996, your boyfriend bought this book, placed it on his coffee table to look smart, and the bookmark remained stuck at page 70.” But the reviews were soaring.

I thought to myself, “Ah, so it’s that kind of book—the big one nobody reads. Well, Wallace, looks like it’s you and me, buddy.”

I bought a first-edition hardcover and settled in. I hated it at first. The first fifty pages were nothing but postmodern bullshit. I’m not committing to over a thousand pages of this nonsense. I’ll read Sartre’s Being and Nothingness instead. Screw you, Wallace.

I did more poking around online. There are online glossaries and guides dedicated to the novel. There are entire conferences held. [sigh] I’ll read the goddamn thing.

So, I did. I will not provide here a summary of the book. I will say that Wallace downloaded his entire intellect—which was considerable; I’ve seen a number of interviews—into this book. It’s a masterpiece of modern fiction. When you finish reading it, you are now ready to read it properly. (I’ve only read it the one time.) It has over 200 pages of endnotes; some of the endnotes have footnotes. It’s a serious commitment.

There is a however: Wallace was cancelled for being a violent misogynist. Another great artist turns out to be a vile human being.

I know well what to do in these instances. I like Picasso, Heidegger, and even J. K. Rowling. Say what you want about David Foster Wallace—or Picasso or Rowling—but Heidegger was a Nazi. Card carrying. Should we still read Heidegger? Sure. Just remember you’re reading the work of a disgusting human being. It’s not hard.

Now, some people argue that we shouldn’t buy Harry Potter books. They want to hurt J. K. Rowling. They are not going to; she’s a billionaire. Furthermore, should that be the motive? Pitchforks and torches? I think discussing these issues would be far more constructive. Read the books and discuss their racial failings. Put them to use.

And who knows, you might get Rowling to realize what she has been saying about trans folk is hurtful and stupid. Wouldn’t that be better than her making a million fewer dollars this year?

If you’re looking for a major work of contemporary fiction, something to really sink your teeth into, I would recommend Infinite Jest. It’s brilliant. The structure alone is a wonder. And much of it is laugh-out-loud funny. And you can take solace that you’ll be embarrassing all those dopey erstwhile bohemian boyfriends.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2026/feb/07/never-mind-the-lit-bros-infinite-jest-is-a-true-classic-at-30

Ten Points about Islam (revised, repost)

The points below are basically as they appeared in my 2014 post. I have, however, updated a few figures as well as slightly expanded/edited some of the points for greater clarity. (Also, beneath the points, I include a short list of useful sources on Islam and the Prophet Muhammad.)

A few details to keep in mind before proceeding:

A Muslim is someone who adheres to the faith of Islam. An Arab is essentially someone who speaks Arabic and grew up in and/or identifies with Arab culture—and who may or may not be a Muslim. Most of the Middle East is Arab, including much of North Africa, called the Maghreb. Though not regionally Middle Eastern, the Maghreb is considered culturally Arab.

An Arab (noun) is a person. People, places, and things can be Arab (adjective), such as populations and cuisines. Arabic is a language. THERE ARE NO ARABIC PEOPLE. And Arabian, a mostly outmoded term, can refer to the Saudi Arabian nation-state, or the Arabian peninsula (on which Saudi Arabia is located), or a breed of horse.


Ten Points about Islam

1. There are almost 2 billion Muslims in the world, almost one in four people worldwide. Of the 2 billion, 20 percent are Arab (though 95 percent of Arabs are Muslim).

2. Most Muslims live in South and Southeast Asia. The countries with the most Muslims are, in order: Indonesia, India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.

3. There are 49 countries with Muslim majorities. The Arab League has 22 member states.

4. Muslims worship the same God as Jews and Christians. Allah is Arabic for "God."

5. Jews and Christians are esteemed in Islam as "People of the Book." (Jesus is considered a prophet in Islam and appears throughout Islam's holy book, the Quran, as does Mary.)

6. The concept of jihad refers to one's "struggle" as a Muslim, namely, to be a better Muslim. Reducing jihad to "holy war" is a distortion. Moreover, a common Western misunderstanding is that "holy war" is a general Islamic mandate to kill nonbelievers, which does not exist. “There is no compulsion in religion,” says the Quran (2:256).

7. Sharia, or Islamic law, is a broad category that addresses and governs many, if not all, aspects of Muslim life, including food, dress, marriage and divorce, contracts, and so on. Sharia includes punishment for crimes, but the specifics vary and are open to interpretation.

8. The two major Islamic denominations are Sunni Islam and Shiite (Shia) Islam. Though there are certain theological differences between the two, they have not been in perpetual confrontation. Intermarriage between Sunnis and Shiites is not uncommon in the Middle East. While sectarian conflict does exist, much of the Sunni-Shiite tensions one sees in the news are the product of regional politics and foreign intervention.

9. Women's rights is a serious issue in many Middle Eastern countries. However, this is a cultural and political phenomenon, not a religious one. (Oh, by the way, the first Muslim was a woman—Khadija.)

10. The Prophet Muhammad (570-632 AD) founded Islam. While considered by Muslims to be the Seal of the Prophets (that is, the last of them), he is not viewed as divine. Muhammad was a reformer and endeavored to promote better treatment of women, orphans, and the poor.


SOURCES

Two short biographies on the Prophet Muhammad I recommend:

• W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman (Oxford, 1974). Watt also coauthored the "Muhammad" entry of the online Encyclopedia Britannica.

• Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time (HarperOne, 2007). Armstrong's work in general is dependable, carefully researched, and humane.

Two documentaries on Islam and Muhammad I recommend:

• Islam: Empire of Faith (2000), produced by PBS and narrated by actor Ben Kingsley

• The Life of Muhammad (2011), a three-part miniseries by the BBC

Episode 19

Quite excited to be working on Episode 19, which will be on Islam. Have been going through old photos of my adventures in the Arab world (where I wish I was), and it's been weird.

 
I'm not very good at looking back; I find it unsettling. Not sure why. But I am so fond of Arab culture, and it breaks my heart to see the images—recent and my old photos—from Gaza, in particular. Such a beautiful people, such a special place—one of my favorite, now reduced to agony and rubble. Biden and Trump should die in prison, together.

At any rate, I have put Adam Smith to the side for a short while, and will try to make the Islam episode a good one.

Just wanted you to know that the Inquiry is alive and well.

My Friend Leah—update 8

[Read time: 3:00]

This update is a bit different. It’s mostly a note to Leah.

While in the hospital again, Leah and I were chatting on the phone. The staff there must get tired of fielding calls from “Gregory,” because I call about five times a day.

Actually, the staff were warned this time, and Leah told them, “Just be advised, my friend Gregory is going to be calling [she had just been admitted], and he is very persistent.”

Like I said, we were chatting, and we do this thing where I have to hang up the phone. So, I say 1, 2, I love you [first name plus middle name—withheld], you’re beautiful, and I am proud of you, 3.” I then said, “I don’t think you understand how much I love you.”

She replied, “Put it in a note and tell me.”

I then said, “[sigh] I’ve done that already.”

“Do it again!”

“That was a brilliant piece of writing! You wouldn’t say to John Lennon, “Hey, that ‘Strawberry Fields’ song wasn’t half bad. Write another one!”

She begins laughing.

I say I will write another one.

She was quite satisfied with this, and we hung up.

This is what I wrote:

The universe rarely does me any favors. But when I met you it certainly did. I can say my life changed. At first, admittedly, my guard was up. I assumed anyone who has a list of mental-health issues, getting close too fast can be destabilizing. Things can get weird; but things never did.

We have been friends for not terribly long. However, we have packed about ten years into that short span. If people talk to a friend once a month, that’s twelve times a year. Double that, it’s 24. Once a week: that’s 52. Twice a week: that’s just over a hundred. If you and I continue on our present course, you and I will average 2,232 times a year.

We agreed that Michael is my best friend. And so I have decided that you are my “super-duper, stupendous friend.” You’re not crazy about this—I believe you asked if I was in fourth grade—but I suspect it will grow on you. Like when I started calling you “Cuckoo Bird.” You recently asked me, “Why did you stop calling me that??” I really thought you didn’t like it. I predict it will go back into rotation.

I recently have had a hard time with your suffering. When you bottom out, are weepy, whimper, begin blaming yourself, talk of being done with the fight, I’m a wreck. The thought of waking up in a world without you in it is an unbearable one.

You have changed my life. You are kind. Your moral compass is precise. You are one of the smartest people I have ever met. When it comes to the particulars of your daily demands [which I cannot go into here] you are dedicated and great at them. I am just happier when I am talking to you, bickering, goofing around. These things make me happy. You make me happy. I know it sounds trite and banal, but life before you is something of a blur.

We have so much to do, but I am so proud of your progress and what you’ve achieved in such a short time: you’re stronger, you’re more confident, you’re more developed, you’re more refined, you’re beginning to intellectually blossom. I laugh and adore that you have all these really serious books, just everywhere: Plato, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Dostoevsky, Adam Smith. Who has those books, period?? You not only have them, but are always reading them, and just have them lying about everywhere! I’ve never seen anything like it.

As mentioned, we have a lot to do. First stop: the Art Institute. You’ve been warned: I am annoying when I’m in there. (“You’re annoying everywhere,” I can hear you saying.) Despite my tendencies, it’s going to be grand.

The years ahead of us are also going to be grand, because I will have you in them.

I love you. You’re beautiful. I’m proud of you. And I believe in you.

Photo: Leah has an unbelievable collection of various retiles, fish, a python for a time; it’s crazy. This is Onyx. She’s a bearded dragon. She’s in a basket. Not sure why.

Suicide (repost)

 I posted this essay in 2019; I felt it was worth revisiting. Suicide has also come up in conversation a few times recently, so that was a sign.

[Read time 4:00]

Comedian Dave Chappelle's ... Netflix special Sticks & Stones opens by contrasting two narratives: that of Anthony Bourdain and an old high-school friend of Chappelle's. Bourdain, the audience is told, had a great job, which allowed him to have enviable experiences, and yet took his own life. Chappelle's friend, on the other hand, faced a series of life setbacks, was now in a workaday job, and in spite of it all had not taken his own life.

The purpose of this blog is not to engage in art criticism. And the purpose of this particular blog post is not to review some entertainer's work. It is irrelevant that Chappelle's joke wasn't funny. (Though, judging by the response, many in the audience would disagree with me and felt someone's suicide was hilarious.) What is relevant is that the joke reinforced a prejudice.

I understand well the principle that because a joke mentions a subject does not mean the joke is about that subject. However, Chappelle was indeed speaking to suicide, all the while fostering an all too common assumption that those who take their own lives do so casually. I have personally, on many occasions, heard people criticize, condemn, dismiss, and ridicule victims of suicide. When the topic arises in a group or at a gathering, condescension is sure to follow.

This critical commentary leveled at victims of suicide is an expression of both disappointment and conceit. There are three basic verdicts that seem to predominate, and frequently overlap:

1. He or she had everything. Chappelle adopts this approach, as if to ask, Why would someone who enjoyed the appurtenances of material success kill himself? The question of course is not a question; it's a judgment that happens to feature a question mark. Removed from consideration is the reality that suicide—it sadly bears mentioning—is an internal event. Money, friends, good looks, and the like do not preclude agony.

2. He or she was selfish. This reaction, that the person should have considered others, might be based on genuine frustration with the suffering created by someone's suicide. We see the knock-on effects, and wish the person who took his or her life would have "thought it through." However, again, this line of thinking neglects the internal realities; from the suicidal person's perspective, those left behind will be better off. Judging the suicide victim for not seeing clearly is not dissimilar to judging someone suffering from renal failure for not having better kidneys. One must also note the gratifying benefits of sounding or appearing righteous, of being able to see the big picture. As if to say, "My kidneys are working perfectly."

3. He or she was weak [etc.]. This is the most base of the three—sometimes simply ventilated as "That was stupid"—and seems to be purely motivated (similar to example 2) by an eagerness to appear rugged and resilient. The message is not difficult to decipher: "I've had disappointments in life, and I'm still here." It is my observation that this outlook oftentimes emanates from a particular personality type.

Suicide is a tragic and complicated phenomenon that can involve a multitude of factors. Almost half of those who commit suicide suffer from some kind of underlying mental health condition. Other considerations that can place someone at risk of suicide may include: substance abuse, medical issues, physical or sexual abuse, problems with family or finances, and a long list of possible stressors in one's life. The act can be planned or impulsive. Access to firearms also plays a significant role.

At the point of suicide, a person has lost all hope, is in unthinkable pain, and sees the end of life as the only possible release or solution. Throughout this post I have used the wording "victim of suicide," because that is what they are. We don't say one "contracts" or is "stricken with" suicide, but perhaps we should. The person has succumbed to despair. To suggest otherwise is an act of ignorance, self-aggrandizement, or cruelty.

Suicide, like gun violence, is a national health problem and should be taken seriously. But to be taken seriously, it has to be understood. Please familiarize yourself with the subject of suicide and the warning signs of someone at risk.

And if you are having suicidal thoughts, please—please—talk to someone. Anyone.

National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1 800 273 TALK (8255) or dial 988

Leah in Space

I took this photo while on FaceTime with Leah. Her sunroof was covered with ice; but it looks like she’s in space.

Patience

I really like this series. It’s called Patience, and it’s about a young woman, Patience Evans, who has autism. Patience has a keen interest in criminology and puzzles. Through happenstance, she befriends a detective, whom Patience helps with her investigative work; and they form a friendship—one of Patience’s first.

The series is sophisticated, and it seems to have a decent grasp of autism. It doesn’t (so far; I’m on episode 5) traffic in stereotypes.

I’m enjoying it. The characters are good, the writing is intelligent, and the drama and touching bits are nicely balanced.

The show was panned by the Guardian’s Lucy Mangan. Mangan also panned Etoile, another favorite. Lucy Mangan needs to get a real job, maybe mixing paint at B&Q (B&Q is like Home Depot in England). Or stocking shelves at Tesco. And if you work hard, Lucy, you can make your way up to register. I’m not saying hang up the writing; maybe start a website that features fart jokes?

https://www.pbs.org/show/patience