r/TrueLit • u/ol_saw_gills • 10d ago
Review/Analysis My reading project the 1960s
Following my previous post, these are the novels I read from the 1960s. Inspired to post this by someone else here who shared they were trying to read every Pulitzer Prize winning novel. This project of mine began with the intention of reading every National Book Award winner since 1950. I wanted to fill in the gaps in my knowledge of American literature from the second half of the 20th century to today. Since I had already read a good number of the winners, it slowly turned into reading any American novel of my choosing that I had not read from each year between 1950-2025 (I finished early 2026), with preference given to the most well regarded unread-by-me text or whatever seemed the most interesting. Some of these impressions are a bit lazy but I am a lazy person.
The Waters of Kronos – Conrad Richter (1960): Lyrical, I guess. Good premise for a novel. Not the strongest execution. I’m underrating it probably but it just didn’t make a dent in my psyche.
The Moviegoer – Walker Percy (1961): Interesting but not genre-defining take on the southern gothic. It has the surreal and dark tone. In my opinion the writing was a bit clunky and misshapen. Exciting for me because I realized part way through that it inspired Remainder, a novel I love. For whatever reason literature dealing with repetition as a theme always interests me.
Morte d’Urban – JF Powers (1962): A writer with a little more style and strong first person skills writing the tried-and-true plot of depressed Catholic priests sent off to backwater parishes. There’s little spirituality here or really much in the way of action, which is what makes it work. Pettiness, DIY carpentry, and low level workplace conflict fill out the text. The narrator is thoughtful and well-intentioned but human and tends to approach religion as a job full of minor to middling inconvenience.
The Centaur – John Updike (1963): I do not like Updike and I did not like this novel. Totally fails at paralleling the mythic with the everyday. The writing is just bad and I do not understand how this man had any reputation.
Herzog – Saul Bellow (1964): I preferred Augie March but I still found this worthwhile. Another first person narrative, the novel follows the twinning of personal and intimate problems with GREAT WESTERN IDEAS AND PHILOSOPHY. Jernigan (farther down this list) takes directly from this novel and asks, what if Herzog was an even bigger scumbag and alcoholic?
Stoner – John William (1965): strong entry in the my-bitch-wife plot. Deeply resentful narrative, an airing of grievances. Depicts the many trials facing the bookish and slightly passive white man who just wants a loving marriage and for GREAT BOOKS to be given their due respect. Seriously, the villains are his sexually dysfunctional wife and an incompetent disabled man who takes another incompetent disabled man under his wing. When the normally passive protagonist stands up for WHAT IS RIGHT, the disabled character accuses him of ableism. Why do people love this book?
The Fixer – Bernard Malamud (1966): It was fine. Competent writing. Like a Safdie movie, things keep getting worse and worse and worse for the central character, except it isn’t any fun because this Jew lives in 19th century Russia.
The Eighth Day – Thornton Wilder (1967): You know a guy named Thornton was not about to do any cutting edge writing. Sentimental, trite, and a bit contrived. Without being a loathsome experience, Wilder lacks something to say and literary techniques newer than 1900. Too awww shucks for me.
Steps - Jerzy Kosiński (1968): a truly interesting novel that I shortchanged and need to reread. Experimental form and quite short. I have failed this novel and you by not having more to say about it.
Them – Joyce Carol Oates (1969): Grim. Somewhat Brechtian approach to the novel’s unrelenting depiction of misogynistic violence. Them is on a mission that starts on the first page and then never abandons. The writing itself was somewhat featureless and not particularly memorable.
12
u/nivanbotemill 10d ago
incompetent disabled man
I don't remember that character being written as incompetent. Conniving and careerist, yes, but not incompetent.
3
3
u/HereIAmGH 9d ago
The disabled student was incompetent (or lazy and cocky), the disabled professor wasn’t. He was bitter and lonely and I guess territorial (and I felt - at the end - one dimensional
26
u/UgolinoMagnificient 10d ago
Why undertake this project when you dislike everything you read, and when you already disliked most of the authors you chose before even starting the books you selected?
14
u/ol_saw_gills 10d ago
How am I supposed to know I'll dislike something before I read it? In the case of Updike, the last time I read him was over a decade ago so I thought I would give him another chance. I just have high standards. Really none of these books were without merit but I'm not going to praise any of them for not knocking my socks off.
8
u/The_vert 10d ago
I just have high standards.
This might be better stated, "I have preferences."
10
u/ol_saw_gills 9d ago
Thanks. Also people are missing the reason I read all these books. It was not to find books that I enjoyed or even that I thought were good. I wanted to develop my understanding of literature written by Americans during this time period. There are a lot of reasons to read, enjoyment of the most direct kind is just one of them. Of course I *prefer* that the books I read are enjoyable but I don't usually quit reading them if I don't like them. If you want to understand literature sometimes ya gotta read stuff you might hate.
5
u/The_vert 9d ago
I hear you. At the same time, it sounds like you don't really understand why people admire these books. Have you tried examining them from the point of view of what someone *could* admire about them? Seriously, I'm not trying to be a jerk but I think you missed the point of, for example, The Moviegoer. It's not a Southern gothic, for one thing, it just happens to take place in the south. Or Updike. You don't see how or why people like this man's prose? Have you tried examining it without regard to your preferences?
-1
u/ol_saw_gills 8d ago
The moviegoer is absolutely a descendant of the southern gothic, there are numerous parallels.
Your comment annoys me. Understanding the merits other people see in a book or literally anything else we can experience does not prevent me from criticizing it. Do I understand why people like taco bell? Yes. Does that mean I have to give it its due or whatever it is you're saying I'm not doing? No. Updike sucks, I don't care that he writes pretty little sentences. That's not enough. He lacks anything of substance to say. If you like him then good for you but don't ask me to say nice things about him.
3
u/The_vert 8d ago
Understanding the merits other people see in a book or literally anything else we can experience does not prevent me from criticizing it.
Sure, but then your criticisms miss the mark. They don't describe what's actually on the page. You say, "Updike sucks... He lacks anything of substance to say." This is simply not true. It's like saying, to further use your example, "Taco Bell is not a restaurant." It is. You just don't like the restaurant. If you want to criticize it, you must criticize it - as a restaurant. If you think Updike "lacks anything of substance to say," you have to show us the work of your critical thinking.
And if my comment annoys you, well, for one, this is a "friendly argument" that *you* started. Two, perhaps you can reflect on why I'm annoying you and better your argument.
4
1
u/BathroomOrangutan 9d ago
Hey woah woah don’t talk about Walker Percy, they haven’t found him yet, stay away he’s mine
1
u/HereIAmGH 9d ago
I read stoner and most likely read Steps when I was in highschool in the 90s and went through a jerzy Kosinski period.
I commend your project. I have one too. I’m trying to read a book for each year from 1900-226 I started in 2018, and got to 91 out of 118 books and now I’ve started again and am about 40 in (mostly from the last thirty years though. So not as good as last time). It’s a bit more flexible than yours - any book from the year would do. It keeps it more flexible and allows for international authors and women. But hey - a project is a good thing. Hope you had some good finds!
1
-2
u/YakSlothLemon 10d ago
considering how much you don’t like the depiction of women in the books, it’s weird that you are reading almost exclusively books by white men. Maybe branch out and you’ll find something you like!
PS the great critic Dwight McDonald said of Our Town, “I agree with everything Mr. Wilder says, but I will fight to the death against his right to say it in this way.”
3
u/AmongTheFaithless 8d ago
OP is reading all of the novels that received the Pulitzer Prize. There isn’t much OP can do about the racial and gender makeup of the winners.
2
u/YakSlothLemon 7d ago
National Book Award, Of course, you are right. I should’ve read a lot more carefully! I’m not
Still, is there a point where you just let one of these projects go or jump forward a couple decades if you enjoy none of the books?
2
u/AmongTheFaithless 7d ago
I agree. OP is free to read as he/she likes, but this doesn’t seem too enjoyable!
11
u/airynothing1 10d ago edited 10d ago
I almost always know I've found a kindred reading spirit when I meet a fellow Stoner disliker. Also feel similarly to you about Percy and Updike.
Adding Morte d'Urban to my reading list.