IJ study archive

The Work of Play in David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest

source

TL;DR

A 2008 Critique article — core, frequently-cited IJ scholarship on play — that reads Infinite Jest against the sociology and theory of play (Huizinga, Caillois, Derrida, and above all Donna Haraway). Bresnan's thesis: in Infinite Jest play is an activity fraught with anxiety, subject to the same disciplinary structures that restrict autonomy anywhere else, so that the novel "characterizes sport as an enterprise completely devoid of play". Where earlier postmodern sports novels (Coover's The Universal Baseball Association and DeLillo's End Zone) dramatize pure play being corrupted by sport-structures, IJ goes further: sport and play are "entirely discrete endeavors" from the start — nothing needs to be "pumped out" because the two are already estranged. Bresnan runs this through E.T.A. (Schtitt's "true opponent… is the player himself"; Orin's careerist "Absent Play"; Hal's toenail-clipping game that curdles into "agency panic" the instant he keeps statistics; Erdedy's ritualized, boundary-building pot use), through the Entertainment (play carried to fatal self-erasure), and through Eschaton, which Bresnan reads as "overwhelmingly rational" serious business whose Interdependence Day breakdown is "ironically… a much more accurate 'simulation' of war than the game itself". The turn comes in the last movement: the novel's only liberating play lives "in the seriousness and sobriety of the Alcoholics Anonymous meeting room." Don Gately's recovery works not because of AA's program but because of "his provisional and playful approach to it" — he builds AA into "precisely the sort of closed ludic space that has eluded the novel's other characters," separating words from feelings ("Fake It Till You Make It") to construct a partial, multiple, strategically compliant self. This is Haraway's cyborgian "serious play", a subject "resolutely committed to partiality, irony, intimacy, and perversity". AA's status as an "Irony-free zone" thus does not resolve the novel into sincerity (contra Jacobs and Nichols): Gately's ongoing struggle "highlights the difficulty of distinguishing between the sincere and the ironic," and the Demerol ordeal marks serious play's limit. Bresnan closes that IJ "does not privilege play, but neither does it condemn it" — and that Gately's recovery and "the novel's adventurous prose and form illustrate the potency of serious play."

Key claims

  • Play in IJ is anxiety-fraught and disciplined, not free. Against the structuralist promise (Schtitt echoing Huizinga/Caillois: play as autonomy reclaimed within fixed boundaries) and the poststructuralist one (Derrida: play as the disruption that has "no center"; Haraway's boundary-crossing cyborg), IJ "depicts play as an activity fraught with anxiety, subject to the same disciplinary structures that restrict autonomy in any other individual endeavor." The operative structures "go well beyond the 'rules of the game,' encompassing not only the lines on the court… but also institutional, familial, erotic, political, and many other forces."
  • Sport and play are wholly estranged — IJ revises the postmodern sports tradition. Coover's Henry Waugh and DeLillo's Gary Harkness inhabit novels that assume a "pure" ludic space corrupted by sport-structures; IJ "complicates the division between pure and corrupted play". "Reading Infinite Jest, we cannot speak of play as corrupted by sports; sports and play are depicted throughout the novel as entirely discrete endeavors." Against Birkerts's "the idea of play has been pumped out of it," Bresnan: the two "are already systematically estranged."
  • Orin is "Absent Play". Orin's career satisfies neither structuralist nor poststructuralist play: leaving E.T.A. is compelled by ranking, not chosen; his move to football is falsely rationalized (the true motive is Joelle/Avril, sex and "P.G.O.A.T."-conquest), so sport is never "disinterested"; and his punting is not unpredictable but "almost mechanistic", the lob shot transposed. Wallace even elides Orin's first punt — the stock hidden-talent set piece — "further divorcing his presentation of sport from the field of play."
  • Play instantly curdles into work/anxiety. Hal's spontaneous, autonomous toenail-clipping game "immediately" becomes a statistics-keeping ordeal ("shooting seventy-plus percent"), inducing a Melley-style "agency panic" — "'Talking about it's broken the spell'," Hal "frozen with aboriginal terror." Erdedy's marijuana "mission"/"penance" surrounds him with more boundaries, not fewer.
  • Eschaton is rational serious business, and its collapse is truer than the game. The game is "overwhelmingly rational," "serious business," its chance element (ball-propulsion) more predictable than it looks; its whole design polices the boundary between "simulated game and real life." On Interdependence Day that boundary collapses under "real" feuds and "nonstrategic emotions", and "ironically, the melee that results is a much more accurate 'simulation' of war than the game itself".
  • "serious play" (Haraway) is the one liberating play — and it lives in AA. "Instead, the novel locates liberating play in the seriousness and sobriety of the Alcoholics Anonymous meeting room." Gately "constructs the program as precisely the sort of closed ludic space that has eluded the novel's other characters" — a strategic, provisional, partial identity ("Fake It Till You Make It"; separating words/actions from "true" feelings), Haraway's cyborg "resolutely committed to partiality, irony, intimacy, and perversity". "The change is not ontological… instead, it is provisional…"
  • AA doesn't resolve the sincere/ironic binary; it dissolves it. The "Irony-free zone" seems to hand Jacobs and Nichols a sincerity thesis, but Gately's persistent struggle to accept AA doctrine "highlights the difficulty of distinguishing between the sincere and the ironic." Serious play has limits: the frantic Demerol resistance shows "serious play also has its limits."
  • IJ's own form is serious play. Despite the thematic skepticism toward play, the novel "engages in both linguistic and formal play to an extraordinary degree" (LeClair's "prodigious"; Hayles's "cycles within cycles within cycles"); Gately's recovery and "the novel's adventurous prose and form" together "illustrate the potency of serious play."

Theories & evidence

THEORY: Eschaton is not play but "overwhelmingly rational" serious business; the Interdependence Day breakdown — real feuds and "nonstrategic emotions" bursting the game's boundary — is a more accurate simulation of war than the ordered game itself

  • Crux: eschaton-function (advances — the substantive-function / counter-to-pure-comedy side; the archive already credits this reading secondhand as "following Bresnan")
  • Stance: advances
  • Evidence:
    • [S] The game is engineered against chance: the ball-apportionment that "used to be determined by a throw of Yahtzee dice, is now determined by a software program called 'EndStat'"; "'quaint chance'… is no longer necessary". "This 'game' is serious business," its players sworn "not to let the awesome weight of their responsibilities… compromise their resolve to do what they must to preserve their people's way of life".
    • [S] Its one apparent irrationality — physical ball-propulsion — "is much more predictable than it might appear; we know that many of the athletes at E.T.A. have developed incredibly precise lob shots." Bresnan ties Pemulis's coin-nailing and Orin's punting to the same lobbing skill.
    • [S] The collapse is the argument: on Interdependence Day "these painstakingly erected boundaries between the real and the simulated collapse," fueled by "the 'real' feuds, rivalries, and animosities" (Pemulis "a sworn foe of all Penns for all time"; Ann Kittenplan and Evan Ingersoll attacked over personal "bones"). "In short, all sorts of 'nonstrategic emotions' are aroused, and ironically, the melee that results is a much more accurate 'simulation' of war than the game itself".
    • [text] (IJ, via Bresnan) Eschaton is "the most complicated children's game anybody around E.T.A.'d ever heard of" (IJ 322); the players "eminently 'rational' agents, 'deliberate,' 'sober,' 'judicious,' and 'almost Talmudic'" (IJ 327); "It is not a matter of the principle of thing [sic], ever, in Eschaton" (IJ 328 — Bresnan's own "[sic]").
  • Notes: This is Bresnan's most load-bearing single scene reading and the archive's likely reason to hold him firsthand: eschaton-function's registry entry (adjudicated contradicted for the pure-comic-set-piece claim) already lists the Foster tribute-note as its ninth counter-side witness "following Bresnan" — i.e., the archive credits Bresnan as the origin of the melee-more-accurate-than-the-game thematic reading without yet holding him directly. Bresnan belongs on the substantive-function (counter) side. Adjacent to delillo-influence (Bresnan pairs the Eschaton/End Zone war-game lineage, n. 2) and the Coover UBA dice-simulation lineage.

THEORY: In Infinite Jest sport and play are systematically estranged — play is anxiety-fraught and disciplined by structures well beyond the "rules of the game," so recreation and leisure (Orin's careerism, Hal's toenail game, Erdedy's pot ritual) yield not autonomy but more boundaries; the novel revises, rather than repeats, the postmodern sports-literature tradition of pure-play-corrupted

  • Crux: none (candidate: serious-play / play-autonomy — the play-as-work / play-and-autonomy design frame has no established home). Also entertainment-lethality (mentions — the cartridge as play carried to fatal self-erasure).
  • Stance: advances (frame); mentions (entertainment-lethality)
  • Evidence:
    • [S] The thesis proper: IJ "depicts play as an activity fraught with anxiety, subject to the same disciplinary structures that restrict autonomy in any other individual endeavor"; "the novel characterizes sport as an enterprise completely devoid of play". Where UBA and End Zone "assume the existence of th[e] 'pure' ludic space," IJ "complicates the division between pure and corrupted play"; "we cannot speak of play as corrupted by sports; sports and play are depicted throughout the novel as entirely discrete endeavors."
    • [S] "Absent Play" (Orin): his exit from tennis "is not a freely determined action" (compelled by ranking); his football rationale is false (the real motive Joelle-as-Avril, the "coital moan… the sound of the womb"); his punting is "almost mechanistic", never "disinterested" (Huizinga). Wallace "elides" the first-punt set piece, "further divorcing his presentation of sport from the field of play."
    • [S] "Anxious Play" (Hal): the autonomous toenail game "immediately" becomes statistics-keeping, and Hal is "susceptible to a form of 'agency panic,'" which "'Talking about it's broken the spell'" enacts — "In these moments, the play of disruption becomes work." (IJ, via Bresnan) "frozen with aboriginal terror" (IJ 248).
    • [S] Erdedy's pot "mission"/"penance"/"behavior-modification" "surround[s]" him "with more boundaries and limits" — "What might be represented as a playful liberation… is instead characterized as a profoundly banal, anxious, and isolating enterprise."
    • [text] (IJ, via Bresnan) Schtitt: "The true opponent, the enfolding boundary, is the player himself" (IJ 83-4); Mario: "So what's the difference between tennis and suicide, life and death, the game and its own end?"; John Wayne "a 'grim machine'" (IJ 438); the Entertainment as "the most explicit confirmation of Mario's suspicion that play ultimately leads to self-erasure."
    • [author] Wallace on Michael Joyce as a "'radically compress[ed]'" and "'grotesque'" figure with "'the regretless cheer of a man for whom issues of choice became irrelevant long ago'" (A Supposedly Fun Thing / "Michael Joyce," 254-55, via Bresnan), and his "'level of abstraction and formality'" play-definition (SFT 235n.40).
    • [secondary] Melley's "agency panic" = "intense anxiety about an apparent loss of autonomy or self-control—the conviction that one's actions are being controlled by someone else, that one has been 'constructed' by powerful external agents" (Melley 62); Messenger's "Ritual Sports Hero" and the "play back to" nostalgia (which Bresnan says Orin, tellingly, lacks); Huizinga (Homo Ludens), Caillois (Man, Play, and Games), Derrida ("Structure, Sign and Play"), Haraway ("A Cyborg Manifesto").
  • Notes: The article's organizing frame and its most genuinely new material for the archive — a sustained play-theory reading (Huizinga/Caillois/Derrida/Haraway) that has no dedicated slug. Everything else Bresnan does routes through this. The play-as-work claim brushes but does not equal eschaton-function (a scene) or entertainment-lethality (which Bresnan touches only as one confirming instance — the cartridge as terminal play).

THEORY: The novel's only liberating play is Don Gately's recovery — a strategic, provisional, "serious play" (Haraway) that constructs AA as a closed ludic space and builds a partial, multiple self ("Fake It Till You Make It"), though the Demerol ordeal marks serious play's limit

  • Crux: gately-salvation (advances — the mechanism of Gately's recovery); aa-seriousness (supports — AA as the serious, valued site of the novel's one real play)
  • Stance: advances
  • Evidence:
    • [S] "Gately's success with AA is generated not by the program itself but rather by his provisional and playful approach to it." He "constructs the program as precisely the sort of closed ludic space that has eluded the novel's other characters," segregating AA "both physically and philosophically from his everyday life" — unlike Orin and Hal, who cannot untangle sport from their "real" lives.
    • [S] The mechanism is Haraway's cyborgian "serious play": Gately "separates his words and actions from his 'true' feelings" ("Fake It Till You Make It"), an atheist praying twice a day; "'All that mattered was what he did'" (IJ 466, via Bresnan). "The change is not ontological—Gately is still an addict and still does not believe in God; instead, it is provisional—he strategically constructs a self that can comply with all of AA's 'suggestions.'"
    • [secondary] Haraway's cyborg is "resolutely committed to partiality, irony, intimacy, and perversity" (Haraway 151), crafting multiple identities "through irony and serious play"; Bresnan reads Hayles's liberal-subject-to-recursive-citizen account of Gately as real but incomplete — it "does not account for the playful method by which he achieves it."
    • [S] The limit: "the tenuous nature of this recovery, as illustrated by Don's frantic attempts to resist Demerol after suffering gruesome gunshot wounds, suggests that serious play also has its limits." Bresnan reads Gately as apparently surviving "without being treated with Demerol" while flagging the narrative as "ambiguous".
  • Notes: Routes to gately-salvation with a distinctive mechanism — recovery-as-play (provisional/partial-self construction), which is neither the conversion nor the Hercules/martyr framings the slug already absorbs. aa-seriousness support is oblique: Bresnan values AA as the one place real play survives, but his stance is not that entry's designed-temptation crux statement — it is that AA works because the recovering self can be played provisionally. A support with a distinct framing, not a restatement of the temptation reading.

CONNECTION: AA's "Irony-free zone" does not resolve Infinite Jest into sincerity — Gately's ongoing struggle to accept AA doctrine shows how hard the sincere and the ironic are to tell apart, and the partial/playful identification (Haraway) exceeds the binary Jacobs and Nichols impose

  • Crux: sincerity-definition (advances — the sincere/ironic boundary is undecidable, not settled toward sincerity); irony-vs-recovery (mentions — AA as "Irony-free zone")
  • Stance: advances
  • Evidence:
    • [S] The AA fascination, "'Irony-free zone'" (IJ 369, via Bresnan), "appears to provide more evidence for the readings of Nichols and Jacobs in which Infinite Jest fervently endorses sincerity". Jacobs reads a "clear divide between 'unself-conscious' moments and 'purposeless irony'"; Nichols opposes the novel to the carnivalesque ("sober reality becomes an even more revolutionary act…").
    • [S] Bresnan's counter: "Gately's ongoing struggle to accept AA doctrine (a struggle that continues as he lies in his hospital bed) highlights the difficulty of distinguishing between the sincere and the ironic. The novel's depiction of Alcoholics Anonymous complicates this binary and explores the potential of the partial and playful mode of identification endorsed by Donna Haraway in 'A Cyborg Manifesto.'"
    • [text] (IJ, via Bresnan) Gately's early meeting-rant that he "hates this limp AA drivel about gratitude and humility and miracles" (IJ 353); the "'old and almost unfamiliar panic'" at "'I'm here But For the Grace of God'" (IJ 366); still unable to conceptualize a god "'to really sincerely pray to'" (IJ 444).
  • Notes: Directly engages two interlocutors the archive already holds — Dialogizing Postmodern Carnival: David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest (the very Nichols article, Critique 43.1) and a Jacobs note (verify which Jacobs piece) — from a position that treats the irony/sincerity question as undecidable-through-play, not resolved. Sits beside the archive's sincerity-definition and irony-vs-recovery material; a play-theory route into the same crux.

Themes

Play and its theory (Huizinga/Caillois's bounded "play-ground" as langue; Derrida's centerless play as différance; Haraway's cyborg "serious play"); sport as devoid of play (E.T.A. as tennis-overload machine for "The Show"; the everyday privileged over the highlight; Orin's mechanistic punting); autonomy and its loss (self-abnegation as the price of the game; "agency panic"; the disciplinary structures beyond the "rules of the game"); postmodern sports literature (Coover's UBA, DeLillo's End Zone; Messenger's Ritual Sports Hero and "play back to"); Eschaton (rationality, verisimilitude, and the boundary that bursts into a truer war); recreation as anxiety (Hal's toenail game, Erdedy's pot "mission"); the Entertainment (play carried to fatal self-erasure); AA and serious play (the "Irony-free zone"; the closed ludic space; "Fake It Till You Make It"; provisional/partial identity; the Demerol limit); sincerity vs. irony (the binary dissolved rather than settled); form as play (IJ's "prodigious" linguistic and formal play — LeClair, Hayles).

Cross-references

Notable passages

Verbatim from Bresnan (ASCII-marks convention; journal page numbers).

Through its treatment of sport, recreation, and leisure, Infinite Jest depicts play as an activity fraught with anxiety, subject to the same disciplinary structures that restrict autonomy in any other individual endeavor. (Critique 50.1, 53)

Reading Infinite Jest, we cannot speak of play as corrupted by sports; sports and play are depicted throughout the novel as entirely discrete endeavors. (56)

Instead, the novel locates liberating play in the seriousness and sobriety of the Alcoholics Anonymous meeting room. (53)

In short, all sorts of "nonstrategic emotions" are aroused, and ironically, the melee that results is a much more accurate "simulation" of war than the game itself. (62)

Gately's success with AA is generated not by the program itself but rather by his provisional and playful approach to it. (65)

Infinite Jest does not privilege play, but neither does it condemn it. […] Both Don Gately's recovery from drug and alcohol addiction and the novel's adventurous prose and form illustrate the potency of serious play. (66)

Advances