David Foster Wallace and Michael Silverblatt, 1996, 3/3

[ctbluegrass]

I wish I could be friends with this guy. I find this whole sequence of interviews heart-rending.

[TheSometimesWhy]

@Phaedruslive: They are indeed. I don't know that I would ever use the word "brevity" in any sentence that refers to DFW, but that seems obvious and niggling to me. Glad you enjoyed. Have a great weekend.

[jabbadooable]

I like how the interviewer picks the stupidest example possible of "delicious comedy" in the book. There are so many much funnier ones besides the inane exam questions the female prorector formulates.

[dstock881]

@jabbadooable You entirely missed the point that Sliverblatt was making, and by extension, the significance of double binds in relation to the book. Silverblatt is suggesting (and DFW confirms) that the novel creates an environment for double binds to manifest, which in turn puts the characters in considerable turmoil. The fact that it was entertaining (which it very much was) is more of a side note.

[TheSometimesWhy]

Next time you're hungry, really yearning for a conversation that arouses you, feeds you, and then drops you on your head as it ends, listen to these three pieces. They are exquisite.

[phaedruslive]

@TheSometimesWhy They're fantastic. here I am sitting alone with a massive grin. To listen to a mind with such incredible perspective and a prose with such unparralled brevity. I dont see DFW as scattered, I see him as a man who allows himself to be the victim of his conversational impulses. It doesn't hurt that michael is incredibly perceptive and manages to not only keep up with David buy key-in on his intentions. No small feat against an intellectual titan life DFW