I'm ashamed and embarrassed to say that I've read very little of David Foster Wallace's work. It's a huge gap in my education, one of many.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Writers such as Richard Powers and the late David Foster Wallace have shown the path to a newer generation of writers for whom all national boundaries are quaint curiosities.
David Foster Wallace, in my opinion, is one of the greatest writers we've ever had, certainly in the last twenty years. His obvious dominance of the English language is partnered with honest moments and the most beautifully dark sensibility.
It's true of so many fiction writers that I much prefer the essayistic work they did, whether it's David Foster Wallace's, or John Cheever's, or Nathaniel Hawthorne's.
It's not highly intellectual material. I'm dedicating it to the pulp fiction of the past.
My mother introduced me to more academic-minded writers, Cornel West and Skip Gates. In her library, I came across, when I was very young, Harold Cruse's 'The Crisis of the Negro Intellectual,' which is like a bible of Negro intellectuals from Frederick Douglass to Amiri Baraka.
I read less of everything now. With only fond memories of others' work, it will be interesting to give my own journal writing a try now.
In non-fiction, I found John Gardner's two writing books to be tremendously helpful.
I'm a big admirer of Walter Willett's work. I think he's done some really important research. He and I agree on most things.
I read a bit of Ray Bradbury when I was a younger man. I don't read a lot of fiction anymore... like, none.
I read more books for research purposes, whether it's a fictionalized biography of Johannes Gutenberg or a stack of urban fantasies.
No opposing quotes found.