I had higher expectations for "Pairs", but... I wasn't impressed at all.

The beginning started promisingly, but then I got lost in a multitude of characters, whose point I lost, and in details and verbosity that were absolutely unnecessary in my opinion.

If I have to be honest, the book was slightly boring and tiresome to me, almost as much as the lives of the characters in "Pairs".

However...

The novel is definitely provocative and scandalous for its time, harsh, original, cynical. It was interesting for me to see a different authorial perspective on human relationships. I liked how Updike shoots right on target with his directness, without detours and pretentiousness, but the cynicism was a bit too much for my taste.

The author had the courage to speak openly about human impulse, to show the depravity that has always been present and is present in a person, whether it is realized or quietly sleeps in his thoughts, and which most people try to hide under the guise of apparent kindness.

COUPLES

John Updike, the author of Couples, was one of only three authors to win the Pulitzer Prize twice, with the others being Booth Tarkington and Ernest Hemingway. Although Couples wasn't one of the winning works, it clearly showcases the mark of a master writer.

The book is set in the fictional seaside town of Tarbox in Massachusetts, which is likely very similar to Ipswich where Updike and his family lived. The couples in Tarbox are comfortable middle or upper-middle-class (mostly) White people with various religious beliefs (or none at all) - Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or nothing. The men have different professions, while the wives don't work but many volunteer in schools or charities. This gives the wives free time to do as they please, although some have children to take care of. The book is really about the couples and their interactions, with Piet Hanema, the Dutch boy from Michigan, being the central character.

The time frame is from 24 March 1962 to Spring 1964 and beyond, and it integrates specific historic events into the narrative, such as the loss of the USS Thresher and the assassination of President Kennedy on 22 November 1963. In the 1960s, there was a craze among couples to form alliances outside of marriage. In this book, the couples often gather for parties, football games, picnics, dinners, and ski vacations, and at these functions, they become enamored of one another beyond their marital bonds. The infidelities usually occur without the knowledge or tacit consent of the cuckolded spouses, at least at first. The book deals with some of the consequences of this behavior.
The book's title is a pun. There are 10 married couples, and then there are couples who form extra-marital alliances. And "couple" is what both sets of couples do. I don't remember the names or relationships as well as I should, and I made the mistake of not creating a score-card to keep track of who was married to whom and who coupled outside of marriage, who was jealous, and who snitched.
Couples is high literature by an honest chronicler of this behavior. A great deal of ink is spent on developing the backgrounds of each individual, couple, and their families, the situations they find themselves in, and how they became involved with their lovers. There are also some very explicit descriptions of love-making, but it's a tiny fraction of the narrative and is tastefully done. Still, it doesn't leave the reader uninterested. Updike had clearly experienced a lot in life and in love.

Overall, Couples is a complex and engaging novel that explores the themes of marriage, infidelity, and human relationships in a thought-provoking way.

In true Updike form, this book is an absolute masterpiece of creative writing.

His descriptive narrative is simply captivating and continues to leave a lasting impression on me.

What sets Updike apart from other authors I have read is his remarkable use of vocabulary.

He has the ability to describe even the simplest of ideas in the most vivid and engaging way.

It is truly a pleasure to read his work and be transported into the worlds he creates.

Thank you once again, John Updike, for another highly entertaining experience.

Your talent and creativity shine through on every page, and I look forward to reading more of your books in the future.

Maybe I'm an idealist when it comes to matters of the heart, romantic idioms, love, and marriage.

It's hard for me to grasp the reality that some people actually live as described in this book.

However, with an entire novel (Couples) and a significant part of at least two of the Rabbit books dedicated to partner "swapping" and "swinging," and other forms of adultery, I'm compelled to accept that this behavior not only exists but that the author, John Updike, actually did it.

This book, not as strong as some of his others, sort of drifts along with a sense of apathy and detachment, mirroring the main character, Piet Hanema, the catalyst for community-wide relationship destruction in a small New England town in the early-mid '60s.

Couples is based on the idea that everyone is unsatisfied, unfulfilled, and unhappy in their marriages, and that good times are only to be found outside the "sacred bond."

I noticed a lot of similarities between the scenarios in this book and the recent AMC original TV series "Mad Men," which is set around the same time.

It's an interesting snapshot of the period. Sexuality seemed to be "on the verge" of something, perhaps driven by and intertwined with the popularization of psychotherapy for the masses, early women's lib, Cold War anxiety, the rise of the middle class, and other socio-political realities of the time.

As for Updike's "heroes," Piet is much harder to like than Harry "Rabbit" Angstrom; he's also not as well-developed.

The best character in Couples is the villain/anti-hero, Freddy Thorne. He has some incredibly sharp and funny lines.

You know when a guilty man attempts to justify his actions, how he endeavors to employ grand philosophical terms and simultaneously showcases all his charm to rationalize the insignificant thing he has done? Well, this entire novel is somewhat similar to that.

It centers around ten couples in suburban America during the 1960s. It is like a medieval orgy of sex, reaching its peak with a moral equivalent of gout. Besides everything else, it is all extremely implausible. A balding middle-aged man of average intelligence and no creative talent, who feels a sort of contemptuous affection for his two young daughters, somehow manages to seduce most of the wives of his group of friends. We learn very little about the motives of the women who yield to this obnoxious man's insatiable desire for sexual conquest.

In this novel, the men have all the best lines and all the volition. I was initially excited due to how well Updike writes (although he also frequently overwrites) and how perceptive he can be about relationships. However, as a novel, it拖沓地goes on and on with the same repetitive rhythm. The denouement, when the chastened hero watches his church burn down, just seems trite as any form of commentary on the irresponsible and gratuitous behavior of all the numerous and often indistinguishable characters in this book. Only because of the quality of the writing does it deserve three stars.

This novel is set in a small town in New England during the 1960s.

It follows several couples who gather for parties on weekends and then engage in sexual relationships, sometimes quite openly.

The story is slightly disturbing and perhaps implausible, especially considering that birth control was newly available at that time.

However, the novel also includes references to current events, such as the assassination of John F. Kennedy, which add context and a sense of historical authenticity.

These references help to ground the story in a specific time and place, and give the reader a better understanding of the social and political climate in which the characters live.

Overall, the novel offers a unique and thought-provoking look at the relationships and lives of a group of people in a small town during a tumultuous period in American history.

This book truly brought my mother to mind. It was a book she might have read, with its pink edged pages, copyrighted in 1968, and the price of $1.25 on the cover (not even an ISBN number). I initially picked up this one due to its reputation for having some steamy content, and I wasn't let down in that regard.

However, that's not the sole reason I gave it five stars. John Updike is an incredibly talented wordsmith. Everything about this book, from the vivid imagery to the depth of his characters and the engaging story line, was of the highest quality. I've never come across such a vivid portrayal of an unlikable character as Piet Hanema.

It was also quite interesting to compare the current social paradigms with the ones that were written decades ago. His use of certain words like "negro" (even "negress") and the mention of the rabbit test were eye-opening. Additionally, the surprising concern for climate change and the fact that political discussions (such as relying on the government and foreign affairs) seem to have remained largely unchanged over the years was quite thought-provoking.

His admiring descriptions of an overweight woman and how everyone found her sexually attractive (or was it perhaps because of her money?) were a bit puzzling to me. I also found it strange how the characters in the book could be so insulting to each other and act as if it was no big deal.

Nevertheless, the prurient aspects of this novel were truly the best. Somehow, Updike managed to handle them in a way that wasn't trashy or vulgar.

I'll definitely have to explore more of Updike's works. One of my favorite quotes from this book is: "Convolute cranny, hair and air, ambrosial chalice where seed can cling." It's almost like poetry!

John Updike's 'Couples' was published in 1968, a significant year as he also graced the cover of Time magazine, with the headline 'The Adulterous Society' referencing the novel. The treatment of sex in the novel sparked a storm of controversy and interest among both the public and critics.

The story is set in the small Massachusetts town of Tarbox and revolves around the relationships of 10 couples. The overarching theme is the negotiation of Protestant monogamy and marriage with the zeitgeist of the time, which included free love and promiscuity.

The tale weaves a web of affairs, some secret and some open, like partner swapping. While the subject matter might seem suited for a scandalous soap opera, the writing is creative, experimental, modernist, and high-brow. The conflict between religiosity and existentialism, coupled with Freudian readings of sex, is a constant undertone beneath the surface of the affluent, polite society. It is a unique modernist combination that is realist yet psychological and sensationalist in content rather than style.

Sporadically, there are sex scenes described in a mixture of vulgar and poetic language, which is where the novel gained its notoriety. The characters are unique, and the novel is challenging in parts and fairly lengthy, but the standard of writing is top-notch.

Themes explored in the novel include the treatment of sex in literature, which prior to the 1960s was often handled with caution. 'Couples' describes sex in both bodily and psychological terms, mixing vulgarity with poetic language. The tradition of monogamy versus the new era of promiscuity is also a central theme, as is the exploration of the thin line between life and death.

The style of the novel is modernist, with Updike's varied lexicon, considered syntax, and descriptive prowess. He is skilled at creating vivid imagery, and the narrative voice is flexible, often reading like stream of consciousness, especially during Piet's anxieties about death. The story is not linear, and the lack of a strict plot adds to the complexity and realism of the novel.

Characterisation is another strength of the novel, with attention given to specific characters to round them out. The use of third-person free indirect discourse further develops the characters, and the dialogue exemplifies the varying ways in which they speak.

In conclusion, 'Couples' is a thought-provoking and complex accomplishment. While it has its flaws, such as the incredulous level of deceit and the length, it is a significant work that explores themes relevant to the 1960s and beyond. The characterisation, dialogue, and writing style are all excellent, making it a worthy read for those interested in modernist literature.

3.9 out of 5

Tai mano pirmoji pažintis su amerikiečių klasiku - John Updike!

The book, which was published in 1968, is very bold and open. Especially in Puritan America at that time, when the talk leans towards the themes of sex and moral issues!

The text is polished, filled with countless descriptions of the political realities of that era, including the assassination of Kennedy.

The excellent portrayal of the upper class in a small town - the upbringing of children, political and religious views, the perspective of various social strata and professions. No, and the most important axis of the whole novel - infidelity and the consequences that cannot be reversed, the deviation of moral norms and "tolerance"!

Another Updike novel "Centaur" published in Lithuanian during the Soviet era is waiting for me!

And for a deeper acquaintance - it is necessary to read in the original language!

A strong 4, even 4.5: -)

I recommend it to the lovers of a solid novel and a profound text - this will not be a simple, forgettable potboiler!

First and foremost, this book was simply too long. The initial couple of hundred pages felt entirely unnecessary. They offered exposition that had little to no impact on the overall story.诚然，这本书本应是关于夫妻的（见书名），但实际上它主要是关于Piet的。这倒也无妨。但如果你真的要专注于一个角色……你就得全身心投入。在我看来，厄普代克花了太长时间才真正进入Piet的故事。

Second, this book lacks the gut-wrenching suburban tragedy of the Rabbit tetralogy that I have come to know and love. All the pain seemed self-inflicted and was accepted with a contented arrogance. Everyone was sleeping with everyone else, and no one seemed to care until, magically, they did? It just didn't make sense to me.

Third, Tarbox was not a compelling setting. It had no distinct "feel," and it seemed as if only the couples inhabited it. There was no sense of a larger community or the world outside of their relationships.

Lastly, Updike's prose was too abrupt. I don't think he wove it well into the rest of the story. The book read in a choppy manner, making it difficult to fully engage with the characters and their experiences.

Spoiler ahead:

P.S. When Foxy is at Frank (or is it Freddy? I honestly can't keep track of these characters) the dentist's office, and he brings up abortions, it is almost as if Updike is grabbing the reader by the shoulders, shaking them, and yelling, "Foxy is going to get an abortion later in the book!" This heavy-handed approach detracted from the overall reading experience.

How innocently life ate the days.

Day after day, life seems to pass by effortlessly, almost as if it is devouring the days with an innocent voracity. We wake up each morning, go about our routines, and before we know it, another day has slipped away.

Sometimes, we are so caught up in the hustle and bustle of our lives that we fail to notice how quickly the days are passing. We focus on the tasks at hand, the responsibilities we have to fulfill, and the goals we are striving to achieve.

But in the midst of all this, we should also take a moment to reflect on the preciousness of each day. We should cherish the time we have with our loved ones, pursue our passions, and make the most of every opportunity that comes our way.

For life is a finite resource, and once a day is gone, it can never be regained. So let us not let life eat away the days innocently, but rather make each day count and fill it with meaning and purpose.

I read this book solely because it was once bestowed what I think is the most unforgettable blurb of all time: the author's wife once described it as "wading through pubic hair."

Obviously, it was only a matter of time before I read Couples. Don't be like me. Don't read Couples.

Ok, now some disclaimers! This is the only Updike I've ever read (except for "Fellatio", surely The Worst Poem Ever Written, and I'm really more embarrassed for him than angry at him for writing it), so I've no comparison, or insights into the prose itself. But I imagine that even for the gentleman's fans, this one is for completists only.

Let's see, what else? Maybe I should say that I don't normally consider myself a prude, but I felt positively relieved when this book was over. What got my goat, I think, was not the sexuality (it's frank, but not intrusive, and whoever talks about only that is missing the - no, at least two points). It was a particular branch of masculinity that I'm nervous about attempting to describe lest it reveal me as the self-hating, non-lady-of-the-movement, unliberated girl (I mean, woman!) that I am.

Perhaps it was the way the male characters seemed to approach life with a certain swagger and entitlement, a sense that they could do as they pleased without consequence. Or maybe it was the way they objectified women, reducing them to mere objects of desire. Whatever it was, it left a bad taste in my mouth and made me question whether I really wanted to spend any more time with Updike's work.