I've had my head down the last week or so cleaning up the first half of my novel, so I managed to miss the news of both Philip Roth's winning of the Man Booker Prize, and Carmen Callil's absolutely idiotic comments in the wake of that victory.
"I don't rate him as a writer at all. I made it clear that I wouldn't have put him on the longlist, so I was amazed when he stayed there. He was the only one I didn't admire – all the others were fine. Roth goes to the core of their [Cartwright and Gekoski's] beings. But he certainly doesn't go to the core of mine . . .Emperor's clothes: in 20 years' time will anyone read him?
I mean, yes, OK, The Humbling - embarrassing. But come on.
Putting my head back down. Nice to see you all survived the Rapture.
I suspect there was much more going on behind that contretemps than the public will ever likely know.
Posted by: Paul Lamb | May 24, 2011 at 03:58 AM
Callil gives a more considered opinion here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/may/21/man-booker-international-carmen-callil?intcmp=239
There are great moments in Roth's work. He is clever, harsh, comic, but his reach is narrow. Not in the Austen, Bellow or Updike sense, because they use a narrow canvas to convey the widest concepts and ideas. Roth digs brilliantly into himself, but little else is there. His self-involvement and self-regard restrict him as a novelist. And so he uses a big canvas to do small things, and yet his small things take up oceanic room.
Rough justice, perhaps. But some justice nonetheless.
Posted by: (The Other) Niall | May 24, 2011 at 07:16 AM
As far as publishers not even promoting his work in 20 years, Ms. Callili might notice that all of Roth's work dating back to the late 50s is still in print. As to being narrow, that's a rather limited judgment. It only applies if you think Celine or Gide narrow. In fact, Gide's dictum that 'the more individual one becomes the more universal one becomes' is applicable. If Roth's viability as a writer were so narrow it's highly unlikely his work would be in translation in so many languages.
Posted by: David Clarke | May 24, 2011 at 04:45 PM
When you lift it you might mention the Wodehouse, and Super Sad's not so sad author.
Posted by: ward jones | May 26, 2011 at 08:23 AM
I made it clear that I wouldn't have put him on the longlist, so I was amazed when he stayed there.
Posted by: Islamic Scholars | May 26, 2011 at 12:12 PM