Showing posts with label John Updike. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Updike. Show all posts

Friday, September 8, 2023

William Boyd on Writers Who Inspired Him

 

William Boyd


William Boyd on Writers Who Inspired Him

The novelist William Boyd tells us about the authors, from Chekhov to Heller, who most influenced his own development as a writer – and reveals the secret to a well-crafted sex scene


After writing 17 novels, do you feel as inspired now as you did 20 or 30 years ago?

Yes, I do actually. Funnily enough, I feel in the last three of four years a new surge of energy. I don’t know whether it’s because I’m getting older, but I actually feel I’m working harder than I’ve worked ever before in my life. I seem to have so many things on. It’s not by any great intent, it’s just the way things have panned out.  I can’t write for as long as I used to. I used to write for five hours a day and now I’m down to about three. But I do feel very creatively energised as I approach my 60th birthday, which is reassuring. It’s strange how these things happen. It’s not just new novels, I’m also writing short stories and for film and television. I feel very busy and I enjoy that. I don’t feel under any pressure so obviously the brain is still working well.

Thursday, November 17, 2022

Book Review 088 / Rabbit Redux by John Updike / Man in the Middle




Rabbit Redux
by John Updike

Man in the Middle


Sam Tanenhaus
November 8, 2012

As the long election night began to take shape, all eyes remained fixed on the swing states. Some were on the Eastern Seaboard (Florida, Virginia), others in the West (Colorado, Nevada). In most cases the outcome hinged on the marshaling of dependable blocs of voters.

Saturday, March 12, 2022

Hide-and-Seek / The complete Isaac Babel

Isaac Babel
by David Levine



Hide-and-Seek
The complete Isaac Babel

By John Updike
October 28, 2001

Isaac Babel was born in the Moldavanka, a poor, raffish district of Odessa, in 1894, and died, it has been established only within the last ten years, in Moscow's Lubyanka prison, early in the morning on January 27, 1940. He was shot by a firing squad after a twenty-minute trial held the day before in the private chambers of Lavrenti Beria, the notorious head of the K.G.B.'s predecessor, the N.K.V.D. Babel was convicted of "active participation in an anti-Soviet Trotskyite organization" and of "being a member of a terrorist conspiracy, as well as spying for the French and Austrian governments." He had confessed, during the previous eight months of imprisonment and interrogation, to charges of espionage, but his last recorded statement protested, "I am innocent. I have never been a spy. I never allowed any action against the Soviet Union. . . . I am asking for only one thing—let me finish my work."

Monday, November 5, 2018

John Updike / Have we fallen out of love with John Updike?

John Updike
Poster by T.A.

Have we fallen out of love 

with John Updike?


Three years after John Updike's death, his reputation appears to be on the wane. But who else can match his deftness and grace?

Sarah Crown
Tuesday 15 May 2012 17.02 BST




Happy news from across the water. 117 Philadelphia Ave, Shillington, childhood home of John Updike, has been bought by the Updike Society for what seems, to one humbled by the London property market, a snip at $200000. Their plan is to run the house as an "historic site" - restored, presumably, to something like the condition it would have been in when Updike was in residence, and open by appointment to visiting "writers and scholars".
All well and good - and unquestionably the Updike Society has done a fine thing in saving the home of Pennsylvania's most famous son for the nation, particularly given the traces this early environment would leave on his work down the line (Shillington is a suburb of Reading, PA, the city which Updike makes over into Brewer, PA; its landmarks are also scattered through his early novels and his short fiction). But reading about the plans in the wake of a roadtrip round New England's college towns and their bookshops, during which we were lucky to come across the odd copy of Rabbit, Run or Couples tucked between the serried ranks of BellowVonnegut and Morrison, I find myself wondering whether, in fact, it's enough.
This is hopelessly subjective, of course, but for me, Updike is THE American novelist of the late 20th century, picking up where HemingwayFitzgerald andSteinbeck left off. Through his Rabbit novels alone, which follow the fluctuating fortunes of high school basketball ace Harry Angstrom from 1960-2001, Updike furnished us with a roadmap of his country's postwar progress, from 50s smalltown conservatism through the upheaval of Vietnam and race relations to complacent and bloated late capitalism, all inked in prose whose airy loveliness consistently astonishes. When his death was announced in early 2009, panegyricspiled rapidly upon encomia - but in the years since, his reputation appears to have suffered a gradual but definite slump. Writing on Salon at the beginning of this year, Katie Roiphe picked up on this "subtle fall from fashion" and talked engagingly about what she views as "the bizarre and misguided critical assault on [his] reputation". As well as addressing the oft-repeated criticism of his "misogynist" characters ("even if this is true, and it's arguably not the full and nuanced truth ... novels portraying the minds of totally fair minded, upstanding, liberal people with very few conflicts about conventional life, who treat everyone around them extremely nicely, seem destined or at least highly likely to be sort of blah"), she also wonders whether, in fact, in a post-Sarah Palin world, "the idea is that we should somehow distrust Updike because he is too good a writer. The word stylish in this way of thinking becomes a slur, as does the word beautiful."
As if in response to this vague miasma of disapprobation, James Plath, president of the Updike Society (membership stands at a scant 250), adopted a faintly apologetic tone when speaking to local paper the Reading Eagle about their acquisition of the house. He concentrated primarily on emphasising the lack of disruption that the change of ownership would cause to local residents, saying "we believe there will be far less traffic than in the current (commercial) use of the building," and explaning that "out of respect for the residential neighborhood ... he expects the historic site to be open only by appointment and not list regular hours." Really, one has to wonder, how much trouble would it be to have a trickle of tourists passing through the doors? Granted the Eagle is a local paper, much concerned with traffic and zoning laws, but if the residents of Shillington aren't hollering to have Updike's house made over into a permanent museum, then perhaps his standing has slipped further than I realised. Which seems to me to be a crying shame. I've yet to come across the novelist currently writing who simultaneously celebrates and skewers America with the Updike's deftness and grace. Until s/he comes along, let's continue to pay him our respects.


THE GUARDIAN



John Updike / Running away by Julian Barnes



Rereading

Running away

When Julian Barnes first read the Rabbit quartet on a book tour of the States he was overwhelmed by Updike's joy of description. Twenty years later, he still thinks it is the greatest postwar American fiction

Julian Barnes
17 October 2009 


W
hen a writer you admire dies, rereading seems a normal courtesy and tribute. Occasionally, it may be prudent to resist going back: when Lawrence Durrell died, I preferred to remain with 40-year-old memories of The Alexandria Quartet rather than risk such lushness again. And sometimes the nature of the writer's oeuvre creates a problem of choice. This was the case with John Updike. I have only ever met one person – a distinguished arts journalist – who has read all Updike's 60-plus books; most of us, even long-term fans, probably score between 30 and 40. Should you choose one of those previously unopened? Or go for one you suspect you misread, or undervalued, at the time? Or one, like Couples, which you might have read for somewhat non-literary reasons?



The decision eventually made itself. I had first read the Rabbit quartet in the autumn of 1991, in what felt near-perfect circumstances. I was on a book tour of the States, and bought the first volume, Rabbit, Run, in a Penguin edition at Heathrow airport. I picked up the others in different American cities, in chunky Fawcett Crest paperbacks, and read them as I criss-crossed the country; my bookmarks were the stubs of boarding passes. When released from publicity duties, I would either retreat inwards to Updike's prose, or outwards to walk ordinary American streets. This gave my reading, it felt, a deepening stereoscopy. And even when, too exhausted to do anything, I fell back on the hotel minibar and the television, I found I was only replicating Harry "Rabbit" Angstrom's preferred way of ingesting politics and current events. After three weeks, both Harry and I found ourselves in Florida, "death's favourite state", as he puts it in the final volume, Rabbit at Rest. Harry died; the book ended; my tour was over.

I came home convinced that the quartet was the best American novel of the postwar period. Nearly 20 years on, with Updike newly dead, and another American journey coming up, it was time to check on that judgment. By now those four volumes had been fused into a 1,516-page hardback under the overall title Rabbit Angstrom. If the protagonist's nickname denotes a zigzagging creature of impulse and appetite, the angst of his Scandinavian surname indicates that Harry is also the bearer of a more metaphysical burden. Not that he is more than fleetingly aware of it; and the fact that he isn't makes him all the more emblematically American. John Cheever once said that Updike's characters performed their lives amid a landscape – a moral and spiritual one – of whose grandeur they were unaware.


John Updike in 1950s. Photograph: Elemore Morgan Jr

Harry is a specific American, a high-school basketball star, department-store underling, linotype operator and, finally, Toyota car salesman in the decaying industrial town of Brewer, Pennsylvania (Updike based it on Reading, Pa, which he knew as a boy). Until Rabbit starts wintering in Florida in the final volume, he scarcely leaves Brewer – a location chosen to represent middle America by a New York film company in Rabbit Redux. Harry is site-specific, slobbish, lust-driven, passive, patriotic, hard-hearted, prejudiced, puzzled, anxious. Yet familiarity renders him likeable – for his humour, his doggedness, his candour, his curiosity and his wrong-headed judgments – for example, preferring Perry Como to Frank Sinatra. But Updike was disappointed when readers went further and claimed they found Rabbit lovable: "My intention was never to make him – or any character – lovable." Instead, Harry is typical, and it takes an outsider to tell him so. An Australian doctor, asked by his wife Janice what is wrong with Rabbit's dicky heart, replies: "The usual thing, ma'am. It's tired and stiff and full of crud. It's a typical American heart, for his age and economic status etcetera." Harry's quiet role as an American everyman is publicly confirmed in Rabbit at Rest when he is chosen for his second, brief moment of public fame: dressing up as Uncle Sam for a town parade.
Rereading the quartet, I was struck by how much of the book is about running away: Harry, Janice and Nelson all take off at different points, and all return defeatedly. (Updike explained that Rabbit, Run was partly a riposte to Kerouac's On the Road, and intended as a "realistic demonstration of what happens when a young American family man goes on the road" – ie, the family gets hurt, and the deserter slinks home.) I had forgotten how harshly transactional much of the sex was; how increasingly droll Rabbit becomes as he ages (Reagan reminds him of God, in that "you never knew how much he knew, nothing or everything", while Judaism "must be a great religion, once you get past the circumcision"); how masterfully Updike deploys free indirect style, switching us in and out of the main characters' consciousness; and how, instead of making each sequel merely sequential, he is constantly back-filling previous books with new information (the most extreme example being that we only get Janice's pre-Rabbit sexual history in the 2000 follow-up novella Rabbit Remembered – 40 years after we might have learned it).
What I remembered well was the audacity of Updike's starting-point. Harry is only 26, but past it: his brief years of sporting fame lie behind him, and he is already bored with Janice. On the second page, he refers to himself as "getting old" – and there are still several hundred thousand words to go. Even when he attains bovine contentment and material success in Rabbit is Rich, it is against a general background of things being over before they had really begun. Each book is purposefully set at the dying of a decade – from the 1950s to the 1980s – so there is little wider sense of fresh beginnings: the 1960s America of Rabbit Redux isn't filled with love and peace and hopefulness, but with hatred, violence and craziness as the decade sours and dies. Perhaps America is itself dying, or at least being outpaced by the world: this is what Harry, and the novel, both wonder. What is American power if it can be defeated by the Vietcong; what is American inventiveness if it can be out-invented by the Japanese; what is American wealth when national debt piles up? In Rabbit Redux Harry feels he has "come in on the end" of the American dream, "as the world shrank like an apple going bad"; by the start of Rabbit is Rich he feels "the great American ride is ending"; by the end of Rabbit at Rest "the whole free world is wearing out".
Whereas in my first reading I was overwhelmed by Updike's joy of description, his passionate attentiveness to such things as "the clunky suck of the refrigerator door opening and shutting" – by what he called, in the preface to his The Early Stories, "giving the mundane its beautiful due" – in my second I was increasingly aware of this underlying sense of things being already over, of the tug of dying and death. Thus the whole trajectory of Janice's life is an attempt to expiate the sin of having accidentally, drunkenly, drowned her baby. And while Harry imagines himself a genial and harmless life-enhancer, others see him quite differently. "Boy, you really have the touch of death, don't you?" his sort-of-whore girlfriend Ruth says at the end of Rabbit, Run. "Hold still. Just sit there. I see you very clear all of a sudden. You're Mr Death himself." Harry's son Nelson agrees with this analysis. In Rabbit Redux, Harry is away on another sexual escapade when his house burns down, killing the runaway hippie Jill; teenage Nelson, equally smitten by the girl, thereafter treats his father as a simple murderer. And in Rabbit at Rest Harry fears his female-killing curse is striking a third time when his rented Sunfish capsizes and his granddaughter Judy is nowhere to be seen. This time, as it happens, the hex is reversed: Judy is only hiding beneath the sail, and the scare triggers Rabbit's first heart attack, a dry run for his death.
And after death? Harry's intimations, not of immortality, but of the numinous, show up more clearly on rereading. Updike said that he couldn't quite give up on religion, because without the possibility or dream of something beyond and above, our terrestrial life became unendurable. Rabbit shares this vestigial need. "I don't not believe," he assures his dying lover Thelma, who replies, "That's not quite enough, I fear. Harry, darling." But it's all he can manage: "Hell, what I think about religion is ... is without a little of it, you'll sink." But this "little" doesn't find or express itself, as did Updike's, in churchgoing. God-believers in the quartet tend to be either crazies like Skeeter, fanatics, or pious post-Narcotics Anonymous droners like Nelson. Harry is not exactly a joined-up thinker, but he has an occasionally questing mind, a sense of what it might be if there were something beyond our heavy-footed sublunary existence. It's perhaps significant that the sport at which he excelled, which he plays in both the opening and closing pages of the tetralogy, involves a leaving of the ground and a reaching-up to something higher, if only to a skirted hoop. A greater reaching-up is offered by the US space programme, whose achievements (and failures) run through the book; Harry has a couch potato's fascination for it – as he does for the fate of the Dalai Lama, with whom he bizarrely, mock-heroically identifies. But there are also moments when Harry is able to recognise his longings more precisely. Beside the big stucco house belonging to Janice's parents there grew a large copper beech, which for many years shaded Harry and Janice's bedroom. When Nelson comes into occupation of the family house, in Rabbit at Rest, he has the tree cut down. Harry doesn't argue; nor can he "tell the boy that the sound of the rain in that great beech had been the most religious experience of his life. That, and hitting a pure golf shot." In such moments Rabbit exemplifies a kind of suburban pantheism, giving the mundane its spiritual due.
Rabbit Angstrom has its imperfections. The second volume is usually considered the weakest of the four; and it's true that Skeeter's mau-mauing of whitey Rabbit goes on too long, and to decreasing effect. And there is a change in register after the first volume, where the hushed Joyceanism of his early mode – when he thought of himself as a short-story writer and poet, but not yet fully as a novelist – is to the fore. (Updike didn't realise that he was heading towards a tetralogy until after the second volume.) On the other hand, it's rare for a work of this length to get even better as it goes on, with Rabbit at Rest the strongest and richest of the four books. In the last hundred pages or so, I found myself slowing deliberately, not so much because I didn't want the book to end, as because I didn't want Rabbit to die. (And when he does, his last words, to his shrieking son, are, maybe, also addressed consolingly to the reader: "All I can tell you is, it isn't so bad.") Any future historian wanting to understand the texture, smell, feel and meaning of bluey-white-collar life in ordinary America between the 1950s and the 1990s will need little more than the Rabbit quartet. But that implies only sociological rather than artistic virtue. So let's just repeat: still the greatest postwar American novel.





2002


2013

Sunday, November 20, 2016

John Updike / A brief survey of the short story

John Updike
Poster by T.A.

A brief survey of the short story 64 : John Updike


The longevity and prodigal output of this ‘conspicuously autobiographical writer’ give his complete works – and especially his celebrated stories – the shape of an entire life 

Chris Power
Thursday 19 February 2015 15.03 GMT


I
n his 1960 story, The Blessed Man of Boston, My Grandmother’s Thimble, and Fanning Island, John Updike’s narrator expresses the challenge of capturing life in words. “[W]e would-be novelists have a reach as shallow as our skins,” he writes. “We walk through volumes of the unexpressed and like snails leave behind a faint thread excreted out of ourselves. From the dew of the few flakes that melt on our faces we cannot reconstruct the snowstorm.” In a lecture given 16 years later, Updike described himself as a person “whose chemistry must daily secrete a written page or two”, and the expression of writing as a natural process was wholly appropriate: for him, living was writing. In fact, the thread he secreted was enormous: 63 books in 50 years, including more than 20 novels and more than a dozen short-story collections.


William Maxwell, Updike’s first editor at the New Yorker, described him as a “conspicuously autobiographical writer”, a trait that, coupled with his longevity and prolificacy, gives his complete works the shape of an entire life. Teenage narrators in semi-rural Pennsylvania give way to young professionals in New York, marital strain, the death of parents, child-rearing and adultery in suburban Massachusetts, ageing and affluence, wistful longing for the energies of youth and, finally, an obsessive return to one’s beginnings (half of the stories in the posthumous collection My Father’s Tears are set in Olinger, Updike’s fictional version of his childhood home).
In Updike’s earliest stories, Salinger and Hemingway occasionally jut from the text. The narrator of A&P (1961) is unmistakably a Salinger type, while in Pigeon Feathers (also 1961), the teenage protagonist confronts an incipient fear of death in distinctly Papa-like fashion: by turning that fear outwards and visiting death on others. As he massacres pigeons in the family barn the prose becomes terser, culminating in lines that could be Hemingway’s: “He climbed down, and was struck by the silence in the barn. The remaining pigeons must have escaped out the other hole. That was all right; he was tired of it.”
These influences were soon overlaid and overtaken: by Henry Green, whomUpdike’s biographer Adam Begley believes encouraged in the author “a looser, more flowing” syntax, and more striking metaphors; by Proust and Joyce, two writers expert at mining their own lives for fiction, and by Nabokov, whose fine-tooled descriptive talent clearly appealed. The Russian’s taste for metafictional games also left a mark, inspiring Updike’s Jewish-American alter ego Henry Bech: a humorous offshoot from his vast literary project.
Elizabeth Hardwick called Updike “[a]s productive of print as a Victorian”, describing his work as “efflorescent in observed detail, prodigal in image, brashly knowing and accomplished in the rhythms of current dialogue, and steaming with the orifices and bodily fluids of many fluent copulations”. Some see Updike’s voluminousness as irrepressibility, others as indigestible self-absorption. “Does the son of a bitch ever have an unpublished thought?” David Foster Wallace reported “a friend” asking, while Frank Kermode wrote about those instances “when the prolific becomes prolix”. But where they saw clutter,Cynthia Ozick saw “busy Bruegelian amplitude”; and Alfred Kazin judged – with only slight ambiguity – that: “John Updike writes as if there were no greater pleasure than reconstituting the world by writing.” They are each right, in a sense: there is enough Updike, with enough difference in quality, that you could plausibly read a lot of him without encountering a dud, and read just as much in another, unluckier direction without encountering anything particularly good. Few writers are more in need of a well-chosen collection of selected stories.
In lieu of one, some signposting is required. The best place to begin is in Olinger, as these stories probably represent the best of all his work, including the novels. The aforementioned Pigeon Feathers, rich in symbol and metaphor, is the most powerful of them. The Happiest I’ve Been (1958) is a superb evocation of a young man at manhood’s border, when the world simultaneously opens yet remains unfathomable (and how that implicitly despairing title subtly inflects the story!). Flight (1959) gives prominence to the strong mother who appears in many of Updike’s stories, and studies the ways in which one generation imprints its hope, frustrations and disappointment on to the next.
These stories, sprawling acts of memory, are about family, ambition and first love, but their common, fundamental theme is time. Updike writes a great deal about families, but while the elements of his typical family unit – child, parents and grandparents – suggest continuity through time, it is a sense of death and oblivion that dominates his stories. Updike might state, in his introduction to his collected Early Stories, that his aim was to “describe reality as it had come to me – to give the mundane its beautiful due”, but his work often struggles with an apprehension of death that undercuts the wistfulness of this definition.

A Sandstone Farmhouse (1990), an extraordinary story about the death of a parent, provides an example of the harsh wall that encircles Updike’s conception of the world. The narrator remembers a night in the old family home with his mother, towards the end of her life:
He was aware of his mother and himself, laying each in bed, as survivors of a larger party that had once occupied this house. It was as if, on a snowy pass, they had killed and eaten the others, and now one of the two remaining must perish next.
This apprehension appears elsewhere. In Packed Dirt, Churchgoing, a Dying Cat, a Traded Car (1961), the narrator lies in bed on his birthday and feels “death like a wide army advancing”. In Lifeguard (1960), a young divinity student admits that in the night he feels “my death rushing toward me like an express train”. In Pigeon Feathers, meanwhile, David Kern envisages death as “a long hole in the ground, no wider than your body, down which you are drawn while the white faces recede … Shovels pour dirt into your face”. A couple’s holiday with old friends in storm-struck East Anglia becomes a compelling metaphor for the violence and transience of life in The Afterlife (1986), and in Playing With Dynamite (1992), the nostalgia of the narrator, “living now in death’s immediate neighbourhood”, is deepened and darkened by the detail of a neighbour whose body lies undiscovered for days.
In 1985, Updike told an interviewer about the “sense of futility and of doom and of darkness” in his fiction. He perceived death “behind everything in life, a sort of black backdrop”, while in a later scrap of memoir he admits that in 1955, aged 23, he was already “fearful and desolate, foreseeing, young as I was, that I would die, and that the substance of the earth was, therefore, death”. On Desert Island Discs in 1995 he said: “I’m always aware of my own death in me like a baby, getting bigger every day.” All the cliches of Updike’s fiction – from adultery to middle-class mores to religious crises to golf – are figures played above this ground bass of death. His work is more a threnody for life than a celebration of it.
This spurs Updike to both cruelty and beauty. The self-consciously Joycean Wife-wooing (1960), from the extended story cycle about Richard and Joan Maple (a married couple whose affairs and eventual divorce are a precise recounting of Updike’s own first marriage), contains one of his most merciless passages. Sitting in front of the fire with his family, Richard regards his wife lustfully, and anticipates having sex after the children have been put to bed. But she would rather read about Nixon, and falls asleep reading. Richard’s resentment lasts overnight:
In the morning, to my relief, you are ugly. Monday’s wan breakfast light bleaches you blotchily, drains the goodness from your thickness, makes the bathrobe a limp stained tube flapping disconsolately, exposing sallow décolletage. The skin between your breasts a sad yellow. I feast with the coffee on your drabness. Every wrinkle and sickly tint a relief and a revenge. The children yammer. The toaster sticks. Seven years have worn this woman.than many can hope for – deserve the permanence we ourselves are denied.
 Behind the harsh judgment of the spurned lover lies the conception that life’s prime is so brief as to almost be a dream. The previous night, in the romantic but also obscuring firelight, the narrator could see “the orange shadows on the ceiling sway with fresh life”, but in the pale light of day such illusions are stripped away.
The same, apparently revelatory, light of day ends Plumbing (1970), one of Updike’s most successful evocations of life’s impermanence. He habitually made the attempt to invest everyday moments with resonance – a task he failed to complete at least as often as he succeeded, but does so here beautifully. Through a conversation between Richard Maple and a plumber in the cellar of an old, newly purchased house, and Richard’s flow of thoughts about the house just departed – once busy with their lives, now silent (“I feel guilty that we occupied it so thinly, that a trio of movers and a day’s breezes could so completely clean us out”) – Updike establishes an intricate pattern, whereby every symbol of rebirth, from the new house and pipework to the memory of an Easter egg hunt, is revealed to be a fresh opportunity for something to end; stages on the journey to death. “‘Don’t you want to be a big girl like Judith?’” Richard remembers asking his youngest child. ‘“Then you can wear lipstick, and a bra, and ride you bicycle even on Central Street.’” But the child doesn’t want to ride her bike on Central Street. “Why not?” he asks. “Because then I will get to be an old lady and die.” At the story’s conclusion, Richard and the plumber leave the cellar. “We push out through the bulkhead, a blinding piece of sky slides into place above us, fitted with temporary, timeless clouds. All around us, we are outlasted”.
“I cannot greatly care what critics say of my work,” Updike said in 1968. “If it is good, it will come to the surface in a generation or two and float, and if not, it will sink.” Much of his work, despite the nearly unfailing presence of a memorable simile, or pitch-perfect phrase, will disappear in time. Some – a small amount by Updike’s standards perhaps, but more than many can hope for – deserve the permanence we ourselves are denied.