I bought my copy of the biography but I will not read it until I've read every Philip Roth novel. To date, I have read 7 of them. So far, this reading exercise has been fun. I'm pacing myself at 1 novel per week.
“What has been on such gruesome display in the Bailey story (and so many others) is not the failure of individuals who have been harmed to speak up to protect others; it’s the broader failure of anyone in power to care when they do.”
Who cares? Does his so-called "gruesome" behavior in any way negate his scholarship or writing ability? If he were a plagiarist, then by all means, stop the publication of his book. But there were plenty of great artists and writers who were less than morally impeccable, to say the least. This should not detract from the greatness of their work. That's all that matters: the work.
I have read almost all of Roth's books, including his autobiography, and his book about his relationship with his father, called "Patrimony." Why would I want to read a biography of a writer who dealt exhaustively in his books with his personal history? It would be an exercise in redundancy.
@@BNardolilli I don't know why Roth bothered with this guy. He couldn't possibly have as much insight into Roth as Roth himself had. And I doubt his style is equal to Roth's. (Thank you for saying my comment was reminiscent of PR. Perhaps I unconsciously imitated him?)
@@rubyparchment5523 On the other hand, Roth himself lived to be 85 without any diminution of his critical faculties and he was still producing excellent works of art into his 70s. But time, alas, only runs in one direction, and is famous for running out on all of us.
