I persistently persuaded my book club to read this particular work. The reason being that Updike is highly regarded as a significant chronicler of American society and its attitudes during his era as an author. Instead of proposing any of the renowned "Rabbit" series for which he received much acclaim back then, I selected this one. It had the reputation of being the 1960s equivalent of "Desperate Housewives",描绘了美国中西部小镇在60年代末伍德斯托克一代真正的性革命之前的性态度。

After reading other reviews, I couldn't help but envy those readers who only had to struggle through a 470-page copy of this book. My Penguin edition had a whopping 506 pages, and it was truly a relief to reach the last page. When I arrived at what could best be described as an Updike "happy ending", I found myself wishing that he had employed the same economy of writing in the last seven pages for the previous 499.

This epic novel, which portrays the sexual activities of ten couples in a small town on the Massachusetts coast, was initially difficult to get into. The descriptions of the individuals were so fleeting that I constantly had to refer back to the early pages of the book to remember who they were. The non-WASP Americans were easy to identify, but it took some time to figure out who was married to whom and who was cheating on whom with whom. Confused? Yes, I had that problem too. Pretty soon, it became evident that at the center of all these activities was the unlikable Piet Hanema, a middle-aged, red-haired (thankfully, the only one with hair of that color as an identifying trait) building contractor who seems to have had sex with four of the wives in the story (his wife, Angela, is included almost as an afterthought). He isn't the only one involved in wife-swapping here, as almost everyone in this group of ten couples has their "moment in the sun".

For me, the best way to view this book is as a description of the sexual mores of a group of affluent, middle-class, bored friends who seek entertainment in word games, drinking, parties, and partner-swapping outside of their work and family responsibilities. Through their characters and actions, Updike offers his commentary on contemporary "small-town America" views on various aspects such as religion, sex, adultery, social class attitudes, greed, abortion, race - you name it, he incorporates it somewhere. Sometimes, the sheer complexity and multi-stranded nature of the novel can be hard to follow, especially in the early stages when the main characters are sketched so briefly. I found myself re-reading sections where a character was simply named by their forename to match them with their husband or wife. This "scattergun" approach to character-building can be very frustrating as it takes a while to form a mental image of the families involved, especially when their offspring are included as part of the descriptive texture. In spite of this, the overall atmosphere of dissatisfaction, malaise, gloom, and boredom is maintained throughout the book, and each couple's frustrations are resolved in one way or another, before the aforementioned "happy ending" for the main characters.

Regarding the other reason for this book's celebrity or notoriety - the sex - Updike's verbosity often hinders the action. There is no doubt that the clear, almost clinical, description of the body parts and potential positions involved in the act contributed significantly to the book's sales figures. Looking back from a 2024 perspective, the writing here seems almost quaint rather than racy. The book was published in 1968 but is set in the period from 1962 to just after Kennedy's assassination in November 1963, effectively during the early days of the birth pill sexual revolution. Birth control was not always 100% successful, and to his credit, Updike does not shy away from depicting the use of abortion as a means of birth prevention. The passages that deal with this subject and the three people involved sharply highlight the then-illegality of the procedure and its immediate impact on these three individuals, as well as the subsequent reverberations through their families and friends.

In conclusion, I do not believe that this book solidifies Updike's reputation as a literary great. The basis for that reputation lies in his other works. Maybe I'll give the "Rabbit" series a try and take the risk of suggesting it to my book club!

I read "Couples" while residing in Greece. There couldn't be anything more diametrically opposed than Updike and Greece. One is lacking in worldly experience, while the latter is a veritable abundance of it. This was one of those books that I read in short bursts. I would come back to it out of a sense of obligation rather than due to suspense or interest.

Moreover, it's not a book that one should read immediately after getting married, as I did. Consequently, I found it dull and unrelatable. Just like everything else, reviews must consider the passage of time in relation to relevance. I still shudder at the thought of re-reading it, which I will not be doing, just as I used to do when I read it intermittently.

Some of Updike's works affect me in this manner, even though I recognize the perspective that he is an outstanding writer - a master wordsmith, so to speak. It's just that what he writes about appears to me to be lacking in vitality, even when it's about sex.

I haven't delved into any works by John Updike for a considerable number of years. So, I randomly picked up "Couples" from the library. My intention was simply to shift gears and explore the writings of a prominent American author for a change of pace. "Couples" is one of his most widely read books. It delves into the "new morality" that emerged among the young suburbanite married couples beginning in the early 1960s. Updike描绘了这种郊区文化，使用了生动、明确的词汇，勾勒出一幅在“Tarbox”镇的夫妻之间几乎完全不道德的画面。即使按照2011年的标准来看，这些不断变化的关系似乎也过于夸张，但至少在Updike的脑海中，它们一定是存在的。

If you have an open mind and are not overly prudish, then this is a good book for you to read. It offers a unique perspective on a particular era and the social changes that were taking place. You may find yourself both shocked and intrigued by the relationships and behaviors described within its pages. However, if you are more conservative in your views, you may find some of the content disturbing or offensive. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that Updike was writing about a specific time and place, and his work should be evaluated in that context.

I don't think I can be disappointed with Updike.

However, I know I might be wrong. After all, I'll likely come across a stinker of his soon enough. Maybe it'll be his post-apocalyptic or apocalyptic or whatever kind of book it is.

But in the meantime, he has officially become my favorite writer (for a while, among his contemporaries). His narration is so flawless, always integrating seamlessly with his magnificent descriptions and probably unintentionally hilarious dialogue.

He's just such a cynical old dad, and I absolutely love it. This book is truly ridiculous. If I were to summarize it to friends, they would be aghast.

His writing style is captivating, drawing me in with every page. I can't wait to explore more of his works and see what other literary gems he has in store.

Updike has a unique way of bringing his characters and stories to life, making them feel real and relatable.

Even when the plot might seem far-fetched or absurd, his writing makes it all seem believable.

I'm hooked on his writing, and I don't think I'll be able to break free anytime soon.

One thing that you often hear about when it comes to Updike is his genius literary prose.

After reading this, my first Updike novel, I have to concur. In fact, I'm now convinced that he could make even the phonebook interesting.

With that being said, once you approach this book with an open mind and get past its initial premise, you'll find that it is beautifully written.

However, I do have one gripe. I don't particularly favor books with long chapters. In this case, Chapter 1 is over 100 pages long. It makes taking a reading pause rather difficult, as it feels like stopping mid-story. This is a huge pet peeve of mine.

Another challenge I faced was keeping all the couples straight, especially during the swinging episodes. There are so many characters and their relationships can get quite complex.

Despite these minor drawbacks, I still found the book to be an engaging and enjoyable read, thanks to Updike's masterful prose.

There is so much to cherish about this book.

The descriptive passages are truly remarkable, painting vivid pictures in the reader's mind and creating moods that are simply incredible.

However, I did have some difficulties with the characters.

There are an abundance of them, and I found myself still getting confused about who was who right until the very end.

Moreover, I simply didn't find any of them likable.

Usually, in a book, I have to root for a character and find some empathy with them, but unfortunately, that didn't occur here.

Nonetheless, I'm quite certain that another read would be worthwhile.

But alas, there are just too many books and too little time.

One of my all-time favorite novels is Couples.

It baffles me when people dismiss this remarkable work for various reasons. Some might say the characters aren't likable, or there's an excessive amount of sex, or perhaps it doesn't quite meet the Bechdel test. However, in my view, they are simply missing the essence of the novel.

Couples is a spiritually profound and yet delightfully profane exploration. It serves as a scathing indictment of callous, soulless decadence and vividly portrays the devastating toll that adultery takes on a community. At the same time, it is also hilariously bitchy, filled with sharp wit and caustic humor.

Regardless of the dynamics that someone might object to in 2023 (and I firmly believe that the novel itself objects to these very same dynamics, even as it depicts them), I challenge anyone to find another novel from 1968 in which all the characters, both men and women, are as educated and whose interactions are as witty, catty, intelligent, and lyrical.

I truly wish I had read Couples during my college years. I would have relished the opportunity to write a research paper on this captivating and thought-provoking work.

This is the second of Updike's books that I've read. Just like the first one, I found it highly disappointing and truly don't understand the appeal it holds for others.

I don't think I'll be reading a third book by him. As the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Or, as George W. Bush rather interestingly put it, "Fool me once, shame on... shame on you...... a fool can't get fooled again."

It seems that my experience with Updike's works has been less than satisfactory. Maybe I'm just not in tune with his writing style or the themes he explores.

However, I can't help but wonder if there are others out there who see something in his books that I'm missing.

Nonetheless, based on my two attempts, I'm inclined to move on and explore other authors and their works.

Perhaps I'll find something that truly captivates me and leaves a lasting impression.

Couples is a rather disappointing book.

It starts off by using a scandalous subject as a bait to attract potential readers. However, once you get into it, you find that the author has resorted to overwriting. The writing seems to be trying too hard to be literary and overly meaningful, which in turn creates a conflict within the book.

This conflict eventually leads to the book collapsing onto itself. I personally read over half of the book and came to the realization that if I were to finish it, it would simply be for the sake of finishing and not because I was enjoying it at all.

The author's attempt to create a profound and literary work using a scandalous subject just didn't quite work out in this case. It's a shame because the initial premise had the potential to be quite engaging, but the execution fell short.

"Pairs" reminds a lot of the "Marry Me" written 11 years later. Several families are an expanded version of its two pairs. They form a closed circle in the idyllic and elegant suburb of Boston - a large family that does literally everything together, secretly or completely openly, in different configurations of gender, age, social status, ethnicity, education and religion. One part of their daily life has become easy and normal, the other - as scandalous and immoral as it is also initially human and understandable.

Updike is a very good storyteller, captivating, and his eroticism is abundant, but genuine, unobtrusive and beautiful. And although the scandalous and sex (as liberation, indulgence, excuse, escape, ecstasy, habit, sport, emotion, desire, deal or revenge) are the visible leading threads, beneath them there are many more open questions and answers that, due to fear, unwillingness or inertia, are often overlooked.

The novel is definitely not for puritans, but it should be read by more people precisely because of the themes it touches - the little things that accumulate, fall in love, alienate and divide a pair, the difficult choice of whether to be saved and at what price, the thin line between love, loyalty, passion and habit, the unpredictable outcome of the battle between reason and feelings, the lie beautifully masked as affection or respect, the emptiness, more可怕 and depressing not in the other half of the bed, but as the absence of a parent and partner, the loneliness among people, the consequences of unspoken desires and conversations that didn't happen, the flexible boundaries of personal morality.

With the problems and emotions of ordinary people, "Pairs" is much more human and exciting than a scandalous book.

Rereading this book proved a doubly nostalgic experience.

I first read Couples in 1990. At that time, it was the very first novel by Updike that I approached. I truly enjoyed it then. What I liked especially was the evocation of my old home area and the shadows that so many people I knew while growing up cast on the characters Updike creates. (My father sold Updike his first house in Ipswich, and my aunt was the organist at the church on the hill that is struck by lightning – both in reality and in the novel.)

Rereading it with the benefit of a couple more decades of living – and having read many more of Updike's novels – I'm still taken in by Couples' vivid portrayal of place (the north shore of Boston masquerading as the south). But even more so, I'm impressed by the richness and beauty of Updike's language, something that I found lacking in his later fiction.

Of course, the rather dreary plot of infidelity and wife-swapping does seem a bit dated nowadays. But what's more striking is the interior mindset of Piet Hanema, the principal philanderer and main character. He seems to go (mostly) blithely through his amorous exploits, moving from one married woman to another with instinctive but almost unconscious decision-making. However, at the end, just as it seems he'll get his comeuppance, Updike sends him off to start a new life away from Tarbox with the youngest of his inamoratas (whom he, not incidentally, impregnated and then helped to get an abortion).

In someone else's hands, Piet might seem a callow and amoral perpetrator of mayhem in his community. But Updike somehow enables Piet to maintain his sweet and rather winning innocence. Still, what I shall remember most from Couples is the poetry of the language.

I'm an absolute sucker for Updike and all of his ridiculously captivating prose. His exploration of hyper 60s sexuality and the f'd up relationships within that era is both fascinating and disturbing. I read this particular work as it was one of the more commonly referred to Updike novels after the Rabbit series, which I simply adore. However, this one didn't quite have the same level of intrigue for me. The story didn't draw me in as deeply as I had hoped. Nevertheless, I'm not sorry that I read it. It still provided some insights into Updike's unique writing style and his ability to delve into the complex and often messy aspects of human nature.