Tell me how Updike, a comfortable man who died a death he could plan for an understand, is any way similar to Tillman, a man who could not control anything about his life because he made the sacrifice of being a soldier in wartime? You demean your argument by conflating both.

And last I checked, Updike’s work was being criticized, not whether or not he suffered fatal wounds under friendly fire. In general, may we know the rules of mourning for those people whose misuse or paucity of intellect we don’t agree with? There’s a reason why sensitive or grieving people warn others that they will refuse to hear anyone who speaks ill of the dead. You gave no such warning; you didn’t say, “you know, I’d rather hear good things about him,” instead of participate in a forum that would consider both the good and the bad of his work.

And look, I don’t know if Updike was good to cats or ate small goldfish in his spare time — *we were talking about his work*, which has been considered as skillful and sexist for as long as I have been alive. Since when is discussion of a man’s work off-limits? Isn’t a man’s death the time when we give it full appraisal, since it’s now very likely his body of work will no longer be revised?

Yes, I’m gonna say it — somehow if Mme. Secretary Clinton died tomorrow, no one on this board would get away with desiring a mourning period, before the trolls would descend, and still we’d be accused of curtailing free speech, for wanting mere respect. You live a public life, and people will judge you publically. That’s the deal they make for fame’s sake.

Updike got respect here.

He was also called out as an O.G. sexist, reflected through his work.

Why do you want an honest appraisal of his record muted until no one talks about him online, when his death stops being fresh or in the news? That’s revisionist history in action, and that silence is never right. Never.

Satsuma said this:
“Ah, such a joy to be defended in these lovely feminist blogs after dealing with rampant male mania everywhere else on the Internet”

Which means she observed that there are a lot of *men* on the Internet saying, “Yeah, women are worthless, aren’t they? The world would just be a better place without them.”, and using their posting skills as dick-waiving, to prove it. We aren’t going on those blogs to hammer them with our manliness or womanliness; we are simply having this discussion here about what we value, which sure as hell isn’t what you value, as shown by your tone or lack of respect.

Not one anti-masculinist blog can stand unmolested while you’re on the job, right? Sheesh.

My criticism was based solely on the fact that you were attacking him two days after his death. It was, as you put it, an issue of reverence for the dead, not for Updike in particular. On another blog a couple of years ago, I made the same criticisms of an author who wrote a post calling Pat Tillman a traitor and a terrorist during the very week of his funeral. In that case, I actually agreed with the author to a limited extent — I don’t have a lot of respect for people who volunteer to join the military when the nation’s security isn’t threatened. But I didn’t find it appropriate to make those criticisms of a man whose passing was being grieved by his family at that very moment.

Men are so accustomed to running the entire academic show over say the last 1000 years or so, that like poor Harold Bloom, well, they’ve become flumoxed and resentful of this usurpation.

So this may come as a shock to men of a certain generation who were used to dominating classrooms on college campuses, and controlling all discussion in small groups within academy as well. Heck, I even remember the guys hogging all the best seats at the lecture and reading Updike gave on my college campus back in the late 70s. Nor have I forgotten the boys spitting (yes you read that right) spitting on women who were attending the first women’s studies lectures of that era. The guys thought this a cool way to intimidate women in the academy by spitting at us from the balcony. Equal education indeed.

Since men are used to patriarchy, this blogroll must be disturbing indeed to read, and I know I shouldn’t gloat over ‘revenge of the nerds (I mean feminists), but it is such a tasty bite after all this conservative male dominant resurgence in politics or should I call it reactionary thought?

Anyway, talks like this energize me, it’s as if I found the thread that continued from those beloved days of the late 70s when the first women’s studies PhD emerged from a big ten university back then. Look at how far we all have come women! Three cheers for our continued delight in learning and our passion to encourage greatness in feminist thought.

P.S. Robert, my name is spelled S-A-T-S-U-M-A FYI

Thanks for clearing up the misunderstanding about who you were criticizing.

Once again, in a post that is essentially all praise for Updike (most of it was Michael’s pro-Updike report of his pro-Updike book club!), my commenters and I get smacked down again for not agreeing totally 100% that Updike is TEH AWESUMM, no questions or objections allowed.

Whatever.

*See, for example, Charles McGrath’s comment in the NY Times (which I quoted in the earlier thread on this subject), where he refers to the Rabbit books as a way for future readers to learn what the twentieth century was “really like” (and ignore the irony for historians of that particular phrase!).