S.

Rating:
Summary: Enjoyable Updike
Review: "S." is the story of a lonely woman named Sarah Worth, trapped in a thankless marriage who one day escapes to an Arizona ashram while not knowing which part of her life to live. Her confusion and angst leads her into a sordid relationship with the village's Arnat (leader), duplicity with the organization's questionable fund-raising, and difficult friendships with her peers in the ashram. I found this to be a very interesting look at the desire of one woman to shed her old skin and begin anew, although at the same time not knowing exactly how to do so. Sarah is sort of a metaphor for trapped women everywhere; confused and comedic, she leaves her old self with reluctance, all the while questioning her decisions. The outcome is accurate to her character, while still mysterious enough so the reader isn't sure if her whole journey was worth it in the first place. The book overall is light reading, but great fluff entertainment nonetheless. Updike is at his comedic best here, while still covering everything in the beautiful, pesudo-technical language that has become his trademark. If you would like to learn more spiritual terminology while getting to know a loveably neurotic character I recommend this book, but not if you want something to really make you think.

Rating:
Summary: Letters Home
Review: Ever since Rabbit, Run, Updike has been attracted to the idea of writing a story that feels as if it is actually happening while it is being read - rather than, as is almost inherent in the form of the novel, communicating an impression of recorded history. By way of attempting to put the idea into practice, Updike has both experimented with present-tense narration (see Leaf Season in Trust Me) and - in S. - given us his take on the venerable (if not antiquated) genre of the epistolary novel. From this point of view the fact that S. is made up solely of letters is an attractive feature of the book: one's sense of anticipation (how will events unfold?) is indeed sharpened. What makes the epistolary form work in this novel is the naturally loquacious and confiding disposition of the protagonist and author of the letters, Sarah Worth (or 'S' as she signs herself to her husband).

Sarah has in fact left her husband and gone to join a religious commune in Arizona. Through her dispatches to various friends, family and acquaintances we follow the fortunes of the community and her role within it through to its surprising (?) conclusion.

The novel has been criticised for its satirical presentation of Buddhism, yoga, etc. in the context of commune life. I'm not sure Updike would accept the charge. In fact I found quite a lot of fair-mindedness in the book - it actually left me with an improved rather than diminished opinion of what Eastern ideas are actually aspiring to - although I don't think Updike can excuse himself from drawing on certain stereotypes. But this is essentially a light, comic novel - although I don't see why it necessarily had to be - and probably shouldn't be taken too seriously.

What I missed most was Updike's typically well-observed dialogue, which in this case is mostly paraphrased in retrospect by the narrator. I had a similar problem with A Month of Sundays, in some ways this book's companion volume. Updike may also have found himself missing this type of writing since half-way through he suspends the strict rules of the epistolary genre and has Sarah include a cassette recording of some tapped conversation in with one of her dispatches. This moment was a welcome relief from her up-till-then uninterrupted monologues, but its breaking the rules of the genre made me wonder about the point of the form in the first place.

Overall he's done it very well, of course, as he does almost everything very well, but I doubt he'll revisit the experiment.

Rating:
Summary: Failed experiments
Review: I thought that "S" was a strange book - a novel in which Updike experiments with a different (for him) format. "S" is comprised of a series of letters, mostly from and to Sarah Worth ("S"), and the transcripts of taped conversations.

Sarah Worth leaves her husband to join an ashram in Arizona, ostensibly to to find a new meaning to her life (or a better way of living). However, Sarah's past life, habits, and ways of thought prove difficult to shake off. The members of the ashram do not live up to their billing. Things begin to deteriorate rapidly.

"S" is a deeply acerbic satire. Little escapes Updike's criticism: the ashram; those Americans and Europeans who form the ashram's membership; the leaders of the ashram; the forces of conservatism that oppose the ashram; and the middle-class American female as exemplified by Sarah Worth. But I felt that Updike was moving beyond satire or comedy into contempt - as if to say that he washed his hands of the whole self-indulgent and hypocritical lot.

Another difficulty I found with "S" was that it was very predictable. There's not much in the plot to surprise, not much that you feel you haven't seen or read somewhere before. But the main problem was Updike's apparent unease with this style of epistolatory writing. At best it creaks along, only to fall apart with Updike resorting to inserted "taped conversations". As a result, it felt very contrived.

Updike has written far better novels than this.

G Rodgers

Rating:
Summary: Failed experiments
Review: I thought that "S" was a strange book - a novel in which Updike experiments with a different (for him) format. "S" is comprised of a series of letters, mostly from and to Sarah Worth ("S"), and the transcripts of taped conversations.

Sarah Worth leaves her husband to join an ashram in Arizona, ostensibly to to find a new meaning to her life (or a better way of living). However, Sarah's past life, habits, and ways of thought prove difficult to shake off. The members of the ashram do not live up to their billing. Things begin to deteriorate rapidly.

"S" is a deeply acerbic satire. Little escapes Updike's criticism: the ashram; those Americans and Europeans who form the ashram's membership; the leaders of the ashram; the forces of conservatism that oppose the ashram; and the middle-class American female as exemplified by Sarah Worth. But I felt that Updike was moving beyond satire or comedy into contempt - as if to say that he washed his hands of the whole self-indulgent and hypocritical lot.

Another difficulty I found with "S" was that it was very predictable. There's not much in the plot to surprise, not much that you feel you haven't seen or read somewhere before. But the main problem was Updike's apparent unease with this style of epistolatory writing. At best it creaks along, only to fall apart with Updike resorting to inserted "taped conversations". As a result, it felt very contrived.

Updike has written far better novels than this.

G Rodgers

Rating:
Summary: Updike on religious humor and the female condition
Review: S. is the story of Sarah Worth, a New England matron who flees the confines of midcentury feminine affluence to seek spiritual (and sexual) enlightenment in a religious commune. She chronicles her adventure in letters to her best friend, daughter, and estranged husband, as well as short notes to her former dentist and hairdresser, tapes of conversations with the commune's leader, and a selection of the letters she writes on behalf of the commune's business office. The story unfolds briskly and subtely, with Updike employing his satirical skill to show a woman who, in leaving her life behind, manages to take it all with her.

A benefit of the letter format is that it allows a full exploration of the narrator's voice, to excellent effect. It also suppresses Updike's tendency to rely too heavily on his (excellent) descriptive language and instroduces an element of suspense that makes the story quite absorbing.

S. has been criticized by other reviewers for its perceived mockery of Eastern religions, but I don't think this is intended. Updike has obviously done extensive research - if not into Eastern religions themselves, then at least into their Western offshoots - and presents the characters with what, for him, is considerable sympathy. Of course he mocks the narrator's blind devotion to the commune - that's part of what the book is about - but he's mocking the misdirection of her efforts, not the ideals to which she aspires.

The one element of the book that frustrated me was Updike's treatment of his narrator. Sure, it's fun to read a book about an arrogant and slightly hysterical woman who is always just slightly out of her league - a Bridget Jones for our mothers' generation. But it would perhaps be more interesting to watch a character really grow through the course of the novel and transcend, or at least recognize, her own bias. Of course that kind of revelatory change would be anathema to Updike, whose thesis - popping up, appropriately, in book after book - seems to be that life is a cycle, endlessly revolving, lush with beauty and without escape. And this book is - first and foremost, like all his books - Updike.

Rating:
Summary: Updike on religious humor and the female condition
Review: S. is the story of Sarah Worth, a New England matron who flees the confines of midcentury feminine affluence to seek spiritual (and sexual) enlightenment in a religious commune. She chronicles her adventure in letters to her best friend, daughter, and estranged husband, as well as short notes to her former dentist and hairdresser, tapes of conversations with the commune's leader, and a selection of the letters she writes on behalf of the commune's business office. The story unfolds briskly and subtely, with Updike employing his satirical skill to show a woman who, in leaving her life behind, manages to take it all with her.

A benefit of the letter format is that it allows a full exploration of the narrator's voice, to excellent effect. It also suppresses Updike's tendency to rely too heavily on his (excellent) descriptive language and instroduces an element of suspense that makes the story quite absorbing.

S. has been criticized by other reviewers for its perceived mockery of Eastern religions, but I don't think this is intended. Updike has obviously done extensive research - if not into Eastern religions themselves, then at least into their Western offshoots - and presents the characters with what, for him, is considerable sympathy. Of course he mocks the narrator's blind devotion to the commune - that's part of what the book is about - but he's mocking the misdirection of her efforts, not the ideals to which she aspires.

The one element of the book that frustrated me was Updike's treatment of his narrator. Sure, it's fun to read a book about an arrogant and slightly hysterical woman who is always just slightly out of her league - a Bridget Jones for our mothers' generation. But it would perhaps be more interesting to watch a character really grow through the course of the novel and transcend, or at least recognize, her own bias. Of course that kind of revelatory change would be anathema to Updike, whose thesis - popping up, appropriately, in book after book - seems to be that life is a cycle, endlessly revolving, lush with beauty and without escape. And this book is - first and foremost, like all his books - Updike.

Rating:
Summary: A NOTEWORTHY WORK - A BIT DIFFERENT
Review: This is probably not Updike's best work, but it is different and I personally feel it is always good when a known author puts his or her self out to be examined. I did find this book to be the funniest of Updikes work, but perhaps my sense of humor is slightly off center. The book is cerainly a satire and is rather cruel and a bit vendictive when it comes to the current human condition, feminism, new age stuff, et al. The format, a series of letters and communications is quite readable and you almost get the feeling of snooping on someone elses life. I do feel it is a good work and do feel those who enjoy Updikes work owe it to themselves the read.

Rating:
Summary: Funniest Updike
Review: Updike has this amazing ability to turn his hand to anything. There is no distinct Updike style you could ever parody. He just writes amazingly well. He can put himself inside the skin of anyone of of any ethnicity or sex. His tone rends to be satirical but he can be profound. This is one of his most undiluted attempts at out and out comedy.
It is written from the point of view of a very WASP New England lady (one of her ancestors is a Prynne, and her daughter is called Pearl) who deserts her adulterous doctor husband to join a Hindu or Buddhist (I was never quite sure which) commune in Arizona.It's written in the form of the letters and tapes she sends to correspodents back East (her dentist, hairdresser, husband, psychotherapist, daughter,best friend, lawyer, hairdresser's jailed son etc).
She starts off as a naive dupe, but by the end has oth cleverly outsmarted everyone who tried to rip her off and achieved the spiritual development she sought from the fraudulent guru.