写作与思考2017longreads.com
大卫·福斯特·华莱士的新闻写作遗产
The Journalistic Legacy of David Foster Wallace
导读
这篇文章讨论大卫·福斯特·华莱士的新闻特稿遗产：他的文风迷人，但常为修辞效果改动细节、牺牲事实准确。对写作者来说，这是一次关于“文学性”与“真实性”边界的案例复盘——值得读，因为我们都可能为了句子好听而悄悄扭曲事实。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
为修辞效果改写细节，会悄悄透支读者信任：风格不能替事实背书，采访原话和事实核查要留痕。
- 02
写人物时把被服务的普通劳动者当成完整的人来写，这种共情会让批判更有分量，而不是居高临下的嘲讽。
- 03
批评的矛头应对准有权解释、却不肯直说的人（管理层、公关），而不是被制度裹挟的乘客或员工。
- 04
分清虚构与非虚构的写作目标：小说可以追求“情感真实”，报道不行；非虚构作品良莠不齐，不必篇篇当作范本。
HN 评论精选
文学性改写细节会伤害报道的可信度与被访者，情感真实不能替代事实准确。
我听过不少关于华莱士新闻伦理的负面评价：不是大情节出错，而是大量细节为了文体效果被改写。他追求的不是严谨的事实，而是一种理想化的“情感真实”。在“另类事实”都能用来回应谎言的年代，这不值得效仿。我本人被一位知名记者采访过，成稿里出现了我从未被问过的问题和我从未说过的话——所幸不严重，但万一重要呢？这让我想起《事实的寿命》里那位“文学记者”与事实核查员的长期拉锯。
simen查看英文原文
I've heard a lot of bad things about Wallace's journalistic ethics - basically misrepresenting the actual story, not the big lines but lots of the details, for stylistic effect. He was not a rigorous searcher of actual truth, just some kind of idealized "emotional truth", and in an era where "alternative facts" is considered an acceptable way to respond to an outright lie, that's not something to emulate. It's been a while so I don't have the exact links to the articles that mention this. (I think some of it was in the biography of Wallace by DT Max.) Also, that cruise ship essay makes him look like a complete asshole. It kind of reminds me of that book, The Lifespan of a Fact, about the protracted struggle between "literary journalist" John D'Agata and fact-checker Jim Fingal. This kind of thing pisses me off, even if it's considered great writing. I've personally been interviewed by a rather well-known journalist (my only interview of my life, I am neither famous nor notable), and in the resulting piece there were questions I was never asked and answers I never gave. Thankfully the false words he put in my mouth were not so bad, but what if it had been something actually important? So this kind of stuff leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
区分虚构与非虚构：小说是他的强项，非虚构水准不稳，需挑着读。
想读严肃又令人捧腹的文学，就读华莱士的小说，尤其是长篇。他的非虚构参差不齐，但论数学的那本《Everything and More》是常被忽略的耀眼例外，应当列为必读。
pklausler查看英文原文
Read Wallace's fiction, especially his novels, for serious (but laugh-out-loud funny) literature. The non-fiction is somewhat hit-and-miss, with the glaring brilliant exception of his nearly-always-overlooked book on mathematics ("Everything and More"), which should be required reading.
共情式的观察能把被忽视的劳动者写成完整的人，而把最锋利的批评对准不肯直说的权力方，是特稿立场表达的高级做法。
在阿拉斯加海岸，我见过一艘挤满神情阴郁、并不富裕的人的小艇，沿着海岸开，却背离港口。当地人解释：那是游轮员工出来观光，是工作福利；但船永远不会靠岸，因为他们没有签证，也许还想逃跑。这让我立刻想起《所谓好玩的事》。华莱士无法安然接受被那些被迫维持永久愉悦假面的员工“伺候”；这种感受让他与同船乘客格格不入——他必须把员工看成与自己完全平等的完整的人，只是世界没给他们同等机会。凭这份共情，他与狄更斯、梅尔维尔、奥威尔同列，某些方面也像亨特·汤普森。所以是的，DFW会选边站，他对冷漠麻木的乘客的轻蔑毫不掩饰；但他真正的怒火留给了管理层受访者——那些对他关于船员福利的直白提问从不正面回答的人。某位手持鞭子的军官：“我希望他倒霉。”最精彩的是公司公关说“船上的人——员工——真的是一个大家庭”，而DFW回应：“……这些‘贱民’员工生活在极度恐惧中。”
everybodyknows查看英文原文
On a trip to coastal Alaska some years back, I saw a small launch packed shoulder-to-shoulder with cheerless, unprosperous looking people, motoring along the shoreline -- but away from the harbor. A local explained that these were cruise ship workers out for a sightseeing tour, a perk of their jobs. The boat would however never land on shore, because the workers had no visas. And might perhaps try to escape. "Supposedly Fun" brought that moment back for me in a rush. Wallace could not feel at ease being "pampered" by workers themselves forced to maintain a facade of permanent delight. Such a feeling could only make alien to him most of his fellow passengers. Unlike them, he had to see the workers as complete human beings coequal with himself every way, except for what opportunity the world had denied them. With such empathy, he joins Dickens, Melville, Orwell -- and in other ways as well, Hunter S. Thompson. So yes, DFW chooses sides, and his contempt for callous, oblivious passengers shows. But the real vitriol he reserves for interviewees in the management class, none of whom will give a straight answer to his plain questions about the crew's welfare. A certain whip-wielder in the officer's quarters -- "I wish him ill". And best of all, the Press Liaison at corporate who tells him "The people on board -- the staff -- are really part of one big family..." To which DFW responds: "...the preterite staff lived in mortal terror..." (footnote 13)
同类还值得读
不要想好再写，要写来思考
Don’t think to write, write to think
这篇短文主张不要把写作当成思考完成后的记录，而要把写作本身当作思考的工具：动笔的过程会逼出想不清楚的地方。
写作与思考2022 · 553 分 · 145 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作即思考：学会自信地写作
Writing Is Thinking: Learning to Write with Confidence
这是一篇讲“写作即思考”的博客：作者认为写作不是把想好的东西誊写出来，而是借助写作本身把想法想清楚，因此写作者应当建立信心、敢于先写烂稿。
写作与思考2019 · 529 分 · 83 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何用写作来思考
How to think in writing
这篇文章讨论的是「用写作来思考」：作者认为写作不只是把想清楚的东西表达出来，更是想清楚本身的工具——文字落在纸上，你才有机会看见自己思路里的跳跃、含混和漏洞。
写作与思考2024 · 424 分 · 120 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作，帮你逃离默认的人生设置
Write to Escape Your Default Setting
文章的核心主张就写在标题里：写作是帮你逃离「默认设置」的手段——日常的思维和表达都有惯性默认的默认模式，而落笔能逼你跳出来，重新看清自己到底在想什么、要说什么。
写作与思考2025 · 407 分 · 93 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作就是思考
Writing is thinking
文章以“写作即思考”为题，讨论写作不只是把已有想法记录下来，而是帮助澄清、组织和推进思考的过程。
写作与思考2025 · 330 分 · 128 评4 条写作要点编辑精选