I finished Infinite Jest without taking notes. I definitely missed a lot of stuff but I loved the experience and it ended up being one of my favorite books.
I think Infinite Jest is a great example for this sort of thing because I later realized that I had completely missed the entire main plot. By the author:
> There is an ending as far as I’m concerned. Certain kind of parallel lines are supposed to start converging in such a way that an “end” can be projected by the reader somewhere beyond the right frame. If no such convergence or projection occurred to you, then the book’s failed for you.
Nothing converged for me at all and yet I thoroughly enjoyed the book. I’m still not quite sure what to think of that.
Aaron Swartz (yep, that Aaron Swartz) wrote a great essay that explains the ending and main plot in clear language:
But I don’t think I got any part of that plot by reading the book. It’s all hidden and disjointed, and there’s so much interesting stuff at the surface that you almost don’t even care to go deeper.
If you ever get the urge to read Infinite Jest again (which I highly recommend—a second read is easily more enjoyable than the first), the Infinite Jest Wiki includes some page-by-page annotations that are nice to have on hand.
https://infinitejest.wallacewiki.com/david-foster-wallace/in...
Probably overkill to look up every little thing (and most of the annotations are just defining SAT-worthy words anyway), but I liked having it around when a random word/phrase would make no sense and it turned out to be a vintage shaving cream brand or some bit of Boston-ese.
And it's free of spoilers, so friendly enough to first-time readers, but I do think a first read is best with no notes or supporting material or anything. Other than two bookmarks, lol.
+1 for re-reading. I’d also suggest the audiobook as an alternate form that is differently accessible. Certainly it’s easier to follow some of the changing perspectives as the narrator does a good job of voicing differently.
The best thing about reading(and finishing) Infinite Jest is that you are not sure. Not sure if the book has ended, not sure about anything. I've read and listened to multiple interpretation of the book. But that is what makes it a different experience(because of varying perspectives)
Infinite Jest seems excessively long and I haven't worked up the motivation to read it yet, but his short stories / essays in Consider the Lobster are excellent, including the titular story which is about a lobster festival in Maine. And looking at the comments in this thread, seems like he had some kind of fascination for fairs and other touristy things.
I think Infinite Jest is a great example for this sort of thing because I later realized that I had completely missed the entire main plot. By the author:
> There is an ending as far as I’m concerned. Certain kind of parallel lines are supposed to start converging in such a way that an “end” can be projected by the reader somewhere beyond the right frame. If no such convergence or projection occurred to you, then the book’s failed for you.
Nothing converged for me at all and yet I thoroughly enjoyed the book. I’m still not quite sure what to think of that.
Aaron Swartz (yep, that Aaron Swartz) wrote a great essay that explains the ending and main plot in clear language:
http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/ijend
But I don’t think I got any part of that plot by reading the book. It’s all hidden and disjointed, and there’s so much interesting stuff at the surface that you almost don’t even care to go deeper.