It was a strange experience reading The Pale King when set against that of Infinite Jest: having entered into it with a degree of trepidation—due to a combination of the novel's unfinished status, the advance warning I'd received about Wallace's determined efforts to capture the essence of (workplace) tedium and graft it within the story's very being, and another cyclically harrowed state of mind—it all made for a dispassionate progression. At no time, as before, did I feel completely enrapt in what was transpiring on the page; I forged near zero connexions with any of the characters receiving a fruitful degree of page time; and, most prominently in the retrospective gaze, not once did I crack a chuckle, indeed rarely became aware of a smile having formed amid the flow of words, let alone finding myself reduced to helpless, tear-pissing laughter as so frequently proved the case with the set piece hilarity of Wallace's wonderful second novel. Which is all to say that on every level The Pale King made for a muted textual passage, a subdued still life as set against the boisterous and carnivalesque roller coaster of the Jest pulled upon an ONANist world.
Not that I greatly minded the difference in the moment, since I was, for the most part, enjoying what I was ingesting at a steady rhythm; but that kind of somber progression built upon its very essence, such that, when I had turned the final page, I set aside this pieced together, final novel from Wallace with a numbness in lieu of the exhausted exhilaration that coursed throughout my frame at the completion of its younger kin. And the very first thought which pushed through the jumble and announced itself was a question: Have I lost the capacity to be dissolved within a novel? It's an odd and plaintive query to have formed, but one perhaps long gestating and brought to the forefront by the changes that have taken place in how I consume books these days. With IJ, the act of reading was one of immediacy, an attunement with story alone; whereas I find that, some four hundred-plus reviews later, I currently make my way through a book with a degree of detachment, analyzing what's before me, making comparisons, taking note of phrases, characters, events, connexions; finding flaws and distractions where previously existed nothing but brushed-aside niggles. I am now ofttimes composing a review as I'm reading, when the old method had no concern for the critical apparatus ere the entirety had been laid to rest. It's not a case of better or worse, but simply different—and I've been circling around that difference ever since. What's more, the lack of firm answers—and troubling nature of the question—has been part of what's blocked me from assembling words into a coherent review. Books are all that I have left. And if the trade is one of a better understanding of any single work, both as an individual work of art and a component of a literary whole, for that unconcerned enthusiasm that used to rev up near the redline, it is enough to give me pause. Which is all of a one with the rather fragmented nature of the following: whether it all adds up to anything or not, I've got to purge myself of The Pale King, that I can move on to different fictional pastures.
I believe that a considerable part of this surprisingly somnolent state was engendered by the fact that I was much more aware of the author as a person—IJ was the very first thing by Wallace that I read, whereas my entry into The Pale King had been preceded by a number of the late author's essays and short stories, as well as a greater immersion within and grasp of his importance to a broad swathe of the reading public; and, of course, permeating it all is the sad reality that he has passed from our world, that a man whose energies were channeled that he might explicate the myriad ways in which we suffer—however inane we deem the roots to be—and how that knowledge could lead to an extension of our humanity, a willingness to commit and dare to be hurt, an opening limned to the spiritual element that resides within every single fiber of an otherwise deadened and deadening materiality, the outreach and connexion available as an ameliorative egress from a suffocating solipsism, could not himself endure another lived moment. That knowledge somehow carried into The Pale King as a tactile disquiet; I had trouble absorbing the succinct opening chapter, with its restrained request to read these. Oh, I would: but accompanied by a sense of the finality and, ultimately, the loss of it all.
You cannot get away from the fact that The Pale King exists as Wallace's long-time editor, Michael Pietsch, pieced it together; it's impossible to know what the late author would have amended or discarded, reworked or introduced, had he lived to see it through to completion. What's been given us is a series of chapter-length vignettes of varying length, temporal reference, and point-of-view, centred around a group of IRS workers in Peoria, Illinois, in the mid-eighties—and including David Foster Wallace himself—of whom a select number display unusual aptitudes and talents that lend themselves, upon one side or the other, to a looming showdown between an IRS old guard believing in the vitality of the human element within its bureaucratic structure, and the incursion of a well-connected team of adepts determined to march the service into the modern era by computerizing, automating, and standardizing its money-assessing and -gathering mechanisms. Operating in tandem with this disjointed IRS theatre is an exploration, exquisitely, almost lovingly undertaken, of the tedium of existence, particularly within the sclerotic confines of a bureaucratized routine, wherein the passage of time is stapled to a series of movements of ordered minutiae both known and capable of being perceived running, in an unattenuated chain, into a second-, minute-, and hour-handed future intuited unto an enervating degree of precision. That Wallace strained to reproduce the thin substance of tedium within the procession of words is absolutely remarkable, and the more so in that, for myself at least, its draining nature was conveyed to perfection while yet never affecting me as regarded the chore of making my way through one thickly measured paragraph after another of that very art. In a moment of pure genius, one of the benumbed IRS workers, Lane Dean, Jr, pictures himself running out into an empty field, flapping his arms all the while: releasing subdued energy? Attempting lift-off from a world of appalling existential demands? Finding within absurdity the existence of a vital human release valve that might allow joy, however bruised, to inflow within the emptied spaces? All of the aforesaid? It's a bit of authorial leavening magic that almost snaps on a page packed to the brim with monotonic and trudging words. The same Lane is also privy to an appearance by the phantom of the Peoria office, a spectral presence summoned when the depths of tedium have been plumbed with such concentration that a level of transcendence is achieved. The ghost proceeds to discourse to a stricken Dean upon the etymological roots of the word boring, having incorporeally discerned its birth within a newly arisen industry and its pressed servant, mass man; a linguistic representation of a drilling into, a hollowing out, worked against the human soul even while its entombing body performs the same actions upon inanimate matter. Being stretched upon the rack of time is, of course, an experience humanity has always possessed itself of—but Wallace here gives a nod to its modern refinements, wherein one is no longer a hunter, a gatherer, nor a farmer, but rather one who simply endures.
Throughout the book, but particularly within the first score of sections, Wallace revealed himself as a writer at the height of his powers. In particular, §8, in which we are introduced to Toni Ware, a quiet and early-steeled young girl living a peregrine existence with her raw-living mother, which meant enduring a steady succession of brutal, coarse, leering men all twitchy with violence and lust, eying the child not as a figure to be cared for or protected, but exploited for their own undisciplined needs, is breathtakingly good. You could have placed it within, say, Denis Johnson's Already Dead, at any point, and it would mesh imperceptibly with the whole. Each of the (regrettably few) times she made an appearance, I was amazed. Having survived a pubescence of routine exposure to insanity, immorality, groping, and blood, she emerges as perhaps the sole character whose dysfunctions are not self-agonizing. Early inured to suffering and boredom and existential anxiety, Toni seems coldly and clearly aware that life is neither promised nor meant to be easy—and when she acts, she does so quickly, efficiently, evincing few regrets or hesitations. Surrounded by sections packed to the brim with self-doubt and self-recriminations, Ware is ice enfleshed; her way of living is linear, not circular. Jack Benny's hardly the man to bring her down.
Which leads to §22, the longest section of The Pale King and, in many ways, its greatest. It's a manner of bildungsroman narrated by an employee of the Peoria REC—a former wastoid going by the handle 'Irrelevant' Chris Fogle—who has taken the request to speak about himself to heart in a way nobody could have been prepared for. It's glacially-paced, peppered with a steady stream of hasty and formulaic qualifications, that the repeated attempts by Fogle to reach deep into the generalized banality of his young, cool-seeking, drug-imbibing, aimlessly-drifting life as the son of a father who always seems to be eying him with disappointment and ridicule, and a mother whose mid-life crisis leads to a lesbian relationship that terminates her marriage, and draw a measure of profundity from that life experience, might not appear so sincere as to be worthy of dismissal or mockery. In the story's unfolding Fogle comes to view his deceased father, and remorse-stricken mother, in a new and fulsome light, trying to piece together where they came from, why they lived as they did—which leads him to an admiration for how his father refused to let recurring disappointment derail him from the responsibilities and demands required of the choices he had made. To the question that torments the modern generation—Am I happy?—Fogles' father answered with a shrugged Whatever. Towards the end Fogle describes how he awoke from his wastoid slumber via a transcendent experience with a Jesuit accounting professor. Having come across this figure through an erroneous understanding of college architecture, Fogle is awoken to the potential for fulfilment within the world of an ordered reckoning of the mathematical figures that render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. A man who seems relatively content with his lot in a life of organized tedium, Fogle's is the first, and strongest, inclination of the potentials within a stultifying boredom for pushback against modern malaise. It's a part of an understanding at play in The Pale King—addressed superbly in §19, a dialogued discussion of US politics in the mid-eighties—that the end for modern civilized man cannot be, perhaps should not be, to live a life of ease without test or suffering—for such will breed its own antithesis. That Wallace is so well-equipped to depict those tests, that suffering, is one of the strands of irony within, and which, of the latter, the author had previously stated as being both a harmful force for a member of postmodern societies and yet almost impossible to extricate oneself from.
Other reviews have excellent summaries of the various sections, which serve to either introduce, often via childhood glimpses, the various personalities involved in the looming IRS internal struggle, or their aligning of means and ways in setting the stage for its undertaking. Wallace tries his hand in a variety of forms, from page-turning subsumption within boredom of a near divine essence, to nightmare panels of voiced chaos and vignettes of a quiet that hum with humor and/or menace. But there's a reason I gave the book four stars, and I'd like to try and get a handle on that below. And be warned: if you thought the above was an impressively portentous amount of pud-pullage, what follows is sure to leave all the came before in the dust.
So it is that everything was trucking along swimmingly until §24, wherein the David Foster Wallace earlier incarnated inside The Pale King—a reflection of the author's substance, not his essence—makes a lengthier appearance, narrating his arrival in Peoria, excruciatingly stretched car journey to the REC, and confused introductory tour of the facility by an attractive Persian known as The Iranian Crisis. I was so utterly absorbed in the Wallacian strength and shine of what had come before—particularly the lengthily and patiently unfolded §22 mentioned above—that the sudden intrusion of Wallace, very meta, very ironic, very purposively comic, jarred me out of that bemused reverie to a degree that I resented. Neither because of its quantity nor its quality—the former was no problem, the latter attendant in abundance—but because of the tone. In the fictive state of mind I had attained up to that point, §24 had no place. As an IRS-themed essay, it would have been marvelous; as a section of The Pale King in its pieced-together existence, in my opinion it simply does not belong. Doesn't fit. Shatters the glass so beautifully set into place, piece by piece, in all that had come before. I'm not normally a stickler for these kinds of things, but it honestly felt to me like an intrusion, a lack of commitment to, or belief in, what had come before: almost as if Wallace felt he needed a tried-and-trusted to glue the whole together. Now, that plaint is directed at this version of The Pale King which the author had no control over—perhaps he would have removed his self-narrated parts. And maybe I'm just digging for a chest that doesn't exist: all I know for sure is that §24 snapped me out of a book-slung reverie, jolted me sufficient that I never quite attained the same degree of fused comfort afterwards.
Which might explain my otherwise inexplicably edgy response to §46, one of the longest sections of the book and which transpires almost entirely inside of Meibeyer's Bar, a drinkery popular with the REC crew, and wherein we are privy to a remarkable interlocution between Meredith Rand, the IRS resident hottie, and Shane Drinion, an artless, perhaps autistic young man with a penchant for speaking a carefully- and thoughtfully-arrived at truth. Meredith, intrigued by Shane's candid persona, unloads upon him a voluminous tale of how she met her aged (and dying) husband when he counselled her during her admission to the Zeller institute, a stay occasioned by the acceleration of her habit for cutting herself. The story, and the characters, were great: what began to eat away at me in the course of reading, and the more in considering it all afterwards, was how Wallace configured it: Meredith, having deep-rooted insecurities about her beauty being the only thing men value in her—and, at a deeper, darker level, the only quality she believes she possesses that is worth offering—cannot achieve a cathartic transcendence from her lengthy unburdening if she suspects the man opposite is maneuvering within it for a pass. As luck would have it, Drinion is incapable of abrading her suspicions at any of the levels she is probing. And that came to strike me as too pat, too convenient; that Wallace used this paradigmatic male, as per Meredith, that he could tell what he was interested in—her story—without having to bother with the complexities and difficulties of crafting ordinary, real people, with all of their hidden agendas and non-copacetic traits—would perforce need to have that tale pried out by means of entwined, messy, sometimes argumentative or hostile or misunderstood conversation, instead of a lopsided, narrative outpouring. In other words, it speaks to us, but only of an us who are nearly non-existent archetypes. It struck me, both in the moment and then stronger subsequent, as taking the easy way out. Abandoning an opportunity for deep revelations as against more of a bout of armchair story-dumping by controlling all of the variables.
Sound ridiculous? Well, that's how unbalanced and interiorized I had become by that point in the story, perhaps dragging far too much of what I (mis)understood from Wallace's fantastic essay, E Unibus Pluram, and believing, in this unfinished labour of love, that he was going to use his mature authorial skills to take me to a different, irony-shedding level. So I was chewing on this one particular nugget of disappointment—surrounded by copious amounts that I loved—working to mine it of something profound, something stirring, perhaps in the process revealing myself as displaying a better ability to think through fictional works. Snagged on a rock and concentrating upon it, at the expense of the gorgeous waters, and riverine scenery, that surrounded me otherwise. And then, blossoming from within a frustrated discontent, the dawning awareness that Wallace had a purpose in this alignment of gorgeous and garrulous young woman opposite a male counterpart incapable of using her loquaciousness as a tool of attempted seduction, or even derailment via sexual fascination shrink-wrapped within fear. Rightly or wrongly, I've come to believe that I had been overlooking the fact, as Wallace most certainly did not, that life is abundant with minor travails that develop an existentially gravitational mass; that the shallowest cuts, when accumulated, are enough to fell us on the quick. That we are so often ultimately brought low by the combined weight of otherwise trivial disappointments, fears, desires, and hatreds—and that the knowledge of their insignificance tends to rendering us helpless to address them at the root until they've become terrifyingly daunting, rooted like a mountain—is addressed by the author through their revelation, in their minute composition, within scenarios oversized in every way. Being put off by the unrealistic nature of a Wallace segment, or believing he should be able to move beyond mining the humor and absurdity into a steady gravitas, is to demand the man address something beyond that which he desired to. With this scene in The Pale King we peel away the grossly-sized whole that me might espy the thousand cuts that led to the (near) death of something dear and vital within Meredith. In other words, I've accepted that this was a case of wishing the author had written a different novel, which is simply a futile way to go through literature even when it isn't a posthumously-assembled work.
And which may all be another generous dollop of Sastrean horseshit. After all this time entangled within the book, its marvels and mishits, magnificence and miscues, I can no longer tell. But here's the thing: every single day, when I arrived home from work, I took in the overabundance of pagewise choice immediately at hand, of which at least a dozen titles were competing against The Pale King—and yet every single time it was the book I picked up, and after but a second's consideration. If I experienced little giddiness within, it was there upon each renewed entrance; and so while it may be that I wasn't, in fact, dissolved within the novel, I am still dissolved, nightly, in reading. And in that losing of myself, I'm still finding all kinds of amazing, life-worthy things. So how about that?