海角大神

Think David Foster Wallace is untouchable?

Think again. 鈥淎merican Psycho鈥� author Bret Easton Ellis tore into the late author of the critically acclaimed 鈥淚nfinite Jest鈥� and 鈥淭he Pale King鈥� on Twitter last week, and in true Ellis fashion, he didn鈥檛 hold back.

鈥淩eading D.T. Max鈥檚 bio I continue to find David Foster Wallace the most tedious, overrated, tortured, pretentious writer of my generation,鈥� Ellis tweeted. 鈥淒avid Foster Wallace was so needy, so conservative, so in need of fans 鈥� that I find the halo of sentimentality surrounding him embarrassing.鈥� In several more tweets, he continued, 鈥淒FW is the best example of a contemporary male writer lusting for a kind of awful greatness that he simply wasn鈥檛 able to achieve. A fraud.鈥�

Ellis鈥檚 comments came on the heels of a new biography of the late author, D.T. Max鈥檚 鈥淓very Love Story is a Ghost Story: A Life of David Foster Wallace.鈥� (See our review of the biography here.)

In the midst of reading the bio of Wallace, who took his own life in 2008 after a lifelong battle with depression, Ellis told his 300,000 Twitter followers, 鈥淥MG is the solemnity of the David Foster Wallace myth on a purely literary level sickening.鈥�

He then turned his attention to DFW fans, saying: "Saint David Foster Wallace: a generation trying to read him feels smart about themselves which is part of the whole bullsh** package. Fools.鈥�

Who does Ellis think he is 鈥渂eing exceptionally hostile and ungenerous toward a tragically tormented writer who, having hanged himself, is in no position to defend himself,鈥� writes Salon.com鈥檚 Gerald Howard (who, incidentally, edited both Ellis and Wallace when they were starting out).

For starters, anyone familiar with Ellis knows he鈥檚 no stranger to the shock-and-awe method of courting controversy.

He is, after all, the guy who in 2010 suggested women are inherently ill-equipped for directing movies. The guy who just last month declared Matt Bomer unfit for playing the title role of 海角大神 Grey in the film adaption of 鈥�50 Shades of Grey,鈥� because he is gay. And the guy who, hours after J.D. Salinger died, tweeted, 鈥淵eah! Thank God he鈥檚 finally dead. I鈥檝e been waiting for this day for-****ing ever. Party tonight!鈥�

But there鈥檚 more here than meets the eye. Ellis and Wallace are literary rivals that go way back, and Ellis鈥檚 hostile tweets are just the latest in a two-decades-old exchange of literary beef.

In 1988, Wallace criticized Ellis鈥檚 first published essay, calling Ellis and his category of novelists 鈥淐atatonics鈥� for their 鈥渘a茂ve pretension,鈥� according to Slate. 鈥淲allace鈥檚 argument, characteristically, defies easy summary,鈥� Slate鈥檚 Forrest Wickman writes, 鈥溾��but, in the context of literary critical essay,鈥� is damning.

A few years later, Wallace laid into 鈥淎merican Psycho鈥� in an interview with Larry McCaffery, saying it 鈥減anders shamelessly to the audience鈥檚 sadism for a while, but by the end it鈥檚 clear that the sadism鈥檚 real object is the reader itself鈥�You can defend 鈥楶sycho鈥� as being a sort of performative digest of late-eighties social problems, but it鈥檚 no more than that.鈥�

Well.

鈥淎lternating between PR stunt, outright bullying, vigorous intellectual debate, and exercise in ego-bashing and boosting, literary feuds are nothing if not pure bibliophilic entertainment,鈥� we once wrote in a post on Paulo Coelho鈥檚 attack on James Joyce鈥檚 鈥淯lysses,鈥� calling the feuds 鈥渁s old as literature itself.鈥�

Perhaps, but we鈥檙e more inclined to heed the reasoning of The Guardian鈥檚 Barbara Ellen.

鈥淚t could be that they鈥檙e feeling a bit bored, their lives and careers aren鈥檛 as exciting as they once were,鈥� she writes, 鈥渢he coffee is cold, the croissant not delicious enough, and mischievous people are encouraging them, telling them that their bratty behavior and ill-thought-out rantings are 'a breath of fresh air!'鈥�

鈥淭hey mouth, off, in the process,鈥� she continues, 鈥渕aking themselves look ridiculous and just a tad obsessed with their targets.鈥�

We couldn鈥檛 have said it better ourselves.

Husna Haq is a Monitor correspondent.