Rabbit, Run vs. In Cold Blood

Personally, I didn't enjoy Rabbit, Run nearly as much as In Cold Blood simply because I am naturally partial to murder mystery novels that include some historical references. After thinking about the book and re-reading several sections, I did however seem to understand what Updike was trying to say and how he was trying to say it a bit more. Both authors are obscenely descriptive, but I feel like Updike takes it into even more detail. I thought this was interesting because most of the book is Rabbit running from his problems and everything that is wrong in his life. When you think of his namesake, a rabbit, you think of swift fast runnning. I believe the overzealous (sp?) description is a way of slowing down a seemingly fast moving novel. It's almost like a lot is happening but the pages and pages of detail seem to slow it down a bit, which I didn't necessarily enjoy. I agree, as most other people, that though both Capote and Updike use excessive description, Capote seems to be a bit more personal. You are given more background information about Rabbit, but you are left feeling more empathetic for Perry mearly on the way each novelist portrays the characters. Another thing that I found interesting about Updike's writing style is that he seemed to use, no negative conotation intended, a lot of "fluff" in his writing style; a lot could be taken out of the novel and still tell the same story. I think the reason he did this is to further the light fleating feeling given by Rabbit running from his problems. Capote, I believe, had a more disjointed but more direct way of telling his story. I believe that both authors use different literary styles that are both appropriate for the type of material they are writing as well as the meaning they are trying to convey.