Infinite Jest and the Test of Boredom

Infinite Jest is one of those books I re-visit a lot on this site. It’s in my top five favorite books of all time. When people ask what it’s about I tell them the surface level answer: It’s about a film so entertaining that people watch it without doing anything else until they die. Oh, and tennis. It’s more than that though. I talked to a friend of mine about it who introduced me to the book in the first place. I told him, “I think, at its core, Infinite Jest is a book about our inability to deal with boredom.” Not even our inability, our refusal. It’s about the sheer panic that rises in us when we’re left alone with our thoughts, without a screen or distraction to drown out the noise inside.

The author — David Foster Wallace — saw boredom as the truest test of freedom. Not freedom in the political sense, but the freedom to exist without the constant need to be entertained. The freedom to pay attention — to life, to others, to ourselves — without numbing out. The irony, of course, is that we’ve built a society where that kind of freedom feels unbearable.

The book also tackles addiction, and the addicts in Infinite Jest aren’t just addicted to substances, they’re addicted to escape. To anything that shields them from the crushing weight of unfiltered consciousness. But Wallace’s genius was showing that this isn’t limited to drug users. We all have our fix. Some people chase achievement. Some chase pleasure. Some chase attention. The forms change, but the hunger doesn’t.

At the center of the book is “the Entertainment,” a film so irresistibly pleasurable that viewers lose the will to do anything but watch it until they die. It sounds absurd, but it’s not that far off. Every endless scroll, every algorithmic loop, every dopamine hit of digital validation is a step toward that same self-erasure. Wallace wrote the book in the 1990s, but he saw where we were heading: a culture where overstimulation replaces meaning, and distraction becomes the dominant mode of existence.

What makes the book so overwhelming — so sprawling, so labyrinthine — is that it mirrors the chaos of modern consciousness. The fragmented attention, the tangled connections, the endless search for something that feels real. The structure itself resists our hunger for easy satisfaction. You can’t skim it; you have to wrestle with it. And maybe that’s the point. Reading it is an act of resistance against the same forces it warns about.

Wallace once said that “the real, profound boredom” we experience in everyday life is where freedom begins. But to get there, we have to stop running from it. We have to stop medicating every quiet moment with noise. Boredom is uncomfortable because it strips us bare. It forces us to confront who we are when we’re not performing, producing, or consuming.

That’s the real terror of the book. Not addiction, not death, not even despair, but the silence underneath it all. The realization that maybe we’ve built our entire lives around avoiding ourselves.

In that sense, the novel is both a warning and a mirror. It asks whether we can still be present in a world designed to keep us from ever being present. It asks whether we can stand the boredom long enough to rediscover what’s real.

Boredom, it turns out, isn’t the enemy. It’s the doorway back to awareness. It’s where meaning has been hiding all along: in the space we’re just too afraid to enter.

TikTok Ban in the U.S.

I’ve been using TikTok since the pandemic in 2020. It’s been a fun little app for me. It was something to do while everyone was stuck inside and not able to go anywhere. It’s fun to watch silly little videos and educational videos when I’m in bed and can’t sleep. It’s just fun to watch, much like YouTube. 

I think another ban is coming up on April 5th? I think that’s the day. I can’t remember. So I suppose I’ll go back over to RedNote, which is another Chinese-owned app. I wonder why exactly the U.S. government wants to ban TikTok though. Well, I’ve done some reading and read some comments and such on the matter and here’s what I’ve gathered:

The U.S. government claims it wants to ban TikTok because of data privacy and national security, but that’s not the real reason. They claim that the Chinese government could force TikTok to hand over user data, but they don’t give a shit about that. What they really care about is another country influencing public opinion. They want to suppress information that doesn’t align with their own interests.

The U.S. doesn’t want China to have any potential influence over Americans, whether through data collection, algorithimic control of content, or possible political manipulation. The irony, of course, is that Google and Facebook already influence Americans in similar ways, but because they’re American companies, the government is less concerned. It’s less about protecting people from surveillance or manipulation in general and more about who gets to do the influencing.

The U.S. doesn’t want China shaping political opinion, culture, or political discourse in a way that would challenge American geopolitical dominance. If China can control narratives, push propaganda, or even just collect some data, it gives them leverage in a global power struggle. TikTok is one of the few platforms where the U.S. doesn’t have control over the algorithm or data. It’s not about whether TikTok is actually doing anything nefarious. It’s about the potential for China to use it as a tool in the future.

The U.S. government doesn’t want us thinking negatively of them. They don’t want a foreign power controlling a platform that could shape public perception against them. If an app like TikTok starts amplifying anti-government sentiment, exposing U.S. corruption, or promoting alternative ideologies, that’s a threat to America’s control over the narrative.

They don’t mind when American companies do this because those companies can be pressured, regulated, or even use for political purposes. However, when a Chinese-owned platform is involved, they can’t control what’s being shown, what’s being suppressd, or who’s benefiting from it.

America frames it as a national security issue, but at its core, it’s about controlling public perception and limiting competing narratives. The government isn’t trying to protect people from manipulation, they’re trying to make sure they’re the ones doing the manipulating. If this were purely about data privacy, they’d go after Facebook, Google, and other companies that harvest just as much (if not more) user data. Those companies are American though, meaning they can be influenced, lobbied, and used when needed.

In summation, it’s not about our privacy. It’s about the American government controlling the narrative. The American government wants to be the one to shape public perception, not a foreign entity. They justify their actions by calling it “national security,” but at the end of the day it’s about controlling the narrative and making sure people aren’t exposed to ideas or information that could weaken faith in the American system.

They’re not against manipulation. They just want to be the ones doing it.

So, if TikTok goes bye-bye again, be sure to catch me on RedNote where I’ll be chilling with the communists. Join me, comrades!