Philip Roth's work – the mystery within
I hold firmly against the notion that every writer has a single or singular theme in his or her writing. When that happens, the writer is either way too one dimensional, or his art is conditioned not by the necessity of creativity, but rather by some external dictate such as Social Realism during the Soviet times.
At the same time, I think that writers do have major themes present in their works. Those are fun to uncover (comparative literature professors are actually paid to do it) just for the sake of the analytical detective game. Such themes can also be useful in providing a productive vantage point when regarding new works by the author (of course, viewing a work from a particular vantage point could distract and limit one's interpretation and enjoyment, but that is a different discussion altogether).
I have just finished reading my fourth Roth Book – “I Married a Communist.” The others have been “Portnoy’s Complaint,” “Operation Shylock,” and “The Human Stain.” After the initial shock of experiencing Roth’s formidable talent, his theme began to take shape.
While I cannot say that Roth writes mysteries in any conventional way, the theme that I gleaned from his book does deal with a mystery, one might say one of the ultimate mysteries that is kicking around: Who people truly are, and how they relate to where they live. Just in case you have not read the books I’d mentioned, I will not reveal any plot twists, but rather speak in general terms. Each one of Roth’s books that I have read takes a character (or sometimes a number of characters), and goes through the process of flaying them, layer after layer, trying to reveal who they truly are. Sometimes there are veritable mysteries -- facts we supposedly know about the character at the beginning of the book turns out to be wrong (I am not getting into details so as not to spoil any surprises, but do read “The Human Stain.”). More often it is a question that is explored – who is that person? In “I Married a Communist,” the book deals with a person who was a Communist (should not be a great surprise, that). What the book actually explores is what did it mean to be a Communist in the 40’s and 50’s in America. The struggle to define that term, a term that is supposed to clearly identify an entire group of people, exposes the individuals in question as well as the people who surround them along with the social institutions and societal forces that mold and direct them. The degree of exposition, of insight, of understanding that is being imparted upon the reader is beyond anything else I have encountered so far.
If I were to try and give a visual image of Roth’s work, I would liken it to one of those glass balls with some kind of panoramic view in it. When you shake the ball, what ends up whirling inside are not fake snow flakes, but rather all the labels attached to all the elements of the view. To the degree that art permits it, Roth shows the essence of things, rather than the social and linguistic constructs that supposed to convey things in an easily understandable fashion. That is both part of the appeal and the potential difficulty in reading Roth’s work. As you read, you get the feeling that you actually understand something about people, 20th century, America, what have you. Roth’s descriptions happily defy the “Show, don’t tell” dictum, for at some point, in order to get into the emotional and psychological depth his aims require, Roth has to tell us what someone feels, or what he thinks, even though the thoughts and emotions are in no way exhibited by the character. This type of violation of the artistic principle can be executed without turning the work into a moralizing mush only if a great talent is coupled with a purpose that justifies the “transgression.” Roth’s work more than justifies it. In a way, he completely removes the demarcation line between people’s outer and inner worlds. There is no innovation in presenting a character’s internal thoughts. The innovation is in the ability to present a character’s inner world with the same believability and authenticity, as one would depict a New Jersey diner.
3:36:56 PM 
|
|
