I took down my copy of The Library of America’s collection
of later Updike stories from the shelf. Nine hundred
pages. Eighty-five stores from the mid
70’s to 2008. Most were first published
in The New Yorker, where Updike’s editor for many years was Roger Angell. Reading the first twenty or so of the stories
was like going home for me. Some of them
I remembered from their original publication; a few others I had encountered in
other collections. Some were new to
me. The collection is presented in the
order in which they were written, so the ones I read were from 1974 to 1982, a
time when I was a young adult. Most take
place in the eastern USA, or at least the characters are from there. So it seems familiar.
But familiar isn’t necessarily just positive. I’ve learned a
lot since then. My geographic, cultural, and personal horizons are broader
now. We’ve all grown up a bit. But Updike is so good at depicting particular
times and places. The attitudes, norms,
and trends from those times might seem antiquated now, constrained by
tradition, perhaps missing the point, perhaps making too much of ordinary
difficulty, maybe all to complacently accepting the paternalistic and elitist
heritage from the post-war generation.
For the most part Updike doesn’t preach, he simply reports
what he sees. And the reporting is often brilliant. These stories avoid the showy overly complex
and learned language of many of the novels.
(Updike has been described by a certain feminist as ‘a penis with a
thesaurus’.) They’re simpler and more
straightforward, and in each one he has clear and for the most part narrow
purpose. Often the story points to a
particular moment, a subtle tipping point that the characters will only understand
in retrospect. My favorites include ‘The Fairy Godfathers’ (a telling
commentary on psychiatry and relationships), ‘From the Journal of a Leper’
(maybe a bit obvious but a nicely executed O. Henry-like story), ‘Morocco’ (wistful
thoughts about family).
Updike as a wonderfully graceful and telling way of shifting
the tone near the end of a story. It’s
the place where we sense he’s going to stop describing and meandering. Here he’s getting to the point of it
all. It’s not pedantic or moralistic,
but it is telling. It’s where someone
reading the story aloud would change tone, slow the pace a bit, and look us in
the eye.
Even if his vision was somewhat constrained by circumstance
(he was very much a creature of his time and social status), he was a supremely
skilled writer that genuinely loved the craft. There is much to be learned and
experienced from reading him. And a visit home can warm the heart, even if I
know and am in part grateful that I no longer live there.
No comments:
Post a Comment