I found this article on suicide (by The Stranger's Brendan Kiley) compelling and somewhat relevant to our discussion of Infinite Jest, given the prevalence of suicide in the novel ("destroying one's map for keeps"), and of course in relation to DFW's own death as well.
The article begins with a description of the imminent construction of a fence on the Aurora Bridge in Seattle, which it turns out is the second most popular suicide landmark in the U.S.:
But this spring, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) will erect more than a mile of suicide fencing on either side of the bridge. The project comes after years of debate pitting concerns about construction noise and fence aesthetics against the danger of bodies plummeting from the sky and landing on houseboats, cars, or passersby.The author's sensitive discussion of the debated human right to suicide reminded me of our frequent discussions about free choice. It goes without saying that all humans possess the freedom to terminate their own lives, but is this an acceptable choice? Who decides the morality of such a choice? And what impact does a fence like the one on the bridge truly have, other than providing comfort to potential witnesses of the misfortunate jumpers and steering them elsewhere? ("You can't jump; not here anyway!") What figurative fences do we construct to guide behavior, be it suicidal or otherwise? In relation to the book, is it suicide to knowingly choose to watch the Entertainment? What about the choice to use drugs and risk addiction or overdose--does that resemble suicide at all?
Incidentally, the content of the article immediately reminded me of DFW's style. The author's inclusion of unnecessary yet charming and poignant details especially made me think of the tangetns in IJ; for example, the possibly apocryphal woman who jumped from the Eiffel Tower, only to survive landing on the roof of a car whose driver she later married. I really want that story to be true.
I first began to seriously think of the social and academic controversy surrounding suicide a couple years ago when I took a class on individual liberties (taught by William Talbott) in which we discussed suicide, and specifically the right to suicide. One of the articles that we read was the Philosophers' Brief on assisted suicide (which I highly recommend to anyone who's interested in the topic- 6 philosophers come together and make condensed and pretty accessible arguments about the right to assisted suicide), as well as some cases of individuals who were in extremely painful situations and wished to die rather than undergo torturous months, or even years, of medical treatments for a variety of medical problems. The patients were not allowed to commit suicide. I remember one case clearly, in which the man who had desired to commit suicide in the face of several years of excruciating medical treatments did later go on to live a productive life which he self-reported as meaningful, and yet maintained that he should have been able to make the decision to die. Despite the man's later happiness and success, he wished retrospectively that his decision to end his own life had been respected.
ReplyDeletePresenting another aspect of this issue, I was recently reading Jodi Halpern's book "From Detached Concern to Empathy" and she talks a lot about decisions to end one's life (for instance refusing medical treatment)and how the decision to die might in some cases be an autonomously made decision, but in other cases autonomy is clouded by emotional reactions to situations, depression, etc. in such a way that a decision as monumental as the decision to kill one's self might not stem from a true reflection of the person's values and sense of self. I think that the issue of a person's right to make a decision about something as fundamental as life and death is difficult because the very pondering if this choice is usually only made in emotionally fraught situations, and are sometimes made hastily or unthinkingly as a reaction to physical, psychic or emotional pain.
But regardless of my own opinions and the academic study of people's right to suicide, in the context of this class the issue of suicide is made extremely personal and poignant in IJ, as you said Emily, not merely by the text but also because of DFW's suicide.
It is interesting to me the various reactions that people I have spoken with have had to Wallace's suicide: anger at him, a deep sadness, apathy. None of these people knew Wallace personally, but only through his work. The thing that I find tragic about IJ is that (at the risk of making the common academic mistake of conflating an author with his text) Wallace's obvious years of suffering permeate the text. The reader can see this meditation on ending one's own life perhaps even more clearly in the short story "Good Old Neon" which was included in Wallace's collection of stories "Oblivion", and which centers entirely upon the main characters decision to commit suicide. While on one hand I wish fervently, for some strange reason considering I never met DFW, that he was still alive- as if that very fact would somehow make the world a little better- I can't help but wonder how selfish it may be to ask someone to live with or in constant debilitating emotional pain, as Wallace ostensibly did. It is almost as though in his battle with depression I view Wallace as someone else might a cancer patient who just wants to stop the constant pain he has to live with.
Thanks for all your thoughts, Chloe. I've also started thinking a lot more seriously about the controversy surrounding suicide in recent years. The philosophical viewpoints you described are enlightening for me because most of the scholarly exposure I've had to suicide has been through Psychology courses, where the purpose is usually prevention mixed with a bit of understanding, rather than a debate on ethics, which I'm actually more invested in. Incidentally, in reference to Halpern, I tend much more towards the empathetic side rather than the detached concern side. IJ serves well as a supplement to these strictly philosophical or therapeutic perspectives, because it provides us with numerous realistic experiences rather than relying on a cold factual debate. Like you said, DFW's own suffering is very much apparent in the text. I'd like to try reading "Good Old Neon" as well. I think that once we can truly empathize with people who suffer so much that they'd rather end it all (I'm reminded of that first passage with Kate Gompert), we must confront the common stereotype of suicide as selfish. Indeed it seems selfish to me to ask someone to keep living with that burden.
ReplyDelete