Literature according to me
I've been reading lots of books published during the 1970s. Rosemary's Baby, Love Story, Ordinary People. Last night I finished The World According to Garp. Before this, the only John Irving book I had read was A Widow for One Year. It is safe to say I am done reading John Irving.
I find him gimmicky. He has many too cute or implausible details and they recur in every novel. What's with the bears? And the prostitutes? And the rape. The rape, most especially, bothers me. I wish he would stop using it as a plot device. Yes, rape happens. Yes, it's not uncommon, but he's unable to write a story without it? I can't help but feel he uses it as some sort of emotional trajectory shorthand for his characters. No thanks.
Honestly, when I finished Garp I was puzzled by people's love for it. The structure is very uneven, and Garp, as a writer, felt artificial. We read lots about the fact that he's a writer but we see so little of it. We're always being told he writes (and occasionally shown pieces of his work) but do we see him writing? Garp is a more convincing athlete. I found the description of his workout far more true than Helen listening to him type. I also got tired of being told things: Roberta is Garp's best friend (how many times does that get mentioned in the last fourth of the book?)
Show me an emotion once in a while. Plus: the crazy long wrap-up-how-everyone-in-the-book-ends-up epilogue? Was that necessary? Oy.
I'm sure tons of people will disagree with me (the man has a huge fan base). But I'm done with Irving. It's on to other authors of the 1970s. I think some Cheever might be in order.