Pride and prejudice

   

     Lindsay's post on John Updike's Rabbit, Run got me thinking about (irrational?) reactions to books we haven't read. I've never read Updike, though two members of my family rate the Rabbit books highly, but despite their views and Lindsay's piece, I'd be hard put to it to pick up that book. Why? Nothing to do with the quality of the writing, of course, as I know the author's reputation, but the subject matter and the main character strike me as decidedly seedy - that's about the best term I can come up with to describe the impression I have, one based on odd fragments of information gleaned here and there but all contributing to preconceptions and negative prejudice. I don't much want to read anything seedy and sordid, and the Rabbit bloke sounds dire (to me), so in the absence of an obligation to read it I would pass it by. My loss, perhaps, but that's the point, and I would stress that I take no pride in any prejudice, whether pro or con.

     Despite having a generally open mind (and the above is uncharacteristic for me) I can't approach the super-human level of neutrality evinced by Dark Puss in his comment when I posted on the latest Book Group title and concluded with the hope that the choice met with approval!
     But what about you - any literary prejudices? Any books you run from, Rabbit-like?

Comments

[Karol/New York City]

I have avoided Updike's fiction because of the misogynistic slant of some of it, most especially the Rabbit tetralogy. However, I have been reading his non-fiction in The New Yorker magazine for years, and he was an extraordinary writer (a painter of pictures with words). His death in late January saddened me deeply because he represents a literary figure whose breadth and depth we won't see again (certainly not in the USA). So, I have decided to read his collection of early stories as well as In the Beauty of the Lilies (a novel recommended to me by an Updike fan) and the Henry Bech stories. As for the Rabbit books, I may wait awhile before deciding to tackle them. I have come to realize that a reader is not necessarily supposed to love the characters in a book, but I still don't think I can deal with Roger "Rabbit" Angstrom and his views of women.

[Mary Ronan Drew]

Like you, I've been reluctant to read the Rabbit saga. A book with a character named Angst-rom makes me nervous.

md

[Dark Puss]

As Cornflower knows, Dark Puss can achieve super-human things because he has gone over to the Dark Side! If I have a prejudice (and my aim in recent years is to put such things to the test) it is that I would not like "romantic fiction". I am not really sure what "romantic fiction" is (or romance for that matter ...), but it is an off-putting characterisation that seems to be applied to certain novels.

As a modern physicist I of course sympathise with Mary Ronan Drew's comment, surely he should be called Nano-metre!

[litlove]

Run, Rabbit, IS a seedy book, and if you don't fancy it I agree there's no reason to read it. If you wanted to try Updike, though, I'd suggest Marry Me, which is an altogether easier and wholly inoffensive read, unless the topic of adultery is out for you completely.

I've never read an Isaac Asimov, despite the fact that he said that after having done something difficult, like socialising, he'd reward himself with time at his typewriter. So I like the sound of him as a person a lot. It's just that sort of standard science fiction I'm not yet ready to approach.

[Cornflower]

Thanks, Litlove, I've noted your Updike suggestion which sounds more appealing than Rabbit!

[Karen/NYC]

Tolkein. No reason, really. Tried to read the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy as a teenager, then again in my 20s, thinking that I really SHOULD. Never got beyond the first chapter of the first book! So -- haven't read them; haven't seen the movies; don't plan to.
Karen
bookishnyc.typepad.com

[adele geras]

I am also ALLLERGIC to Tolkein. My best friend at school kept trying and trying to make me read it as she was a passionate fan and I CANNOT! Just cannot. My eyes literally CLOSE on page one. I tried the movie and the same thing happened. I'd turned it off in minutes. Can't help it.
I hesitate to say that I loved the Rabbit books! But I did, esp. the last one.

[Becky]

I refused/refuse, on principle, to read Brett Easton Ellis's American Psycho, on the grounds of its seediness (thank you for that word, and for the right to object to it in books!). According to its reviews, it simply takes the reader a place I have no. interest. in. going. ever.

I think a little personal moral boundary setting is fine--even refreshing!--so long as I don't try to stop others from reading what I exclude (can you tell I'm on the Board of our local library?)!

[Jenny]

I agree about American Psycho. No interest there. And I generally am not interested in chick-lit or series romance, though if someone tells me it's just fantastic, I might try it -- but it will still be with reservations! The more I read, the more I want to read. I've now read genres I thought I would hate before (westerns, for example) and loved them. As long as a book is well-written, it doesn't seem to matter what sort of book it is.