1. This review by @WDeresiewicz on Begley's Updike bio is excellent on why Updike will continue to be read: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119200/updike-reviewed-william-deresiewicz …
4. Beyond that, there a many small but telling factual mistakes in Begley, signs he's over-interpreting his material.
-
-
5. Example: Not true that Couples was 1st book Updike dedicated to wife Mary (portrayed as an "ironic" and "possibly hostile" gesture).
-
6. Example: Updike referring to mother as "would-be" writer (p. 17) not a dis -- JU was specifically talking about period when he was young
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.