![]() ![]() To argue for such complicity, however, is to misread the novel, for although this debate remains unresolved, it does not exist in a vacuum rather, Updike places his “race debate” firmly within the context of a far-reaching theological and ethical vision that in turn offers a progressive and healing program for pragmatic black-white interaction. It is far too easy to misinterpret this irresolution as evidence of Updike’s apparent complicity in the status quo. ![]() Updike’s treatment of race in Rabbit Redux operates as a sort of unresolved “moral debate”: not only are the racial tensions of the 1960s explored from both sides, black and white, but they are also left, in the end, unresolved. Such misreadings result from the novel’s deceptive, dialectical structure. This essay argues that Rabbit Redux not only makes a significant contribution to the on-going dialogue about race in America but also expresses its concerns in so ambiguous a way as to invite misreadings. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |