# Is John Updike still "important"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 9, 2014, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-john-updike-still-important/704192 "2014-11-09T23:45:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2014, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-john-updike-still-important/704192/41 "2014-11-13T23:29:34Z")
> [@Les\_Espaces\_Du\_Sommeil](#): > > Movies that aim first and foremost to sell as many tickets as possible certainly are not High Art. > > Not all movies are like that, though. Why do you think Dickens wrote? Why do you think he got so up in arms about how American publishers were operating under a looser copyright regime at the time and were therefore publishing his works without paying him, _even though he got full credit_? Hell, how many works did Mozart write simply to finance his lush lifestyle? ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-john-updike-still-important/704192/42 "2014-11-14T00:22:45Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I thought the novel was absolutely banal … I thought banality was not a sad accident for Updike, but rather his goal: to show the banality of suburban life. Still doesn’t make him worth reading; he succeeded too well, too often. ---
**Author:** ![Les\_Espaces\_Du\_Sommeil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/les_espaces_du_sommeil/32/308_2.png) [@Les\_Espaces\_Du\_Sommeil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Les_Espaces_Du_Sommeil)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 8:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-john-updike-still-important/704192/43 "2014-11-14T08:35:57Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > Why do you think Dickens wrote? Why do you think he got so up in arms about how American publishers were operating under a looser copyright regime at the time and were therefore publishing his works without paying him, _even though he got full credit_? > > Hell, how many works did Mozart write simply to finance his lush lifestyle? I was talking about movies whose sole aim is to make money with zero message, insight or emotion. Don’t tell me they don’t exist. Of course great artists are _also_ interested in making money. They have to live. But it’s not the main goal of their work. And it’s definitely not the case for their masterpieces. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Mighty\_Boosh](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_mighty_boosh/32/1755_2.png) [@The\_Mighty\_Boosh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Mighty_Boosh)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-john-updike-still-important/704192/44 "2014-11-14T11:15:18Z")
I like Updike. He captures the C20th existential angst of the run-of-the-mill man quite well; Rabbit is a really good portrayal of the man just bright enough to realise the pointlessness of it all but not articulate enough to express it. Reminds me of a lot of Bruce Springsteen’s music, or even characters like Tony Soprano or Walter White; the sort of ineffectual howl of outrage of a demographic - white men - who are not as necessary as they used to be. Yeah, it’s ridiculous at times, especially when he tries to create female or (most noticeably) black characters; but he does white guys well. That’s more than most writers manage. (And computer games aren’t art. Not yet. Well, maybe some of them are getting there.) ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-john-updike-still-important/704192/45 "2014-11-14T22:08:31Z")
> [@The\_Mighty\_Boosh](#): > > I like Updike. He captures the C20th existential angst of the run-of-the-mill man quite well; Rabbit is a really good portrayal of the man just bright enough to realise the pointlessness of it all but not articulate enough to express it. Reminds me of a lot of Bruce Springsteen’s music, or even characters like Tony Soprano or Walter White; the sort of ineffectual howl of outrage of a demographic - white men - who are not as necessary as they used to be. Yeah, it’s ridiculous at times, especially when he tries to create female or (most noticeably) black characters; but he does white guys well. That’s more than most writers manage. (And computer games aren’t art. Not yet. Well, maybe some of them are getting there.) I value the Rabbit books partly because of their insider’s POV on a (somehwat) alien culture. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-john-updike-still-important/704192/46 "2014-11-14T23:38:57Z")
> [@Belowjob2.0](#): > > I value the Rabbit books partly because of their insider’s POV on a (somehwat) alien culture. Maybe Updike falls into somewhat the same category as Sinclair Lewis: much less widely read now than when he was originally writing, and mainly valuable for how he captured a now-vanished American time and culture. It just now occurred to me to wonder whether the similarity of “Rabbit” to “Babbitt” was intentional. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-john-updike-still-important/704192.md?page=2)