I haven't read any books by David Foster Wallace, though every time he comes up I feel obliged to share a fantastic speech of his about finding joy in the monotony of life. I heard it years ago and it's always stuck with me. Video[1], transcript[2]
A great speech but this is the first I hear it interpreted as an ode to monotony. I've always thought of it as an essay on the value of questioning our default way of thinking in the day-to-day, on the implicit biases we carry with us into the world and how they can trap us in loneliness.
Not ashamed to say I've cried more than once listening to it. It's a lifesaver.
The Pale King, his last novel (unfinished at the time of his death) is a really gorgeous elaboration on the same topics as This Is Water. It is not so much about rejecting the day to day monotony of the modern world, but rejecting the default reaction to the monotony of the modern world. We have complete control over our reaction, and almost none over the reality. One line I’ll paraphrase that sticks with me still: “In the modern world, if you can bear extreme boredom, there is literally nothing you can’t accomplish.”
The general theme is that regardless of the monotonous reality, there’s still plenty of beauty and intrigue to find within it if you look closely enough.
To make this point, The Pale King is about an IRS agent and it includes long, meditative descriptions of turning the pages of extremely long tax forms. I don’t know what philosophical ideas DFW ran into explicitly, i.e. whether he was reframing or actually deriving them, but he was absolutely rubbing up against what we now call mindfulness.
Edit to add one of my favorite scenes in literature ever, with no spoiler or even narrative substance: There's a scene where two characters are talking to one another and one party becomes so engrossed by the conversation that he begins to literally levitate out of his chair. I find this such a simple description of a truly profound experience (~~flow state).
It's a great way to approach life in general. There's many things we have to do that we don't want to. Chores, etc. Like cutting the lawn.
One approach can be to hate it and cut it super short and not take care of it and it slowly turns into a weed patch and something you resent even more. But you still have to get out there and cut it.
Another approach is to learn about cultivation and care and take pride in it and think of the benefits like exercise and having a lawn you take pride in. You also open up the option to learn a lot of things.
So now something that has to be done isn't something you dread because you were determined to find something good in it.
If you can't find any way to take this approach with something then you have to make it not exist (don't have a lawn) or outsource it (pay landscaping company to cut it).
Getting off topic here, but is there a word for the concept of an anti-joke? Along with examples? As in, a joke consists of a setup story, and then there is a lull or pause, enough time for the listener to contemplate what going to happen next. And then the joke teller says something unexpected but somewhat related, and it is funny. There is a moment in the speech that I would classify as sort of the opposite. DFW starts relating about the ugly people sitting in traffic with the large SUVs with religious and patriotic bumper stickers, and the crowd starts cheering and laughing, seemingly agreeing that those "others" deserve mockery. But then there comes the punch line, that maybe the others have some worse hardship like bone cancer, which is definitely not funny. Or stated another way, for a joke, the setup story is neutral, and the after effect is funny. For the anti-joke, the setup is funny, and ends somber, and maybe makes you feel bad for laughing at the beginning? The anti-joke start at about 13:28:
There is definitely the concept of the anti-joke. Anti-humour has the wiki page.
The sadly-late Norm Macdonald was a good proponent.
Fwiw though I watched this after your post and I'd say that's not really the same. I'm not sure what you call this technique in speeches with such a setup but it adds great emotional gravity and is something I see and appreciate a lot in speeches like this (or even shows like The Good Place which is incredible but can't be described further without spoilers).
This commencement speech that Wallace gave is deeply moving and thought-provoking to me every time I listen to it -- and I have probably heard it at least 10 times.
I have shared it with others, most of whom have had a very similar reaction to it.
How should one interpret the speech in light of his suicide? [1] He didn't shoot his head which suggests that his mind wasn't a master. Still, it makes me a bit worried that his thoughts could be the structure that made him suffer.
I agree this is a very complex matter to consider but I dwell on the parts where he emphasizes the degree to which his own "default thinking mode" was like everyone else's, any you can choose to either suffer it or manage it.
He's such a smug intellectual brat HOWEVER he's fully self-aware of his personality shortcomings and seems to set his qualms and enjoy himself despite of himself by the end.
Not ashamed to say I've cried more than once listening to it. It's a lifesaver.