Roth is so annoying: it's like he's sitting on your face and you can't breathe

[Sylph]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/may/18/judge-quits-philip-roth-booker

[(poco) Sforzando]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/may/18/judge-quits-philip-roth-booker

But he gave us a good IRA.

[Scarpia]

I share the view that Roth can become quite tiresome.  I've read a number of his books; there are exceptions but many of them seem to portray a thinly disguised version of himself.  My form of protest is probably not reading any more of them, though.

[Brian]

I can definitely understand her point of view. Roth is one of a small clique of postwar authors who simply tire me; along with Saul Bellow (one of Roth's great supporters) and John Updike, as well as the post-22 Joseph Heller (and some Woody Allen too), he seems to be a member of a group of writers gifted with good-to-astounding prose skills (Bellow's sentences make me groan with envy) but generally unable to write characters who live outside the narrow purview of their own experiences: that is to say, privileged, middle-to-upper class, obsessed with sexual freedoms and exploitation of the female, frequently Jewish, terrified of the wars of the world, neurotic despite obvious creature comforts, and burdened with an all-pervading pessimism which settles on their minds and worldviews like a thick, low fog. I've read some very funny Roth and some extremely funny middle-period Heller, and I recently read Bellow's Herzog and admired its prose, but the whole coterie seems, to me, to be an ensemble with a very limited repertoire. It wouldn't surprise me at all if, in 50 years, Roth, Updike, Bellow, Richler, Heller, Delillo and Allen are mainly remembered, outside a couple of their standout novels/stories/films, as stylistic virtuosi and solid craftsmen who took the easy way out in settling for dime-a-dozen moroseness in the face of luxury. Only the privileged can afford to be morose. The people who have real stuff to complain about write Invisible Man.

I'm even more sympathetic to the judge because she's female. Roth's women are so often sexual props for the men - Portnoy's Complaint and Sabbath's Theater are all about male libidos. Roth's men tend to be self-absorbed anyway. When I recently read Bellow's legendary Herzog, the fact that the female characters were all cardboard cutouts, there to either emasculate or, uh, erect, made me think of the novel as having a downright 18th-century approach to gender and femininity. It's no wonder women feel excluded from that kind of author.

Leaving the final word to the (privileged, upper-middle-class, white) author David Foster Wallace, from a description of one of Updike's too-many autobiographical narrators:
"Rampant or flaccid, Ben Turnbull's unhappiness is obvious right from the novel's first page. It never once occurs to him, though, that the reason he's so unhappy is that he's an asshole."
Ben Turnbull's not alone. Portnoy's an asshole. Sabbath's an asshole. Duddy Kravitz is an asshole. Bob from Something Happened is well meaning but kind of an asshole. Herzog ditto. Yossarian might be the most lovable asshole ever written.

OBVIOUSLY RATHER IMPORTANT CAVEAT: I haven't read Roth's new novel Nemesis.
OBVIOUSLY RATHER IMPORTANT CAVEAT II: I know very, very little Raymond Carver, and only left him out of the barrage in case someone far more well-read than I jumps in and proves me wrong. Which will happen anyway.

[Scarpia]

In all fairness, I rate many of his novels highly, including American Pastoral, The Human Stain and The Plot Against American (the last one because of the vivid depiction of Newark before it was overwhelmed by urban blight).  But for every great one there are five self-obsessed ones, it seems.

[Brian]

In all fairness, I rate many of his novels highly, including American Pastoral, The Human Stain and The Plot Against American (the last one because of the vivid depiction of Newark before it was overwhelmed by urban blight).  But for every great one there are five self-obsessed ones, it seems.

Yeah. I'm starting to think that "write what you know" is close to the worst advice an author can get.

[Scarpia]

Yeah. I'm starting to think that "write what you know" is close to the worst advice an author can get.

The key is write what you know, and know about something other than your own sexual idiosyncrasies.

[Sergeant Rock]

I'm even more sympathetic to the judge because she's female.

But how objective, unbiased is she? If she were a legal judge I think she'd be forced to recuse herself 

"The founder of the feminist publishing house Virago. Virago published Claire Bloom's "Leaving a Doll's House" (autobiography of the actress and her mutually unedifying relationship with Roth, to which Roth responded brilliantly but brutally in I Married A Communist)"

I agree with most of what you have to say but I do love Bellow's Humbolt's Gift (about one of my poet/heroes Delmore Schwartz), and Roth's Goodbye Columbus and Heller's Catch-22 (my bible for 22 years of military service) and anything with Woody Allen's name on it. But Updike's Rabbit Run turned me off so powerfully when I read it (around age 17, I think) I never picked up another of his books.

I suppose it can seem annoying when privileged white males complain about life and mortality...but hey, they have the leisure for it; the time to actually think about the human condition: the fact that we're all on the way to the grave. They may have a sweeter ride but the end is the same and no less depressing no matter who you are.

Sarge

[Scarpia]

But how objective, unbiased is she? If she were a legal judge I think she'd be forced to recuse herself 

"The founder of the feminist publishing house Virago. Virago published Claire Bloom's "Leaving a Doll's House" (autobiography of the actress and her mutually unedifying relationship with Roth, to which Roth responded brilliantly but brutally in I Married A Communist)"

I agree with most of what you have to say but I do love Bellow's Humbolt's Gift (about one of my poet/heroes Delmore Schwartz), and Roth's Goodbye Columbus and Heller's Catch-22 (my bible for 22 years of military service) and anything with Woody Allen's name on it. But Updike's Rabbit Run turned me off so powerfully when I read it (around age 17, I think) I never picked up another of his books.

I suppose it can seem annoying when privileged white males complain about life and mortality...but hey, they have the leisure for it; the time to actually think about the human condition: the fact that we're all on the way to the grave. They may have a sweeter ride but the end is the same and no less depressing no matter who you are.

Sarge

I don't have any problem with the judge that resigned.  If she felt strongly enough that she didn't want her name associated with the award she had no choice but to resign.  The committee was quite small and the decision seems rather arbitrary to me.   Arbitrary enough that I don't think I will be paying much attention to who wins the Booker prize in the future.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I share Brian's (and Scarpia's) reservations. I have never liked Roth, Updike et al. I found them too narrow and they couldn't teach me anything about writing a Joyce, James, Kafka and other (greater) dead writers couldn't do better.

[Cato]

Brian's, J.Z. Herrenberg's and the negative comments of others about Roth and Company echo my antipathy.

Yes, Herzog the "legendary novel" by Bellow...I just do not find anything of interest, either in style or content.

Here are some writers of legendary epics: if you are under 60 and recognize the names, I will be surprised.

Ever hear of Lloyd Douglas, James Gould Cozzens, Thomas Costain, Booth Tarkington, Warwick Deeping, Mary Rinehart?  Many of their books were best-sellers, lionized, and turned into movies.

Or Ross Lockridge, a candidate for The Great American Novel, whose entry was turned into an Elizabeth Taylor movie?

Anyone, anyone?

Even Sinclair Lewis has faded, despite the Nobel Prize. 

I find most of them more interesting than Roth and Company: were they great?  I think they approached it at least more often than Roth and Company.

I sense that Roth and Company and their foul-mouthed, politicized, malakial oeuvre will fade, unless the professors keep resuscitating them.

[Scarpia]

This will get your back up!

http://www.loa.org/roth

Sinclair Lewis rates 2 volumes, Roth 6, so far.

[ooops, miscounted]

[Cato]

This will get your back up!

http://www.loa.org/roth

Sinclair Lewis rates 2 volumes, Roth 7.

Oy! And Roth is such a mumser!   0:)

[drogulus]

The key is write what you know, and know about something other than your own sexual idiosyncrasies.

     Oh, is that the key? Just think how good these writers might have been if they had only known.

     I love Bellow and Roth. Their Jewishness doesn't bother me at all.

[Brian]

But how objective, unbiased is she? If she were a legal judge I think she'd be forced to recuse herself 

"The founder of the feminist publishing house Virago. Virago published Claire Bloom's "Leaving a Doll's House" (autobiography of the actress and her mutually unedifying relationship with Roth, to which Roth responded brilliantly but brutally in I Married A Communist)"

Oh, snap. Makes me wonder if the other two judges picked Roth just to see what she'd do.

I agree with most of what you have to say but I do love Bellow's Humbolt's Gift (about one of my poet/heroes Delmore Schwartz), and Roth's Goodbye Columbus and Heller's Catch-22 (my bible for 22 years of military service) and anything with Woody Allen's name on it. But Updike's Rabbit Run turned me off so powerfully when I read it (around age 17, I think) I never picked up another of his books.

I suppose it can seem annoying when privileged white males complain about life and mortality...but hey, they have the leisure for it; the time to actually think about the human condition: the fact that we're all on the way to the grave. They may have a sweeter ride but the end is the same and no less depressing no matter who you are.

Sarge

That line of reasoning certainly makes sense. As mortals, we all have something to worry about. I guess part of life is knowing what your lot in worrying is. And, incidentally, (a) God do I love Catch-22, though thankfully can't relate to it from actual experience, (b) my mother read Rabbit Run while a PhD student in literature and had the same experience. Her hatred for Updike is unreplicated in her dislike of people we've actually met. 

Arbitrary enough that I don't think I will be paying much attention to who wins the Booker prize in the future.

Bear in mind this is the new "Booker International" and not the real Booker Prize. Something tells me it's a half-baked spinoff, like CSI: Omaha.

Ever hear of Lloyd Douglas, James Gould Cozzens, Thomas Costain, Booth Tarkington, Warwick Deeping, Mary Rinehart?  Many of their books were best-sellers, lionized, and turned into movies.

I've only heard of Booth Tarkington, and only because he's a Hoosier like I am. Time is a cruel, cruel undertaker, and to write a novel which is able to survive time's antagonism is maybe more remarkable a thing that we can remember. Here once again we've got the finest of a generation, ready to be forgotten.

[Florestan]

the fact that the female characters were all cardboard cutouts, there to either emasculate or, uh, erect, made me think of the novel as having a downright 18th-century approach to gender and femininity.

Actually, the women in 18-th century novels can be just as strong, shrewd and manipulative as the men, or even more. Look no further than Henry Fielding or Choderlos de Laclos. 

[Florestan]

I suppose it can seem annoying when privileged white males complain about life and mortality...but hey, they have the leisure for it; the time to actually think about the human condition: the fact that we're all on the way to the grave. They may have a sweeter ride but the end is the same and no less depressing no matter who you are.

He he, exactly.

[Florestan]

Here are some writers of legendary epics: if you are under 60 and recognize the names, I will be surprised.

Ever hear of Lloyd Douglas, James Gould Cozzens, Thomas Costain, Booth Tarkington, Warwick Deeping, Mary Rinehart?  Many of their books were best-sellers, lionized, and turned into movies.

Anyone, anyone?

Lloyd Douglas' Disputed Passage and Warwick Deeping's Sincerity were responsible (among others) for my contemplating a medical career in my early teens. (I'm almost 39) 

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I can definitely understand her point of view. Roth is one of a small clique of postwar authors who simply tire me; along with Saul Bellow [judicious appraisal snipped] Only the privileged can afford to be morose.

I think your description of Bellow's pluses and minuses and (by extension) that of other writers is hard to argue with...that said, even the greatest writers have blind spots; the belletristic imagination is rarely encyclopedic. For instance, the list of famous male writers who can't create convincing female characters (or characters from outside their own social milieux) would be a long one. Being "unable to write characters who live outside the narrow purview of their own experiences" is an occupational hazard for novelists of whatever rank.

I've only heard of Booth Tarkington, and only because he's a Hoosier like I am. Time is a cruel, cruel undertaker, and to write a novel which is able to survive time's antagonism is maybe more remarkable a thing that we can remember. Here once again we've got the finest of a generation, ready to be forgotten.

It's interesting to look at an essay like Mencken's "The National Letters," from c. 1920, and see just what was popular then and what has faded. I was thrown once by Mencken's reference to Winston Churchill, but then I discovered that said fellow was actually a hugely popular American novelist of the period:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill_(novelist)

Lloyd Douglas' Disputed Passage and Warwick Deeping's Sincerity were responsible (among others) for my contemplating a medical career in my early teens. (I'm almost 39) 

That raises another interesting topic: writers who were once popular in their country of origin, but whose popularity abroad has outlived their popularity at home. I would bet that Jack London, John Galsworthy, and JB Priestley are more popular in Russia now than in their home countries. Why, I don't know. I've only heard of W. Deeping via some references in Orwell's essays.

[snyprrr]

frequently Jewish

frequently?,...frequently??,... hahaha...