I never read anything by John Updike and I don’t think I’ve ever known anybody who has. Nonetheless he not only had the talent to cause people who wrote about authors to write about him but also the capacity to be written about in a neutral-to-pleasant way, a way that didn’t make you wonder at the time why you weren’t reading about somebody else or books by somebody you might actually want to read. The things that were written about him never made me want to read him because they said things like this:
Anyway, that was from his obituary, which I just read. via.
I never read anything by John Updike and I don’t think I’ve ever known anybody who has.
Me neither. Maybe I should blog this and see how far we can extend the chain. I doubt you'd be more than six degrees from a John Updike fan, though.
Posted by: Phil | January 28, 2009 at 12:09 AM
I read "Rabbit, Run" a while back and thought it was very good. I tried to read "The Coup," found it incredibly, wildly, obnoxiously bad, and gave up. So my experience with him was sort of hit and miss.
Some of his poems are funny.
Posted by: Chris | January 28, 2009 at 12:14 AM
Wow jamie, my sentiments exactly.
Posted by: Barry Freed | January 28, 2009 at 03:40 AM
Count me in. We could start an Updike Not Reading Group, where we all meet up in a pub and discuss something more interesting than the Updike novel we didn't read that week.
ISTR Paul Theroux reviewed one of the Rabbits as "immoral and asinine".
Posted by: Alex | January 28, 2009 at 02:37 PM
Which one is him, and which one is John Irving?
Posted by: dsquared | January 28, 2009 at 03:30 PM
John Irving? I thought he was Philip(?) Roth.
Posted by: des von bladet | January 28, 2009 at 03:59 PM
Updike's merits aside, I would like to point out that Paul Theroux himself is pretty "immoral and asinine." And creepy.
Posted by: Chris | January 28, 2009 at 05:19 PM
Isn't he the guy in the white suit? Or is that one Norman Mailer?
Posted by: Alex | January 28, 2009 at 06:06 PM
I'd agree that a bad review from Theroux probably counts in his favour rather than anything else...
John Updike, Philip Roth and John Irving are, as far as I know, the same person; if you see anyone younger or more alive than that, it's probably Jonathan Franzen (aka Dave Eggers, Jonathan Safran Foer).
Similarly, all poststructuralist Italians are simply Umberto Eco in a different false beard.
Posted by: ajay | January 29, 2009 at 09:31 AM
I read his Henry Bech stories a few years back and thought they were very good. Does this mean I have to sit outside in the street?
Posted by: Tom | January 29, 2009 at 10:18 AM
We'll bring you out some crisps. I've read two Irving novels, so it'll probably be my penance.
Posted by: Chris Williams | January 29, 2009 at 01:01 PM
Mixed feelings:
http://ellissharp.blogspot.com/2006/12/updike-glitter.html
I would recommend Marry Me.
Posted by: Ellis Sharp | January 30, 2009 at 10:23 PM
But I already Engaged
Posted by: ejh | January 31, 2009 at 09:59 AM