29 January 2009

John Updike, RIP

John Updike, my favorite novelist, left us this week. I've said something in earlier entries here about the reasons for my admiration. Here's an example: on his novel Seek My Face.

For a man so wonderfully prolific, it is astonishingly difficult to find a sloppy sentence from any keyboard of his.

In TOWARD THE END OF TIME, he writes a sentence that plays with the "first robin of spring" cliche in a manner I find ... well ... intrepid.

"Yesterday," he writes, in the voice of his protagonist, "I spotted my first robin, strutting along the driveway's gravel shoulder in his familiar dusky uniform, gawkily startled into flight by my approach: a stuffy bird, faintly pompous in its portly movements, spoiled by too many songs and poems unaccountably devoted to him."

Now THERE's a man with a way with a cliche! At first you think, "oooh no, first robin of spring! This is going to be like one of those posed pictures of some grinning tourist pretending to hold up the leaning tower of Pisa."

But he is soon taking the picture from an unexpected angle. The robin is in a very particular place, the driveway's gravel shoulder. This isn't nature description, it is a sample of one of the pieces of natue that make it into the regulated spaces of suburbia. Nothing about the "redness" (which never seemed to me properly red) of the robin's breast. Rather, we're reminded of the duskiness of the overall uniform, the creature's propensity for startled gawkiness, etc.

Then we're given some gently unstressed alliteration with the letter "p": "pompous ... portly ... spoiled ... poems" on the way of a shocking bit of anthropomorphism.

Of course we don't believe that the robin is aware of his fame in the cliched songs and poems, but we see the free associations going on in the head of the protagonist to that effect, and to some extent we are drawn to share in them.

Cheers, then, to Updike. I'll miss him.

3 comments:

Henry said...

Christopher,

I like Updike's sentence about the robin very much, and your commentary on it is good too. I write about an aspect of it that you may not have noticed. As an animal rights advocate, I am sensitive to the use of "it" to refer to an animal, as non-human animals, like human ones, have a sex. In the sentence you quote, Updike refers to the bird as both "it" and "him." What do you make of that?

Christopher said...

Henry,

I hadn't noticed the "it," but now that you bring it up, I think the word -- and the alternation between "it" and "he," well chosen.

By the time Updike reaches the phrase "a stuffy bird," we are no longer talking or thinking about this particular organism, but about robins in general, about robinhood (if I may risk a punning reference to medieval English banditry)!

The generality of robinhood is an "it." At the end of the sentence, we are more fully committed to the act of anhropomorphism, and THIS robin is said to have been influenced by all the songs and poems, so the gendered pronoun returns.

Henry said...

Christopher,

It had not occurred to me that "it" refers to robinhood, and I find that plausible, but don't think that the question can be resolved. And I see nothing in the portion of the sentence after the colon, other than the switch from "it" to "him," to suggest that Updike meant to switch his reference within that portion of the sentence. What I mean is that the features of "it" (stuffiness, pomposity, and portly movements) would apply to a particular robin as readily as would "spoiled by too many songs and poems . . . ." But, whether you are right or not, I'm glad that you replied, if only for your brilliant pun!

Knowledge is warranted belief -- it is the body of belief that we build up because, while living in this world, we've developed good reasons for believing it. What we know, then, is what works -- and it is, necessarily, what has worked for us, each of us individually, as a first approximation. For my other blog, on the struggles for control in the corporate suites, see www.proxypartisans.blogspot.com.