Regarding David Foster Wallace, who Maria argues simply dismissing as “problematic” is not quite the answer. The artist of special gifts who is also a “hideous man” is a deeply valuable source of information for a society seeking to better itself. This piece doesn’t do enough—it says simply dismissing DFW is unrealistic, but doesn’t offer any of its own ideas about how we’re expected to extract special value from reading the work of a serially abusive man, only that it’s possible and that his work is so good we can’t ignore it. We can learn from troubled people who weren’t abusive, so what makes David Foster Wallace so special?