Skip to main content

Nemesis

I have just completed Philip Roth's 2010 novel, Nemesis, which seems to me to be a classic of simple diction and classical story-telling, like Hemingway's Old Man and the Sea - and Roth too deserves the Nobel for this book, which is about as humane, moving, suspenseful, and powerful as literature can get - concerned as it is with mind, body, and soul - ultimately how these inter-act with history, love, and duty - over which hangs death and disease.  Biblical, yet homely and local (Newark), timeless and yet set in a time fraught for Jews and all Americans (1944), focused on a few young Jewish people of decency, and yet widening to embrace all those struck by "bad luck", and those blessed with good fortune, Nemesis amazed me with its efficacy.

It is the first novel of this century, in English, that truly made me want to write my own novel.  However, what is doubly impressive is that Roth has pulled off a neat trick - while seemingly straightforward, this is a fiction, and a text, that is, in some ways, highly modernist in its tricks.  For one, the narrator, while not exactly "unreliable", as in The Good Soldier, looks on with uncertainty at some stages; the three sections are notably various in tone; and the gosh-shucks Americana of the diction, dialogue and style is gently ironic, but also true to the time.  More notably, the novel is suffused with an unbearable level of dramatic irony, building to a proper tragedy, which wrong-foots the reader who might have though the authorial ethos was simply anti-God or even existential.  Indeed, the pathos of the ending is heightened by there being a sense of the avoidable about this nonetheless character-foretold destiny. I don't want to say too much more to destroy the experience for readers.

I hope the Coen Brothers make this a film.  They are utterly suited to capturing the tension and black comedy of every moment.  I'd have said Kubrick, but he is dead - indeed, the intertwining of sincerity and irony we see in Kubrick's films is very present here.  And, as befits a novel about a young phys ed teacher, the classical end is sublimely beautiful.  Or perhaps Spielberg could do this, if he returned to his Schindler's List mode.

Comments

Poetry Pleases! said…
Dear Todd

I have read a few novels by Philip Roth but for some reason, he never quite compelled my attention in the same way as Updike and Bellow. Todd, I think that you ought to write your memoirs. You are a natural writer who has led a very interesting life with lots of highs and lows in several different countries. If you ever finished it, I would definitely buy a copy.

Best wishes from Simon

Popular posts from this blog

CLIVE WILMER'S THOM GUNN SELECTED POEMS IS A MUST-READ

THAT HANDSOME MAN  A PERSONAL BRIEF REVIEW BY TODD SWIFT I could lie and claim Larkin, Yeats , or Dylan Thomas most excited me as a young poet, or even Pound or FT Prince - but the truth be told, it was Thom Gunn I first and most loved when I was young. Precisely, I fell in love with his first two collections, written under a formalist, Elizabethan ( Fulke Greville mainly), Yvor Winters triad of influences - uniquely fused with an interest in homerotica, pop culture ( Brando, Elvis , motorcycles). His best poem 'On The Move' is oddly presented here without the quote that began it usually - Man, you gotta go - which I loved. Gunn was - and remains - so thrilling, to me at least, because so odd. His elegance, poise, and intelligence is all about display, about surface - but the surface of a panther, who ripples with strength beneath the skin. With Gunn, you dressed to have sex. Or so I thought.  Because I was queer (I maintain the right to lay claim to that

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".