In the interest of consistency, I'll go ahead and examine the piece which just didn't appeal to me quite as much as the other. That, in this case, would be "Consider the Lobster."
I had a teacher in high school who said, "You're only allowed three hates in your life." It is for that reason that I won't say I hated this piece. I know I hate the Devil and underwear that don't fit right; I don't feel like wasting my last hate on this. Suffice it to say that about halfway through, I started checking the side of the road for the exit to the end of Wallace's piece.
I'll give him points for being thorough, but that's all Mr. David Foster Wallace is getting from me. "Consider the Lobster" reminds me of a bit from a comedian named Dan Cummins. Cummins is talking about how Satan-worshippers ruin everything by cheering for the angry, bitter, losing team. "It's like one of your friends says, 'You should come over and watch 'Fight Club', 'The Matrix', and 'Donnie Darko,'" Cummins says. "And you're like, 'Yes! Those are three of my favorite movies of all time!' And then you get there, and the guy goes, 'Psych! We're going to watch 'Garfield: A Tale of Two Kitties'...twice! Go Satan!'"
That, in hyperbole, was how this piece made me feel. Just let the people eat the lobsters, dude. And it is totally okay to go two sentences without a paragraph of segues.
And now that I've ranted and raved, I'll talk a tiny bit about "The Pain Scale". This, I felt, was very well-done. I actually learned something, but at the same time, I was drawn into the story that Eula Biss was telling. Biss isn't complaining the whole time but simply telling the reader what happened to her and how she dealt with it, while simultaneously weaving in random facts which somehow still relate. For anyone who has ever been in a state of pain for long periods of time, these thought processes are exactly what Biss presents in the piece. I thought this was very well done.
LOVE the Cummins quotes. Very fun.
ReplyDeleteI also love how you describe Biss's essay as "weaving in random facts which somehow still relate." I love how she creates this weird form where she can pretty much say anything anywhere. Each paragraph is its own little microessay. Very neat.
Great points, Takota!
I completely agree with you about "Consider the Lobster." It seemed like everything he was trying to say could have been said in a paragraph.
ReplyDeleteI appreciated Biss's essay, too. I like how you use the word "weaving"; it really is like she weaves all of this random information together, trying to make connections that might otherwise go unseen. And she does this in a way that was personal and yet simultaneously vague and inconclusive. Which helped me as the reader connect to what she was trying to say.
Anyway, I appreciated your evaluation of both these pieces. Good job!
Biss's weaving reminded me of the braided essay we covered last semester in Intermediate Writing. It's one of my favorite "forms." It is poetic, but not a poem. It provokes thought, but it's not esoteric. It weaves meaningfully. Love it.
ReplyDeleteTatkota. I just want to thank you for doing a great job presenting. However, you have now set the bar real high, so I am going to have to try and stuff...oh darn.
ReplyDelete