First, I figure I could probably have a decently intelligent conversation about the parameters of John Updike's oeuvre without ever actually having read one of his novels all the way through. Then, the ridiculousness of that statement makes me laugh. Finally, (almost instantly) I go back to figuring I could pull it off anyhow.Incidental cultural knowledge is no small thing.
Neither is the misappropriation of the word 'intelligent.'
7 comments:
Toddy, I have also never read J.U.'s novels, but I once saw him at a Harvard commencement ceremony and couldn't believe that his nose was actually as large, or larger, than those many caricatures make it seem.
As for his writing, I tried a few short stories in the New Yorker and found them boring, but I've always imagined his novels would be like John Cheever meets Montgomery Clift, or something like that. Was Pink Floyd referring to his Rabbit Run or vice versa? Or neither?
Who fucking knows Dan. Who fucking knows.
You could. One only needs to read the super hilarious review of Toward the End of Time by David Foster Wallace to get all of John Updike in a nutshell. It is sad that both of these writers are now dead; sadder about Wallace though.
I have theory about men with big noses. Men with big noses who are industrious, intelligent and possessing of big noses.
updike is not one of us, he is of the previous generation - and he is not aging well - history won't be kind to him.
this is fine, history can't be kind to everyone -
literary attrition
I've never read John Updike, and probably won't in the near future, but for anyone to call him 'dated'(paraphrasing) feels sanctimonious and vastly immature. Almost stupid actually. Sometimes things aren't apparent when we
think they should be.
This just go sooo interesting.
Post a Comment