[thedufer]

This is a very cynical guess as to why GP is being downvoted. The more obvious, straightforward reason is that the article links to this speech a mere seven sentences in. In that light, the post being downvoted adds nothing and indicates that the author probably didn't read the article at all. Commenting on something without reading it is frowned upon around here.

[drzaiusapelord]

Maybe, but when I see hit pieces (lets just admit this is what the article is) on social media, I just see a lot of uncritical reflexive knee-jerking. "Yes, of course he was terrible! Thank you current .com tastemakers for telling me this! Christ, how did anyone like this person before you opened my eyes?" It always reminds me of crowds at the town hall in the Simpsons who are 100% swayed by every speaker at the podium. Luckily, Lisa speaks last as the voice of reason. On the web, that's rarely the case.

The rewriting of history and the political correctness polarization is so out of control, I'm not even sure we see it anymore. Thomas Edison is the millenials version of Stalin for no other reason than him being a successful businessman while the cult-favorite failed at his own, just as evil/greedy/stupid/cheap business. Or how autocratic states are so wonderful and democracy so terrible because it would be un-PC and racist to admit that the Chinese, Iranians, or Russians have significant problems themselves.

This stuff wouldn't be so bad, but once you toss in an up/down vote mechanism, the cream doesn't often float to the top. Its like lowest common denominator crap that does and if you browse this article without reading DFW's work or watching some interviews, you'd just shrug and agree he was a terrible person on some kind of moralist crusade to build himself up as some kind of guru superstar, when he was very, very far from that.