Scan barcode
A review by cinchona
Everything and More: A Compact History of Infinity by David Foster Wallace
5.0
Enthusiastic to the point of being frantic. Idiosyncratic to the point of being entirely disorganized. Marked by D.F.W.'s strange style, which manages to be both personable and byzantine. I can see a million places where a reader would be put off by this book--those with limited math background will choke on the proofs and casual use of difficult mathematical ideas, those with lots will be dissatisfied by his oddly-paced and sometimes confused presentation.
But this book is a gem. If you've got a good but rusty math background, dive in.
It perfectly recreated for me a beautiful feeling: that of a mathy friend trying earnestly to explain something cool they *just* learned. The frantic disorganization and enthusiastic jumble of thoughts rings true. And it inspires in me the same feelings of interest and excitement to learn. This won't be the last book I read on these subjects, and I feel like D.F.W.'s extensive bibliography is proof that he didn't intend it to be anyone's.
Further, this book has turned me around in my feelings about the author. In 2012, I read Consider the Lobster, and wrote this in my review: "I guess the problem is, DFW thinks I want to read about what DFW thinks about X (X being the AVN awards, lobsters, or grammar) when I really just want to read an interesting, spirited account of X." I take it back. Now I'm a lot more interested in D.F.W.'s weird math-loving brain.
But this book is a gem. If you've got a good but rusty math background, dive in.
It perfectly recreated for me a beautiful feeling: that of a mathy friend trying earnestly to explain something cool they *just* learned. The frantic disorganization and enthusiastic jumble of thoughts rings true. And it inspires in me the same feelings of interest and excitement to learn. This won't be the last book I read on these subjects, and I feel like D.F.W.'s extensive bibliography is proof that he didn't intend it to be anyone's.
Further, this book has turned me around in my feelings about the author. In 2012, I read Consider the Lobster, and wrote this in my review: "I guess the problem is, DFW thinks I want to read about what DFW thinks about X (X being the AVN awards, lobsters, or grammar) when I really just want to read an interesting, spirited account of X." I take it back. Now I'm a lot more interested in D.F.W.'s weird math-loving brain.