First Impressions

First of all, I would like to address the first post by Erik titled: "Invitational Instructions." I believe the most critical information was left from this post. And yes, I am being a smart ass. I am even considering not leaving any clear "first impressions" in this post to further my smart ass-ed-ness. Seriously, though, since we are four individuals, and to avoid spoilers, etc. should we consider how we can post items here? I do not want to go into some detailed thought on chapter 3 before others have had a chance to read it, for example. How do we propose to resolve this dilemma? Providing a schedule sounds thoroughly book club-ish; are there any other innovative in-situ-book-reading discussion ideas?

Onto impressions (nullifying the above threat). I don't mean to bust Erik's... chops, but I did not love "A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius." I liked it okay. But I did not love it. Hence, when I saw Dave Eggars' name on the forward, I may have grimaced a bit. Really, for me, I think it came down to writing style. Which may mean it's more a matter of taste. It was and is a fantastic story. A fantastic true story. But nonetheless Eggars' writing never quite squared with me. I have only lately tried to analyze what I didn't like about it, and the best thing I can come up with is that he is a "cute" writer. I'm absolutely sure I don't make sense in saying that, so I will use an example from his forward:

"But Wallace is a different sort of madman, one in full control of his tools, one who instead of teetering on the edge of this precipice or that, under the influence of drugs or alcohol, seems to be heading ever-inward, into the depths of memory and the relentless conjuring of a certain time and place in a way that evokes - it seems so wrong to type this name but then again, so right! - Marcel Proust."

Again, it's stylistic, but by merely suggesting that it may be wrong to compare Wallace to Proust, he plays a bit (or shows that he's considered it), and then emphatically goes for it anyway! How cute! That style is riddled throughout AHWOSG. Erik, by all means, call me crazy. It doesn't land tops on my best reads list. Still, though, a fantastic, inspiring story. And definitely better than Follett's "The Pillars of the Earth." That was 973 pages of wasted time.

I'll give Eggars one thing though. He knows good writing. He, in a stretch, reminds me of the antagonist in the slightly above average flick "Finding Forrester" in that he may not write well himself, but he knows the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Having said that, I've read a few chapters of "Infinite Jest," and so far, the writing is fantastic. Especially chapter 0 part 2. I did some wiki research on Wallace. He grew up here in Urbana, IL. And I say here, because I currently live in Urbana,IL. His parents studied/worked at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where I currently study. I will find his high school and post a picture of it for you guys. The fact that Eggars was a Chicago suburbanite, and also studied here at the University, is why he felt he could call Wallace's background "normal." Because he lived here for a few (3 1/2?) years. Though I guarantee you his experience was quite different. It's kind of like Erik or I saying we know what growing up in Provo is like. We have an idea that's close enough, I guess. Oh, and yes, my girlfriend works and lives in Normal, IL, so that joke (although he said "no joke") was unfortunately old for me. Back in the day, schools that trained teachers were all called "normal" schools. Normal had one (called Normal Branch College, I believe), now Illinois State University, which oddly enough, Wallace taught at for a number of years.

/End rant