David Foster Wallace var for samtidslitteraturen hva Kurt Cobain var for grunge. Jeg var oppriktig knust da han for to år siden avsluttet livet, ved å henge seg utenfor huset i California. Wallace hadde slitt med depresjon siden studietiden. Depresjon var ofte et tema i bøkene hans, men han skrev aldri om sine personlige lidelser. I allefall ikke direkte. "The Depressed Person", en novelle om en narsissistisk ung kvinne var inkludert i boken Brief Interviews with Hideous Men (anbefales btw) det var også novellen "Suicide as a sort of Present" - som jeg har lagt ved en video av at DFW leser selv her.
DFW var 46 år da han tok livet sitt, og leserene reagerte med en sorg som for andre kan virke uproposjonal, gitt at ingen av oss egentlig kjente ham. Jeg skriver egentlig, for hvor mye tettere kan man komme en person enn å ha lest livsverkene deres, og etterpå følt at man forstår mer av både seg selv, verden rundt seg og ham. DFW gjorde meg både ettertenksom og takknemmelig. Takknemmelig, lurer du kanskje nå. Ja, jeg var takknemmelig for at mennesker som han fantes, jeg mente det gjorde verden til et bedre sted. Et sted verdt å ta vare på, et sted verdt å være. Bøkene til DFW forklarer verden gjennom to hundre ord lange setninger, og er fylt til randen med intelligente observasjoner, fakta, humor, digresjoner og substans. Språket var en blanding av formelt, street-slang, teknisk og direkte tale. Han tester leseren, men belønner generøst. Det kanskje tristeste med DFW sin død er at til tross for alt han utga av bøker, døde han uten å fullføre arbeidet sitt. Han slet lenge med å skrive en bok han selv mente kunne matche Infinite Jest, og syntes selv han ikke nådde målet sitt - nemmelig å vise leserene hvordan man lever et godt og meningsfylt liv.“Fiction’s about what it is to be a fucking human being,” skal han ha sagt. Gode bøker skal hjelpe mennesker “become less alone inside.” Etter hans død ble den ufullstendige boken The Pale King utgitt. DFW begynte arbeidet på en bok om noen av verdens vanskeligste temaer, tristhet og kjedsomhet, dette klarer han å utforske på en måte som er tankevekkende, morsom og rørende. Dette er bokanmeldelsen av The Pale King.
Forfatter: David Foster Wallace
Tittel: The Pale King (2011), 560 sider.
I et nøtteskall: Tenk på det kjedeligste du har måttet overvære, noe så kjedelig at du nesten ikke orker å tenke på det, nå, tenk deg at dette kjedelige utgjør hele livet ditt. Velkommen til karrieren din i skattevesenet. Gjør deg klar for å redefinere din ide av hva det innebærer å være en helt.
Favoritt-utdrag:
"Enduring tedium over real time in a confined space is what real courage is. Such endurance is, as it happens, the distillate of what is, today, in this world neither I nor you have made, heroism. Heroism."
"Gentlemen, welcome to the world of reality—there is no audience. No one to applaud, to admire. No one to see you. Do you understand? Here is the truth—actual heroism receives no ovation, entertains no one. No one queues up to see it. No one is interested.’ He paused again and smiled in a way that was not one bit self-mocking. ‘True heroism is you, alone, in a designated work space. True heroism is minutes, hours, weeks, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care—with no one there to see or cheer. This is the world. Just you and the job, at your desk"
"‘Do you suppose it’s so much easier to make conversation with someone you already know well than with someone you don’t know at all primarily because of all the previously exchanged information and shared experiences between two people who know each other well, or because maybe it’s only with people we already know well and know know us well that we don’t go through the awkward mental process of subjecting everything we think of saying or bringing up as a topic of light conversation to a self-conscious critical analysis and evaluation that manages to make anything we think of proposing to say to the other person seem dull or stupid or banal or on the other hand maybe overly intimate or tension-producing?’ ‘…’"
"‘You mean nostalgia.’ ‘I mean methamphetamine hydrochloride'."
‘The fifth effect has more to do with you, how you’re perceived. It’s powerful although its use is more restricted. Pay attention, boy. The next suitable person you’re in light conversation with, you stop suddenly in the middle of the conversation and look at the person closely and say, “What’s wrong?” You say it in a concerned way. He’ll say, “What do you mean?” You say, “Something’s wrong. I can tell. What is it?” And he’ll look stunned and say, “How did you know?” He doesn’t realize something’s always wrong, with everybody. Often more than one thing. He doesn’t know everybody’s always going around all the time with something wrong and believing they’re exerting great willpower and control to keep other people, for whom they think nothing’s ever wrong, from seeing it. This is the way of people. They spill their guts or deny it and pretend you’re off, they’ll think you’re perceptive and understanding. They’ll either be grateful, or they’ll be frightened and avoid you from then on. Both reactions have their uses, as we’ll get to. You can play it either way. This works over 90 percent of the time."
"Consider, from the Service’s perspective, the advantages of the dull, the arcane, the mind-numbingly complex. The IRS was one of the very first government agencies to learn that such qualities help insulate them against public protest and political opposition, and that abstruse dullness is actually a much more effective shield than is secrecy. For the great disadvantage of secrecy is that it’s interesting. People are drawn to secrets; they can’t help it"
"Corporations aren’t citizens or neighbors or parents. They can’t vote or serve in combat. They don’t learn the Pledge of Allegiance. They don’t have souls. They’re revenue machines. I don’t have any problem with that. I think it’s absurd to lay moral or civic obligations on them. Their only obligations are strategic, and while they can get very complex, at root they’re not civic entities. With corporations, I have no problem with government enforcement of statutes and regulatory policy serving a conscience function. What my problem is is the way it seems that we as individual citizens have adopted a corporate attitude. That our ultimate obligation is to ourselves. That unless it’s illegal or there are direct practical consequences for ourselves, any activity is OK."
Tanker i ettertid: David Foster Wallace krever mye, men gir mer. Boken blir tidvis en demonstrasjon på kjedsomheten han forsøker å få deg til å se verdien i, men du belønnes rikelig om du holder ut. Det hele følger egentlig planen han fremla for sin mor da han fortsatt gikk på barneskolen; "jeg vil lage et brilliant teaterstykke, men det begynner ikke før alle bortsett fra en har forlatt teaterlokalet fordi de har kjedet seg og gitt opp forestillingen". Moren ristet bare på hodet. Det tror jeg mange andre også gjør, men vi som satt igjen i salen fikk en av de beste historiene i vårt liv.
Anbefales; Alle som liker å tenke og som tåler at forfatteren krever noe av deg som leser. Anbefaler dere som ikke har lest noe av David Foster Wallace å begynne med en av short-story samlingene, enten "Consider the Lobster" eller "Brief Interviews with Hideous Men"
Karakter: A-
DFW var 46 år da han tok livet sitt, og leserene reagerte med en sorg som for andre kan virke uproposjonal, gitt at ingen av oss egentlig kjente ham. Jeg skriver egentlig, for hvor mye tettere kan man komme en person enn å ha lest livsverkene deres, og etterpå følt at man forstår mer av både seg selv, verden rundt seg og ham. DFW gjorde meg både ettertenksom og takknemmelig. Takknemmelig, lurer du kanskje nå. Ja, jeg var takknemmelig for at mennesker som han fantes, jeg mente det gjorde verden til et bedre sted. Et sted verdt å ta vare på, et sted verdt å være. Bøkene til DFW forklarer verden gjennom to hundre ord lange setninger, og er fylt til randen med intelligente observasjoner, fakta, humor, digresjoner og substans. Språket var en blanding av formelt, street-slang, teknisk og direkte tale. Han tester leseren, men belønner generøst. Det kanskje tristeste med DFW sin død er at til tross for alt han utga av bøker, døde han uten å fullføre arbeidet sitt. Han slet lenge med å skrive en bok han selv mente kunne matche Infinite Jest, og syntes selv han ikke nådde målet sitt - nemmelig å vise leserene hvordan man lever et godt og meningsfylt liv.“Fiction’s about what it is to be a fucking human being,” skal han ha sagt. Gode bøker skal hjelpe mennesker “become less alone inside.” Etter hans død ble den ufullstendige boken The Pale King utgitt. DFW begynte arbeidet på en bok om noen av verdens vanskeligste temaer, tristhet og kjedsomhet, dette klarer han å utforske på en måte som er tankevekkende, morsom og rørende. Dette er bokanmeldelsen av The Pale King.
Forfatter: David Foster Wallace
Tittel: The Pale King (2011), 560 sider.
I et nøtteskall: Tenk på det kjedeligste du har måttet overvære, noe så kjedelig at du nesten ikke orker å tenke på det, nå, tenk deg at dette kjedelige utgjør hele livet ditt. Velkommen til karrieren din i skattevesenet. Gjør deg klar for å redefinere din ide av hva det innebærer å være en helt.
Favoritt-utdrag:
"Enduring tedium over real time in a confined space is what real courage is. Such endurance is, as it happens, the distillate of what is, today, in this world neither I nor you have made, heroism. Heroism."
"Gentlemen, welcome to the world of reality—there is no audience. No one to applaud, to admire. No one to see you. Do you understand? Here is the truth—actual heroism receives no ovation, entertains no one. No one queues up to see it. No one is interested.’ He paused again and smiled in a way that was not one bit self-mocking. ‘True heroism is you, alone, in a designated work space. True heroism is minutes, hours, weeks, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care—with no one there to see or cheer. This is the world. Just you and the job, at your desk"
"‘Do you suppose it’s so much easier to make conversation with someone you already know well than with someone you don’t know at all primarily because of all the previously exchanged information and shared experiences between two people who know each other well, or because maybe it’s only with people we already know well and know know us well that we don’t go through the awkward mental process of subjecting everything we think of saying or bringing up as a topic of light conversation to a self-conscious critical analysis and evaluation that manages to make anything we think of proposing to say to the other person seem dull or stupid or banal or on the other hand maybe overly intimate or tension-producing?’ ‘…’"
"‘You mean nostalgia.’ ‘I mean methamphetamine hydrochloride'."
‘The fifth effect has more to do with you, how you’re perceived. It’s powerful although its use is more restricted. Pay attention, boy. The next suitable person you’re in light conversation with, you stop suddenly in the middle of the conversation and look at the person closely and say, “What’s wrong?” You say it in a concerned way. He’ll say, “What do you mean?” You say, “Something’s wrong. I can tell. What is it?” And he’ll look stunned and say, “How did you know?” He doesn’t realize something’s always wrong, with everybody. Often more than one thing. He doesn’t know everybody’s always going around all the time with something wrong and believing they’re exerting great willpower and control to keep other people, for whom they think nothing’s ever wrong, from seeing it. This is the way of people. They spill their guts or deny it and pretend you’re off, they’ll think you’re perceptive and understanding. They’ll either be grateful, or they’ll be frightened and avoid you from then on. Both reactions have their uses, as we’ll get to. You can play it either way. This works over 90 percent of the time."
"Consider, from the Service’s perspective, the advantages of the dull, the arcane, the mind-numbingly complex. The IRS was one of the very first government agencies to learn that such qualities help insulate them against public protest and political opposition, and that abstruse dullness is actually a much more effective shield than is secrecy. For the great disadvantage of secrecy is that it’s interesting. People are drawn to secrets; they can’t help it"
"Corporations aren’t citizens or neighbors or parents. They can’t vote or serve in combat. They don’t learn the Pledge of Allegiance. They don’t have souls. They’re revenue machines. I don’t have any problem with that. I think it’s absurd to lay moral or civic obligations on them. Their only obligations are strategic, and while they can get very complex, at root they’re not civic entities. With corporations, I have no problem with government enforcement of statutes and regulatory policy serving a conscience function. What my problem is is the way it seems that we as individual citizens have adopted a corporate attitude. That our ultimate obligation is to ourselves. That unless it’s illegal or there are direct practical consequences for ourselves, any activity is OK."
Tanker i ettertid: David Foster Wallace krever mye, men gir mer. Boken blir tidvis en demonstrasjon på kjedsomheten han forsøker å få deg til å se verdien i, men du belønnes rikelig om du holder ut. Det hele følger egentlig planen han fremla for sin mor da han fortsatt gikk på barneskolen; "jeg vil lage et brilliant teaterstykke, men det begynner ikke før alle bortsett fra en har forlatt teaterlokalet fordi de har kjedet seg og gitt opp forestillingen". Moren ristet bare på hodet. Det tror jeg mange andre også gjør, men vi som satt igjen i salen fikk en av de beste historiene i vårt liv.
Anbefales; Alle som liker å tenke og som tåler at forfatteren krever noe av deg som leser. Anbefaler dere som ikke har lest noe av David Foster Wallace å begynne med en av short-story samlingene, enten "Consider the Lobster" eller "Brief Interviews with Hideous Men"
Karakter: A-
Ingen kommentarer:
Legg inn en kommentar