14/4/2020 David Foster Wallace, Mary Karr, & the Tyranny of Genius - The Atlantic

CULTURE
David Foster Wallace and the Dangerous Romance
of Male Genius
A recent spate of #MeToo stories serves as yet another reminder of the centrifugal
forces of talented men.
MEGAN GARBER MAY 9, 2018

STEVE LISS / THE LIFE IMAGES COLLECTION / GETTY

On Monday evening, e New Yorker published yet more proof that the #MeToo
moment continues apace: a report containing the testimony of four women
accusing the New York attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, of a range of physical
and emotional abuses. e story, under the powerhouse co-byline of Jane Mayer
and Ronan Farrow, was striking—and nauseating—for several reasons, among them
allegations of hitting, of threatening, of racism. One of the other reasons, though,
was this line: “After the former girlfriend ended the relationship, she told several
friends about the abuse. A number of them advised her to keep the story to herself,
arguing that Schneiderman was too valuable a politician for the Democrats to lose.”

It’s a common sentiment in politics—the centrifugal forces of “the greater good”—

and it is, of course, absurd. Schneiderman, as a matter of policy, may have been a
professed ally of women and, indeed, of the aims of #MeToo; that changes nothing

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/05/the-world-still-spins-around-male-genius/559925/ 1/7
14/4/2020 David Foster Wallace, Mary Karr, & the Tyranny of Genius - The Atlantic

about the accountability he bears for his alleged behavior, or about the right of the
women to seek a small measure of justice through the telling of their stories. But
the absurdity itself was revealing: about the moral compromises so many people are
willing to make in the name of broader political progress; about the ways women,
in particular, are asked—still, despite it all—to be accommodating and compliant
and convenient; about the ckle avenues of our empathies.

Schneiderman, shortly after the New Yorker piece was published—the news cycle is
a at circle—resigned. e notion that the women’s stories about his behavior were
somehow a nuisance, though—the notion that things would be so much simpler,
macrocosmically, had they kept their experiences to themselves—remains with us. I
know that because, shortly before e New Yorker published its story about Eric
Schneiderman, the poet and memoirist and essayist Mary Karr published her own
story on Twitter. is one was about David Foster Wallace. It was about the writer
stalking her and abusing her and, in general, refusing to take no for an answer. As
Karr elaborated, in one tweet that reads, in the #MeToo context, as its own form of
starkly tragic poetry: “tried to buy a gun. kicked me. climbed up the side of my
house at night. followed my son age 5 home from school. had to change my
number twice, and he still got it. months and months it went on.”

e added tragedy of all this—kicked, climbed, son, gun, months—is the fact that
Karr was not, speci cally, making allegations. As Jezebel’s Whitney Kimball pointed
out, “e fact that [Wallace] abused [Karr] is not a revelation; this has been
documented and adopted by the literary world as one of Wallace’s character traits.”
D.T. Max’s 2012 biography of Wallace, Every Love Story Is a Ghost Story,
documented those abuses: Wallace, Max alleges, once tried to push Karr from a
vehicle. During another ght, he threw a coffee table at her. Karr, in her tweets, was
merely repeating the story she has told many times before. A story that has been
treated—stop me if this sounds familiar—largely as a complication to another story.
In this case, the story of the romantically unruly genius of one David Foster
Wallace.

And, so, within the space of a few days, the stories of government officials and
prodigious writers tangled together, reminders of the pathological ways American
culture approaches power in its many forms. For Schneiderman, it’s political power:
the alleged entitlements of one man who claims to serve the higher purpose of the
public good. For Karr and Wallace, though, it’s an even more complicated
proposition: our insistent fealty to—our implicit faith in—the notion of genius
itself. Karr’s #MeToo stories were not so much an open secret as an open revelation.

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/05/the-world-still-spins-around-male-genius/559925/ 2/7
14/4/2020 David Foster Wallace, Mary Karr, & the Tyranny of Genius - The Atlantic

ey were not hiding in plain sight; they were, worse, strategically ignored. ey
were the collateral damage of a culture that prefers uncomplicated idols.

“Talent is its own expectation,” Wallace wrote in In nite Jest, and he was, of course,
correct: ere’s a canny tautology to all of this. Genius, a means to godliness and its
best evidence, cannot be argued with. Genius cannot be reasoned with. Genius is
the answer and the question. It will be heard. It will be respected. Even when it
kicks and stalks and climbs up the side of the house at night.

Here is the etymology the Oxford English Dictionary provides for the word genius,
imported to English straight from the Latin: “male spirit of a family, existing in the
head of the family and subsequently in the divine or spiritual part of each
individual, personi cation of a person’s natural appetites, spirit or personality of an
emperor regarded as an object of worship, spirit of a place, spirit of a corporation,
(in literature) talent, inspiration, person endowed with talent, also demon or
spiritual being in general.”

ere’s more, but there’s already so much: genius, by de nition a male condition.
Genius, a male condition that in ects its maleness on the individual soul. Genius,
an object of worship. Genius, perhaps slightly demonic. e derivation isn’t
surprising on its own (no one would mistake a typical Roman for a feminist). What
is striking, though, is that, millennia later, the biases of the language remain with
us, tugging at the edges. Genius itself, the way we typically conceive of it, remains
infused with the male gaze, or perhaps more aptly, the male haze: It is gendered by
implication. It is a designation reserved, almost exclusively, for men. Guess who the
rst season of that new show Genius is about? I’ll give you a hint: e rst name of
the genius in question is Albert. e subject of the show’s second season? Pablo.

ese dynamics are unavoidably at play when Mary Karr, the famous and
celebrated writer, reminds the world of Wallace’s behavior toward her—reminds the
world, indeed, that it needed the reminding in the rst place. e horror stories
had simply been subsumed into the broader story (the “greater good”) of Wallace’s
personal genius: as evidence of his uncontainable passion, of the singular depth of
his wanting. He wore his trademark bandana, he once said, not only to keep
perspiration at bay, but also because “I’m just kind of worried my head’s gonna
explode”; there is a certain romance to the admission. And Wallace has often,
indeed, particularly in the popular press, been treated as a rom-comic hero:
besotted, helpless, desperate. (Wallace once suggested that the writing of In nite Jest
was a grand gesture meant to impress Karr: “a means to her end (as it were),” he
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/05/the-world-still-spins-around-male-genius/559925/ 3/7
14/4/2020 David Foster Wallace, Mary Karr, & the Tyranny of Genius - The Atlantic

wrote in the margin of a book, seeming to have intended the sexual pun.) ere
Wallace was, then, raising the boombox. ere he was, dropping the cards. ere he
was, refusing to take no for an answer.

One time, Karr recalled, Wallace arrived at a pool party she was attending with her
family with bandages on his left shoulder. She thought perhaps he had been cutting
himself; it turned out that the wounds being hidden had come from a tattoo
Wallace had gotten: her name, and a heart.

“Wallace did not hear subtle variations in no,” Max notes in an excerpt of Every
Love Story Is a Ghost Story; “he knew only one way to seduce: overwhelm. He would
show up at Karr’s family home to shovel her driveway after a snowfall, or come
unannounced to her recovery meetings. Karr called the head of the halfway house
and asked her to let Wallace know his attentions were not welcome. Wallace
besieged her with notes anyway.”

In another section of the book: “A month later, in May 1992, Wallace packed up
what little he had and drove to Syracuse,” Max writes. “He had rented a rst- oor
apartment in a house around the corner from Karr and a few blocks from the main
campus. It was in a typical graduate-student neighborhood, full of warping
clapboard houses and semi-kempt lawns and right across from the food co-op. But
being near the woman he loved made all the difference.”

At the release of Every Love Story Is a Ghost Story, e New York Times conducted an
interview with Max. One of the questions was this: “What was it about his feelings
for her that created such trouble for Wallace?”

at created such trouble for Wallace. is is the bias at work. Here, once again, is
the male genius emphasized while the female genius is relegated to the margins.
Karr is there, as a slight character, in Max’s biography of Wallace; she’s there, too, as
a kind of human predicate, in interviews about him, in assessments of his literary
contributions, in effusions about his great talent. And often, too—the world can be
so myopic that it can fail to see the genius sitting right in front of it—she is directly
asked about him: what he was like. What it was like. How it was to have had, for a
brief time, the privilege to spin around such an axis. “Sometimes people go on and
on about David Foster Wallace,” Karr noted last year. “As though my contribution
to literature is that I fucked him a couple times in the early ’90s … Everybody in
America owes me a dollar who read In nite Jest.”

is is the thing we do to women in a world of biased idolatry. Women’s stories get
treated as one of Wallace’s trademark footnotes might be: decorative, dexterous,
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/05/the-world-still-spins-around-male-genius/559925/ 4/7
14/4/2020 David Foster Wallace, Mary Karr, & the Tyranny of Genius - The Atlantic

whimsical, trivial. Pretty afterthoughts. Optional. (e book, after all, is already so
long.) Meanwhile, the less heroic elements of the male stories—the fact, say, that
David Foster Wallace referred to the female fans who attended his book tours as
“audience pussy,” or that he wrote in a letter to a friend of a day spent “unpacking,
trying to write, chasing tail,” or that he pushed Mary Karr out of a vehicle—get lost
in the fog of genius. And in the blunt transactions of fetishized talent. “It isn’t that I
doubt that Wallace uttered the sexist remarks attributed to him in any literal sense,”
one fan of the author put it. “Rather, I cannot bring myself to believe that Wallace’s
interpersonal cowardice comes close to overshadowing his many acts of
monumental literary courage.”

Nor can many people. Genius, after all, is a powerful force. (Talent is its own
expectation.) A fealty to genius is its own kind of faith: in transcendence, in
exceptionalism, in the fact that gods, still, can walk among us. And genius, itself, is
its own kind of infrastructure. We have organized our art around its potential; we
have organized our economy around its promise. We have oriented ourselves
according to the light of its stars—and so when they icker, even momentarily, we
lose ourselves. And: We defend ourselves. We delude ourselves. We choose not to
question the makeup of the rmament. It’s so much easier that way. “Something
I’ve noticed since Wallace’s suicide in 2008,” Glenn Kenny wrote in e Guardian a
few years ago, “is that a lot of self-professed David Foster Wallace fans don’t have
much use for people who actually knew the guy. For instance, whenever Jonathan
Franzen utters or publishes some pained but unsparing observations about his late
friend, Wallace’s fan base recoils, posting comments on the internet about how self-
serving he is, or how he really didn’t ‘get’ Wallace.”

I’ve noticed something similar—not only with Wallace, but also with other
members of our awed fraternity of acknowledged geniuses. Last week, I wrote
about Roman Polanski’s ouster from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and
Sciences, on the grounds that the director long ago pled guilty to the drugging and
raping of a 13-year-old girl. (Many more women, since the plea, have come forward
to say that he abused them as teenagers, as well.) My inbox was instantly ooded
with bitter indignation, with angry defenses of the status quo: But his movies are so
good. Could you make movies like that? Don’t you care about art? Bitch.

e genius-bias is a strong one. e male haze is so very hazy. It’s been there with
Polanski. And with Norman Mailer. And with J.D. Salinger. And with so many,
many more: writers, athletes, actors, directors, thinkers, artists, the people who take
it upon themselves to tell us who, and what, we are. It is everywhere. It is there in

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/05/the-world-still-spins-around-male-genius/559925/ 5/7
14/4/2020 David Foster Wallace, Mary Karr, & the Tyranny of Genius - The Atlantic

our literature and our businesses and our music and our soft entertainments. It is
there in our habits of thought. It is one more thing that is, as has been said, water.

In 2012, four years after the death of David Foster Wallace, Mary Karr wrote of
him—and his loss—in her poem “Suicide’s Note: An Annual.” Wallace was not
fully gone, the poet suggested; he could not be. He was too big, too much, too
present. He—his words, his life, the transcendence of his genius—had inscribed
themselves into the world’s very physics. Karr’s lines went, in part, like this:

I just wanted to say ha-ha, despite

           your best efforts you are every second

alive in a hard-gnawing way for all who breathed you deeply in,

     each set of lungs, those rosy implanted wings, pink balloons.

Her poem concluded: “We sigh you out into air and watch you rise like rain.”

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write
to letters@theatlantic.com.

Make your inbox more interesting.

Each weekday evening, get an overview of the day’s biggest news, along with fascinating
ideas, images, and people. See more newsletters

Enter your email Sign Up

Ideas that matter. Since 1857.

Subscribe and support 162 years of independent journalism. For less than $1 a
week.
SUBSCRIBE

ABOUT

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/05/the-world-still-spins-around-male-genius/559925/ 6/7
14/4/2020 David Foster Wallace, Mary Karr, & the Tyranny of Genius - The Atlantic
CONTACT

PODCASTS

SUBSCRIPTION

FOLLOW

Privacy Policy Do Not Sell My Personal Information Advertising Guidelines Terms Conditions Responsible Disclosure Site Map

TheAtlantic.com Copyright (c) 2020 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All Rights Reserved.

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/05/the-world-still-spins-around-male-genius/559925/ 7/7