Philip Roth

Thanks for the heads up, I'll look for it on teh interwebz.

With regard to literary merits & demerits:

His humour is pretty humorous, his wit is pretty witty, and (as far as I've read) he can explore complex issues and themes without the story suffering or the text becoming fifty-two reads a paragraph. He also writes good stories and decent characters.

Having said that.

His characters can be a bit samey (and not only when they're the same person) and I'm not sure how good his female characters are -- after reading The Professor of Desire recently, I did wonder how well the Swedish girls were characterised/charactertured. Be interesting to get another perspective on that.

I'm not a big fan of re-reading (too many books, too little time) but if I were forced to pick one, I would re-read I Married a Communist and wince.

I've got a lot of Roth left to read -- I'm trying to space him out to make him last longer and allow my ongoing maturation (?!*@!!) make me appreciate his writing more -- but even so he high in my list of favourite writers because he's accessible, but smart at the same time.

Oh, and I like the sex.

Thanks a ton for the heads up! Gonna go get that scheduled to record...

Eliza azilE said:

So no one watched it?

Frankly, a boring life. He pumps out books. That's about it.

Still, I learned a bit about writing in general, or at least the kind I'm interested in perusing.

Click to expand...

Would have, but they didn't air it here. Pretty frustrating!

His books have been on my Need to Re-read list. I read them all, or most, I think, (except for Portnoy's Complaint, which my mother -- who had a copy of Mandingo hidden in her hosiery drawer -- threw in the trash and poured grease over) when I was probably way too young (around thirteen?) -- or maybe it was a good time for a first reading. At any rate, it's time for a re-read, especially When She Was Good.

Liralen said:

His books have been on my Need to Re-read list. I read them all, or most, I think, (except for Portnoy's Complaint, which my mother -- who had a copy of Mandingo hidden in her hosiery drawer -- threw in the trash and poured grease over) when I was probably way too young (around thirteen?) -- or maybe it was a good time for a first reading. At any rate, it's time for a re-read, especially When She Was Good.

Click to expand...

Portony's Complaint is hilarious. You should get your hands on it.

I caught part of it, but my husband was not interested in listening to Roth talk about how he stands up while he writes.

I'd like to reread a couple of his books first and then watch the whole thing.

I didn't have a chance to watch the docu, but I so would have.

I did read Portnoy's Complaint when I was 13 or 14 and it was quite an unforgettable experience. Since then, I've read maybe half of Roth's work and loved most of it (The Human Stain is probably in my Ultimate Top Ten), but now and again I stumble upon a book that seems very very good, just not quite up to what I've come to consider "the Roth standard." I'm a *little* torn. I would agree that some of his characters can get sort of same-y and that it's not always all that great.

Couple of years ago, for some reason I've made a habit of starting every year with reading a new (for me) Roth book. This January it was The Humbling. I am sorry to say that it was one of those Roth books that I didn't really love. It was good, but short, but it could have been even shorter IMO, unless there is some deeper meaning in it that I failed to recognize (entirely possible).

Overall, I would say he's one of my favorite living authors, though.

If anyone else, like me, lived in an area where the docu wasn't broadcasted, you can watch it here:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/philip-roth/philip-roth-unmasked/2467/

Thought I'd pass it on!

Thanks, the100s.

Livilla said:

Since then, I've read maybe half of Roth's work and loved most of it (The Human Stain is probably in my Ultimate Top Ten), but now and again I stumble upon a book that seems very very good, just not quite up to what I've come to consider "the Roth standard."

Click to expand...

I read The Human Stain last summer, and it was my first exposure to Roth. The complexity of the circles within circles of that story were truly impressive, but I can't say that his actual text & sentence structure did much for me at all. I mean, there is a certain elegance to his writing's simplicity, and compared to how all those pieces wove together, it made for a neat balance, but I'll take an interesting sentence over clever plot construction any 'ol day. So, if anyone has a suggestion as to what Roth I should next, I'm all for second chances! =)

Many years ago, when I read his first novel (at least I think it was his first), Good-bye, Columbus, I really liked it and was very impressed. None of his subsequent work made me feel that way, and I must admit I haven't entertained any of his more recent stuff. That may be a mistake on my part, and I think I'll give him a bit more of a go.

By critical rep, Roth is probably the pre-eminent American literary novelist still extant, possibly with the rivalry of John Irving. It's been a while since an American writer won a Nobel, and Vonnegut and Updike both being now dead, Roth is probably the top candidate.

caw

KellyAssauer said:

I read The Human Stain last summer, and it was my first exposure to Roth. The complexity of the circles within circles of that story were truly impressive, but I can't say that his actual text & sentence structure did much for me at all. I mean, there is a certain elegance to his writing's simplicity, and compared to how all those pieces wove together, it made for a neat balance, but I'll take an interesting sentence over clever plot construction any 'ol day. So, if anyone has a suggestion as to what Roth I should next, I'm all for second chances! =)

Click to expand...

Now that I see Eliza mentioned The Prague Orgy, I'm definitely throwing in a vote for that! If you want to give Roth another chance, I think this might be a good choice. It's a delightful little (really tiny) book, and while it's also very Rothian, it's distinctly different from The Human Stain. You might like it better. The plot is a nice variation on Henry James' The Aspern Papers, but there's more to it. I'm from (and living in) Prague, and one of the (many) aspects of this book I appreciate is that he took the trouble to get things right. Meaning, for example his Czech characters have real believable Czech names, not those hilariously unreal vaguely Slavic-sounding names my fellow countrymen usually get in American movies. Of course, the book was written when I was a little kid and we've had quite a few changes over here since then, so Roth's Prague (he visited several times, as is also reflected in The Professor of Desire) is very different from Prague as I know it, but that only made it more interesting to me.

blacbird said:

Many years ago, when I read his first novel (at least I think it was his first), Good-bye, Columbus, I really liked it and was very impressed. None of his subsequent work made me feel that way, and I must admit I haven't entertained any of his more recent stuff. That may be a mistake on my part, and I think I'll give him a bit more of a go.

By critical rep, Roth is probably the pre-eminent American literary novelist still extant, possibly with the rivalry of John Irving. It's been a while since an American writer won a Nobel, and Vonnegut and Updike both being now dead, Roth is probably the top candidate.

caw

Click to expand...

I've been rooting him for-EVAH. I was sad that Updike never won it, but if I had to pick between him and Roth, I'd choose Roth.

Eliza azilE said:

^

Perhaps you know he went to Czechoslovakia a few times, starting in the early 1970s, and hung out with writers? He even edited a series (from Penguin?) that brought Czech writers to English readers.


-I don't think everyone realizes how controversial Roth's status is within the ivory tower. The alleged sexism is particularly problematic. Whenever he wins anything, there's an audible cry of dissent.

Click to expand...

I didn't notice any hint of this, but now that you mention it the FMC of Stain (Iris) is certainly unusual, but I did like her. Tough, resilient, and yet completely personable...

Eliza azilE said:

-Because the Nobel committee adores socially-conscious post-modern novels, I think Delillo's gonna win before any other American. I'm not saying that win will be wise or foolish--just a prediction.

By the same rubric, I think Updike never won because he wasn't political enough.

Roth is more political than Updike, but is he political enough for the committee? Maybe. But contrasted with Delillo? No.

Again, it doesn't matter what you or I think. The committee has its own reasons for awarding the prize to whomever, and that's that.

Click to expand...

I should explain that I stumbled upon DeLillo years ago when my main writing concern was poetry. His writing changed the way I looked at a novel. So I came to Roth after being a dedicated DeLillo junkie, and as a critical fiction writer who desperately wanted to learn how these authors do what they do. =)

Story wise and plot wise, I enjoyed Stain. It gave me a great appreciation of the complexities Philip wove together. I can't imagine the outlines upon outlines that had to be assembled and compared to bring all that together! It's seriously overwhelming... but it's not anything at all like I'd see in a DeLillo novel. Don (to me) is more of a scene painter, an impressionist that says: like it or not here it is, while Philip dove deeply into multiple layers of "why" his story is came to be.

Neither are (to me) exactly even handed when it comes to women characters, but if I had to choose DeLillo would probably win. (I liked Philip's Lily - but she's a novel unto herself!)

I don't want to turn this thread into a comparison of the two because I see each of them having amazing talents in different areas, so it's very difficult for me to put them side by side for a comparison.

What I can say, is that now, reading each of their works with a very critical eye and tearing things apart in an attempt to understand how they do it so that I can try.... I placed one post-it note in Stain for the passage that begins: Dance for me... (page 225 in my copy, chapter 4, What Maniac Conceived It?) Whereas every single DeLillo on my shelf has multitudes of post-its with little notes explaining why I marked each passage... and that doesn't mean anything to anyone but me.

blacbird said:

By critical rep, Roth is probably the pre-eminent American literary novelist still extant, possibly with the rivalry of John Irving. It's been a while since an American writer won a Nobel, and Vonnegut and Updike both being now dead, Roth is probably the top candidate.

Click to expand...

Or Joyce Carol Oates, who comes up as a suggested Nobel candidate year after year. Toni Morrison is a Nobel-winner and is still with us and active.

I have to confess I've not read any Roth - one of a long list of writers I mean to try sometime.