I like the idea that they don’t need explanation – they simply are, and they add to the entire experience of reading the book. I don’t need to clearly define each possible reason he included them in order to enjoy the book.

However.. I did try to define all of the thoughts floating around in my mind – and his, if he was honest in the interview, and I don’t see any reason that he wouldnt be. He didnt seem like the kind of person that would fabricate explanations of his writing to safe face. I picture him more along the lines of someone who, like you said, overthought his writing.

The reason that I laid those explanations out was because I didn’t believe agree that the endnotes don’t factor into the overall experience of reading the book and I wanted to present several possibilities of his intentions or ways that the endnotes do have an impact on the overall text.

I think you and I essentially agree because, as far as I can tell, you ARE saying they influence the reader’s experience – just in a way that doesn’t need to be precisely analyzed.

Also feeling like I’ve been reading this forever. I’ve got all these other books I want to read, and I’m starting to wonder if I’ll ever be done with this and able to pick up something else. Halfway? Only halfway? Sigh. Even though I’m enjoying it, I do feel overwhelmed with the “task” at times.

Regarding Wallace’s reasons, as you quoted them: 1) Interviewers tend to ask questions such as “why all the endnotes?” and if you don’t have a better answer than “because they’re fun” you can look like an idiot. 2)Wallace tended to overthink things — such obsessing large part of the appeal of his writing.

In other words, I suspect that Wallace began with the neurotic habit of footnoting first, then came up with the reasons second, rather than the other way around.

All of this is beside the point, however, as I’m just annoyed with and taking to task the suggestion that such an integral element of an artists style can be parsed for meaning as though it were some symbol or motif.

I remain surprised that anyone who has volunteered to guide other readers through the book would, at this stage, be complaining about the book’s length, difficulty, or endnotes.

You ask, in jest, “Are you enjoying it enough?” Is that actually such an outlandish question? If you all rate it a big B+, outstanding but too long, wasn’t the summer kind of a waste? We reserve projects like this for the most special of books, not that any of you would deny that the book is special. But … what can I say. Are the endnotes really that freaky? I am honestly surprised that this specific group of people could still have such profound reservations about the technique.

Maybe you’re all such close readers of fiction that the raggedness bothers you more than it does me. I don’t know.

According to the group of guides, I haven’t even gotten to the good parts yet, but it all seems pretty delightful to me. I still think my comment on Proust is pretty apt.