Rating: 
Summary: preposterous
Review: After i read "American Pastoral", i decided it's enough for me - i am over with Roth. Not that i hated the book - it's just nowhere near his absolutely authentic "Portnoy's Complaint". First - a few good things about Roth, though. "Portnoy's Complaint" is enough to keep him in the list of excellent writers forever. Frank, sincere, to the point - real thing, i would say. His other books - i read "I Married a Communist" and "American Pastoral" - are much weaker. Not bad, still - just not enough for me ... There is still some seriousness in both though. The story of a girl from this wonderful family who became what she became reads very authentic too ... It's just may be there's not enough material for this many pages of "American Pastoral". If Roth made it in half of the space - it might have been much better. Now, back to "Human Stain". The word "preposterous" immediately came to my mind when i realized that Silk is black. I do not know America that well, just 15 years here, still all this story about Coleman bringing his girlfriend to see his family, as well as his whole life of a "[black] Jew" looks like a very artificial arrangement. The section about Coleman's second girlfriend does not add anything to the narrative. Neither his relationships with his children look real enough to me (as opposed to "American Pastoral", by the way). A lot of other things are equally hard to believe. The story of this French intellectual woman writing anonymous letter ... i met a few French people in my life, intellectual or otherwise ... it's amazing how much Roth is off the mark here - comparing with what i know from other sources personal encounters, books, movies. In general, Delphine's behavior looks to me as untrue as it can go ... Also, the book is clearly written to the tune of political "hot items" discussions and trends ... feels like all sincerety is lost by Roth, replaced by newspaper reading and desire to sell more copies ... I got the same feeling from reading "Disgrace" by this year Nobel Prize winner Coetzee ... The pages where this crazed Vietnam veteran is described - his war and peace experience - are a disgrace to both Vietnam veterans and the readers. Things like that deserve either one paragraph (a reference to what the reader already knows), or a whole volume - if a writer really has something to say. One should not narrate a story of such a magnitude in a couple of pages. On the other hand, the description of his rehab attempts - Chinese restaurant and all that - is excellent. Detailed descriptions of milking cows in "The Human Stain", or glove making and leather factory operation in "American Pastoral" remind me of Arthur Hailey books ... which belong to a completely different domain, not where Roth positioned himself. The final section, about Coleman's death and French professor, is even worse: Roth succeeded in making it bot preposterous and predictable, however difficult this task might sound. French intellectual does look like an American housewife after all ... As a footnote - i liked the way Roth describes Clinton/Lewinsky affair in the beginning of "What do you do with the kid who can't read" chapter. This could be published separately, as an essay. To put it shortly - Roth has pretty much nothing to say any more. Sorry.
Rating: 
Summary: Original Sin Human Stain
Review: This is a book that will leave you breathless, shattered and in awe long after you finish the last page. Philip Roth's brilliant insight into the dark side of the human psyche is exquisitely brought out in the principal characters of his novel, Coleman Silk, Faunia Farley, Les Farley, and Delphine Roux. In denial and absolute rejection of his very own race, Coleman Silk is unredeemable in the pain he inflicts upon his family and in his refusal to rise to his own defense over unfounded racial remarks he innocently makes because of what he thinks is necessary to survive in a white controlled society. Faunia is a victim of her brutal upbringing and lives a debased life of sexual malfunction and disorder. Les Farley is a victim of his soul's inner darkness and violent nature that assumes catastrophic proportions edged on by post-war syndrome that unleashes a reign of terror leading to death. Delphine Roux, the rejected intellectual at the College Coleman teaches at desires his attention but in his rejection of her she fails to accept his lack of interest and too seeks his ruin which unknowingly dovetails with Les's brutal intentions. The central theme of the novel, Coleman's race rejection and his refusal to rise to his own defense over the innocent use of vocabulary in his description of two minority students is only secondary to the major issue of the real issues addressed by Roth of hatred, jelousy, and unneccessary revenge. This is a must read for all interested in the understanding of the human condition. This novel so beautifully touches the inner core of the soul that it will leave you thinking long after you have finished reading it.
Rating: 
Summary: Incredibly Overrated
Review: This is the first book I have read by Mr. Roth and it will be a long time before I read another one. I first picked up the Human Stain as I was extremely excited to see Anthony Hopkins and Nicole Kidman were going to star in the movie version. I've lately been on a kick of reading a novel and seeing it on opening night. But I will probably not even bother to drop the $8.50 because the book left me so disappointed. The writing was extremely wordy. I completely agree with another review that said Roth could really use another editor. The author goes on tangents about the life of a crow as seen through the eyes of the main female character and this passages amoung others left me comepletely bored. The author also spends a large portion of the book explaining the backgrounds of the characters without giving us alot of substance in the character's present interactions. There are brief highlights in the book including a peek in at the life of an Vietnam Vet and his struggles in day to day life including eating in a chinese restaurant. This supporrting character (Les) was by far the most intruiging character and the passages about him would make an excellent short story. The lead female character (Faunia) was also compelling but wasn't allowed to completely develop as the author was more concerned with Coleman Silk and his background. But I also throughly enjoyed a passage where Faunia danced for Coleman and tried to teach him the value of life. As I said I was disappointed on a whole but after page 200 of the paperback the writing got better and the ending was actually better then I thought it would be. But if I had to recommend a book that plays on similiar themes I think Atonement by Ian McEwan was infintely better.
Rating:
Summary: Is Roth advocating white racal purity?
Review: "The Human Stain" strongly advocates the "one drop" definition of "black" (tacitly neglecting to mention the African ancestry in Latinos, Arabs, etc.). Roth takes the position that the protagonist, "Coleman Silk," had committed a terribly immoral act (somewhat comparable to child molesting or worse) by not immediately informing everyone in his life of his partial black ancestry. No OTHER ancestry is held to this standard. Roth would have us believe that the physically and culturally white Coleman Silk was "really" black and had deceived and somehow tainted everyone around him by not confessing to the apparent crime of black ancestry in a person who does not show it. Can you imagine a book where a character is condemned for not revealing any NON-BLACK ancestry? The Human Stain is a thinly disguised attack on the late New York Times book critic, Anatole Broyard, a fellow European-American who deserves respect, not this kind of racist condemnation. "The Human Stain" has side issues of political correctness in universities and a weeping, "abandoned" mother (a la "Imitation of Life"), but these are only minor distractions that hide the real issue: How can "Coleman Silk" be guilty of "passing for white" IF Roth is NOT saying that "black" genes are inferior and IF he is NOT saying that white racial purity is real or desirable. If racial equality is real, then "Coleman Silk" is not guilty of ANY racial sin or crime. You cannot pretend to be against racism and at the same time advocate a doctrine based on the racist assumption that "black" genes are tainted and destroy the right of white people to call themselves "white." The Human Stain miseducates people of good will and leads people of mixed ancestry to believe they have no choice but to submit to a "one drop" rule that has no legal standing but strong advocacy from the gatekeepers of our culture. If "black" ancestry is NOT inferior, why isn't "Coleman Silk" white? Change the "black" ancestry to American Indian, and there's no problem with calling Coleman "white." Some reviewers tried to draw a comparison between Coleman Silk and a "self-hating Jew" (which Roth has been accused of being). The comparison is invalid. The Jewish heritage is a real one in which Roth takes little or no pride. The "black" identity assigned to "Coleman Silk" is a stigma no more valid or worthy of respect than the "Aryan" and Jewish "races" of the Third Reich.
Rating:
Summary: What is White? What is Black? What is a Jew?
Review: This masterpiece book, which thankfully is less about Philip Roth himself than about the most emotional issues in American society, brings up a number of questions: What is "white"? What is "black"? How can being black in the U.S. in the late 20th century be so bad that one would be willing to give up so much: heritage, siblings, mother? What is "a Jew"? Is it merely a "Mediterranean" complexion and curly hair and a familiarity with corned beef on rye? Here is someone "passing" as a Jew who does not have a Jewish home, belong to any Jewish institutions, celebrate Jewish holidays, read Jewish texts. Yet his estranged son recites the Kaddish at his funeral. Where did he learn this?
The writing never fails to astound. Every scene is so beautifully crafted and rich in detail it brought tears to my eyes -- especially the scenes recounting the experiences of Vietnam veterans: at the Memorial, in the Chinese restaurant. Brilliant! I just finished the book and will re-read it to enjoy every sentence, paragraph, page. I hope the film does it justice.
Rating:
Summary: By leaps and bounds ...
Review: Even after American Pastoral and I Married A Communist, this book still astounded me. I wasn't particularly impressed by Roth when I read him in the 1970s. Nor in the 1980s or early 1990s. He wasn't a bad writer, but he certainly wasn't great.
Now he is. Human Stain and the two other titles I mentioned represent amazing growth, a writer capable of capturing the pain of loss and all the hurt humans are capable of doing to one another. The way he blurs lines between fact and fiction is thought-provoking, as is the way he constructs a carefully arranged narrative - and then toys with it. This simply isn't the same writer who made his name with Portnoy's Complaint.
Rating:
Summary: one of the best novels i have ever read
Review: This book sat on my bookshelf for over a year before I decided to pick it up and read it. I had only read Roth's Portnoy's Complaint and wasn't too impressed with it. But, when I found out that there was a movie adaptation of the book I wanted to make sure that I read the book before seeing the movie (books are typically far superior to the film adaptation). It didn't take long before I was floored. The Human Stain is an exceptional novel and has completely turned around my opinion of Philip Roth. Without question this is one of the best novels I have read this year. The Human Stain is the story of Coleman Silk, a retired college professor from Athena College. Coleman retired from his position in the midst of a scandal. He was accused of making a racist remark in one of his classes towards two students. The accusation is patently untrue but Coleman was not the most popular man on campus and things began to steamroll out of control until he left the school. The joke inherent in this accusation is that while Coleman may look like a 71 year old white man, he is actually a black man. Coleman has spent his professional (and private) life denying who (and what) he is. In case this concept sounds too fantastic (a black man who looks white trying to hide the fact that he is black), there is a real life corollary in Anatole Broyard, a New York Times book critic. This is the Coleman that we are first introduced to. He is in a sexual (and not much more) relationship with 34 year old Faunia Farley. She is illiterate and works as a cleaning lady at Athena College. This too, is a scandal waiting to happen. It is this relationship with Faunia that instigates the telling of the story and we are told very early in the novel that Coleman and Faunia do not live for many more months (by early, I mean within 20 pages). The story is told by writer Nathan Zuckerman. Zuckerman was told most of what he knows by Coleman. For quite some time Coleman tried to get Zuckerman to write a book about the events following the alleged racist remark. The Human Stain (the title of Roth's novel as well as Zuckerman's book) is not quite the book that Coleman wanted written, but it was a story that Zuckerman felt compelled to tell. We must remember that everything is shaded by what Zuckerman knows and what he believes. There is a long section in the middle of the book dealing with a young Coleman Silk. We see him in High School and get glimpses of how he became a black man hiding behind his white skin and denying his family and why he would have done such a thing. This section deals with Coleman being a young boxer and the relationships with women that he engaged in. For all the power of this book, the section on the young Coleman is the most powerful. I first expected it to break the rhythm of the story, but it fits perfectly and is one of the best passages in the novel. After being somewhat put off Roth from reading Portnoy's Complaint, this book impressed me so much I'm looking forward to reading American Pastoral. I have a hard time imagining that Roth wrote a better book than The Human Stain, but a different novel won the Pulitzer. Awards aside, The Human Stain is one of the best books I have read all year and is simply exceptional work. After finishing the book, the best I can say is: wow. The book really is that good. I would highly recommend The Human Stain.
Rating: 
Summary: Can an old white guy really understand women?
Review: While I don't dispute that this is an interesting (if not particularly original) book, it's astounding to me that after so many years as an author Roth is still unable to write well about women. The dreaded Professor Roux is awfully one-dimensional and contrived - she seemed to be based upon someone in Roth's own past with whom he is still angry. And the real reason that Roux is so mean and miserable? She's lonely and just needs a good older man like Phillip Roth (oops, I mean Coleman Silk). Others have argued that the characterization of Faunia Farley is thoughtful and deep: yet this "depth" stems more from the fact that Roth rarely allows her to say anything than from any empathetic writing on his part. Roth's use of strong words to describe sexual situations - is he trying to shock us? To startle us? is a distraction. This book would have benefitted from a good editor (preferably a woman).
Rating:
Summary: completely Over rated!!
Review: This book in my opinion is not worthy of praise. It is perhaps the worst book I have ever finished. Normally, I would have set this down and forgotten about it, but it came so highly recommended that I kept going, only to discover that it got no better.
The biggest problem with this book is that it needs an editor. The author blathers on neurotically about anything and everything, and these ramblings usually add nothing to the story. Entire paragraphs could be skipped with absolutely no negative effect on comprehension of the plot or understanding of the characters.
Another major problem is that all the characters spoke with exactly the same voice...they all sounded the same....If they were not identified, one would be hard-pressed to distinguish the characters based on their verbose speech patterns.
Finally, I found the main character in the book to be completely unbelievable....I know it's fiction, but it was way too much of a stretch.
Side Note:
I saw a woman on the bus reading this book, and I asked her how it was. She told me that her friend had recommended it, but she had found it disappointing, and thought about just giving up on it altogether several times. However, she, like me, got so far along that she felt obligated to finish it.
Don't be fooled like we were.....pass on this book and move onto something more deserving of your time.
Rating:
Summary: Roth Gets Overly Analytical Here
Review: I have mixed feelings about Phillip Roth. He definitely has a unique writing style that a person could identify from a mile away if no one told you that what you were reading was something by Roth. Yet in this book he gets over analytical. Page after page of finely parsed analysis, for what seems like just for the sake of analysis, becomes wearing after awhile. And the way his narrator dismisses the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal is so typically p.c. Fact is, Clinton lied under oath before a grand jury. That alone, justified his impeachment. If he didn't think what he and Lewinski did was anyone's business then that's what he should have told the grand jury (though I do believe that performing sex acts in the oval office qualifies as something the tax payers have the right to know about, and don't doubt that other presidents did the same; yet if other presidents were asked about it and lied under oath, then they, too, would be justified in being impeached). As for Coleman Silk's escape from "blackness," I found Roth's portrayal very interesting. It brought to mind the absurd nature of the African American experience in America for those of us who don't have the choice of escaping as Coleman did. I'm constantly amazed at the imperviousness of Caucasians to this predicament and would love for every Caucasian to spend at least one month under such suffocating constraints before passing judgement on African Americans. It appears that Roth, at least, has thought about many of the absurdities. The pity is that Coleman found it necessary to "kill off" his mother and siblings in order to be free. Would that he would have simply told his wife about his family (he already claimed that he thinks she could have handled it), and kept in contact with them, while just allowing everyone else to assume what they wanted to.
| 
