updikes prose is way to convaluted and trying to dazzle the reader with his style. the sentences were to long and the descriptions were just far to out there. it was like i was reading science fiction at some points. the ending was also terrible. is harry forrest gump? is he just going to run across Pa to California? People think that Stephen King is a hack, but i feel the guy can tell a great story, develop interesting characters, and can get deep without being confusing. i don't like fluff, but i don't wan't to have to get cliff notes to understand what the author is trying to say. i think simplicity and directness is often the better road to take. Top of FormI am somewhat embarrassed to admit that, prior to checking out "Rabbit, Run" from the library a few days ago, I had never read ANYTHING in my 38 years by John Updike. What a mistake! First, as many other reviewers (here and elsewhere) have pointed out, Updike is an amazing, powerful, beautiful prose stylist. In my opinion, and admittedly having only read one Updike book ("Rabbit, Run") now, I would say that he ranks up there as one of the greatest American fiction writers of the 20th century. In some ways (stylistically and thematically), Updike reminds me of another great (albeit problematic) American 20th century writer, Norman Mailer (his masterpiece, "The Naked and the Dead," specifically comes to mind). Second, I'm just in awe of how clearly, accurately, and powerfully Updike - at only 28 years of age (!) - was able to say so much in "Rabbit, Run," capturing the zeitgeist of a time and place (drab, grey, conformist, late 1950s suburban American hell, as epitomized by Brewer, Pennsylvania), and presenting his characters with such nuance, balance, wisdom, honesty, and - most importantly - truth. Incredible. Finally, I don't feel that it's an exaggeration to say that "Rabbit, Run" (and its sequels, which I haven't read, but have read about) is one of the most important achievem...
