DeLillo or Roth?

[Manchegan]

I've heard it said that McCarthy, Pynchon, Delillo, and Roth are the best living American authors. I've read a few books by Pynchon and McCarthy, so it's probably about time I give the other two a chance. Anybody have any thoughts on which is the better of the two? What does each author bring to the table? or do you know any other great modern writers?

[catatonic]

I'm still waiting for J.D. Salinger to die. Presumably he has at least two completed manuscripts that he has tucked away in his files.

[Drkshadow03]

Roth. Philip Roth is the author that got me to love literature. I also appreciate that he writes about the American Jewish experience. His style is extremely humorous. And his later works are fairly complex when they play with Metafiction.

I've only read one book by DeLillo, and even led a class discussion on it: Great Jones Street. Supposed to be his worst book, and inferior to his other offerings. However, considering that was his worst book I really liked it. His worst is apparently a billion times better than some writer's best. I remember his style being very surreal.

If you're considering reading both of them, then why not just rotate between the two. Read one Roth, then one DeLillo. One Roth, then one DeLillo.

[meh!]

I've not read anything by DeLillo, but Roth is great. I enjoyed 'Human Stain' immensely and will definitely be reading more by him when I have time.

[Red-Headed]

I really enjoyed Delillo's White Noise & Libra, both of which I studied at university.

[stlukesguild]

I agree that Roth may be the best... but I'd probably go with McCarthy's Blood Meridian as the single best work by any of them (of which I have read). By the way... where is Pynchon?

[meh!]

I agree that Roth may be the best... but I'd probably go with McCarthy's Blood Meridian as the single best work by any of them (of which I have read). By the way... where is Pynchon?


Is Blood Meridian a great deal better than The Road? I read The Road and liked it, but not nearly as much as i expected to. And certainly not as much as The Human Stain. I've read nothing else by McCarthy.

[Manchegan]

I agree that Roth may be the best... but I'd probably go with McCarthy's Blood Meridian as the single best work by any of them (of which I have read). By the way... where is Pynchon?

Is Blood Meridian part of the border trilogy, and if so, can it stand on it's own?

What do you mean by where's Pynchon? like physically? Cause I hear he lives in the sewars under San Francisco.

[stlukesguild]

No... Blood Meridian is not part of the Border trilogy... and it can most certainly stand on its own. I haven't read The Road as of yet... but I would be greatly surprised if the latter novel were anywhere near as good... let alone better than Blood Meridian... which is simply harrowing. There's really no way to gauge McCormack as a writer without reading Blood Meridian, Suttree, Child of God, and the Border Trilogy. It would be like judging Roth without the "Zuckerman novels", American Pastoral, and Sabbath's Theater or Don DeLillo without White Noise and Underworld.

[promtbr]

No... Blood Meridian is not part of the Border trilogy... and it can most certainly stand on its own. I haven't read The Road as of yet... but I would be greatly surprised if the latter novel were anywhere near as good... let alone better than Blood Meridian... which is simply harrowing. There's really no way to gauge McCormack as a writer without reading Blood Meridian, Suttree, Child of God, and the Border Trilogy. It would be liking judging Roth without the "Zuckerman novels", American Pastoral, and Sabbath's Theater or Don DeLillo without White Noise and Underworld.

What he said. On Blood Meridian alone he wiped the floor with Roth...(not that I don't like what I have read by Roth. Pynchon IS awesome, I am just not sure he inhabits the same world...I have yet to read Inherent Vice...

The 2009 Nobel discussion is heating up, and it has been noted its a 14 year dry spell for Americans. Pynchon tho maybe the giant of all, would not show up for a Nobel Prize acceptance, so am guessing that leaves him out...

Stlukesguild has read way more of either Roth or McCarthy than I have, but all I needed to to read was BM..


---

[Manchegan]

This is getting slightly off topic, but since you're the one who mentioned Suttree, it's technically your fault...

That's one of the few I've read by McCarthy, and while I found the prose wonderful and the various episodes entertaining and thought provoking, I couldn't get past the overall lack of a plot or conflict. I'd like to hear your thoughts on what justifies the inclusion of so many disconnected incidents into a single narrative. Thanks.

[Dark Lady]

I think I'm in the minority here but I read The Human Stain by Roth a few years ago and really didn't like it at all. I felt like there was no substance and that he could have told the entire story in less than half the space without it losing anything.

Haven't read any DeLillo yet, though.

[Madame X]

No... Blood Meridian is not part of the Border trilogy... and it can most certainly stand on its own. I haven't read The Road as of yet... but I would be greatly surprised if the latter novel were anywhere near as good... let alone better than Blood Meridian... which is simply harrowing.

Blood Meridian…I found it to be quite an irksome read myself. Not on account of the content, mind you, but it was a tad too congested, stylistically speaking, to allow for much of an atmosphere to develop through all that word-clutter. Intentional, no doubt, like the inconsistent and, therefore, most distracting interpunction, but it doesn’t make it any prettier for it. No mistake, it had its moments (at about 10 similes per paragraph a few of them inevitably hit the mark with resounding success ;)), and I’ll even grant that the nefarious character of the Judge was quite nicely conceived indeed. Overall though, can’t say I’m in any hurry to read Mr. McCarthy, or his aforementioned contemporaries, any further.

[Rogers_68]

I've heard it said that McCarthy, Pynchon, Delillo, and Roth are the best living American authors. I've read a few books by Pynchon and McCarthy, so it's probably about time I give the other two a chance. Anybody have any thoughts on which is the better of the two? What does each author bring to the table? or do you know any other great modern writers?

I have not read anything by Roth, although I have Plot Against America sitting on my To Read shelf.

DeLillo is the only writer for which I've read everything he's written. Some of his novels are better than others, of course. I like his style. It's not fluffy or overly descriptive (although not as sparse as McCarthy's can be). With the exception of White Noise his novels don't really build in an obvious way like standard novels do. They get more intense but the climax sort of sneaks up on you. He approaches writing with the mind set of building sentences and physically making words on the page. His characters are interesting but strange. I could keep trying to describe his writing but I think it would be better for you to try a novel, say White Noise, Mao II or Americana. If you do, please let us know what you thought.

-Justin

[Barbarous]

By the way... where is Pynchon?
Right here, on The Simpsons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWU18LRWGrg

[Morden]

Definitely yes for both Blood Meridian and American Pastoral.
Pynchon I don't do. He doesn't grab me and I don't grab him. IV included.
DeLillo someday -- White Noise based on what I read here.

[sixsmith]

I once read that 'Underworld' marked the emergence of a great novelist but its was perhaps not a great novel. For mine De Lillo is a great writer but not necessarily a great novelist. Sentence for sentence he is brilliant. The opening salvo of 'Underworld' is possibly one of the most perfect pieces of writing i've encountered. And contrary to popular belief, he also has the ability to create (or at least portray) three dimensional characters. His rendering of Lee Harvey Oswald in Libra, for example, is astonishing. But his obsession with the interconnectedness of history and the trajectory of 'plots' can become tiresome. It works well in a small and smart little grab like 'Running Dog' but 'Underworld' just collapses under the weight of its own paranoia. His best work is probably 'White Noise', a very, very dark and satirical attack on American academia and modern social neuroses. His best work is probably "White Noise", a very, very dark and satirical attack on American academia and modern social neuroses. I’d start with Libra though and then ‘White Noise’. “Running Dog” is also underrated and worth a look. Given its considerable length ‘Underworld’ is, I think, only for the De Lillo fan so I’d leave that until you have an opinion one way or the other. Steer clear of 'Cosmopolis' and ‘The Body Artist’ which, respectfully, both suck.

Roth is probably my favourite novelist. In one way, contemporary America has become his concern as well. Yet where De Lillo seeks to present the culture almost as a character itself, Roth is concerned with how the individual (read libidinous Jewish male) is first undermined and then destroyed by societies various follies. I’m thinking here of 'The Human Stain”, ‘I Married a Communist’, 'Sabbath’s Theatre'. And of course where De Lillo’s prose is cold and impersonal, Roth’s voice is one of passion: sentences are scythes of indignation. Roths novels can basically be broken into The Zuckerman Novels, The Kepesh Novels, The Roth Novels, and other. The Kepesh books (The Dying Animal, Professor of Desire, The Breast) are his weakest and I’m not as big of a fan of the Zuckerman Bound novels as some. I love ‘American Pastoral’ and ‘Human Stain’ but I wouldn’t rank them among his best few. For that mantle, it’s hard to go past ‘Sabbath’s Theatre’, a novel that pits pure passion against unyielding nihilism. ‘Patrimony’ is a beautiful book, ‘Portnoy’s Complaint’ a very funny one. ‘Operation Shylock’, ‘My life as a man’ and ‘The Great American Novel’ are all rather underrated in my opinion.

As to how they stack up against McCarthy’s ‘Blood Meridian’, I think ‘White Noise’ is its equal and ‘Sabbath’s Theatre’ its better. Personally, I think ‘Suttree’ is McCarthy’s masterpiece but BM is certainly a singular work of near genius. Certainly superior to the bloated ‘Border Trilogy’



No... Blood Meridian is not part of the Border trilogy... and it can most certainly stand on its own. I haven't read The Road as of yet... but I would be greatly surprised if the latter novel were anywhere near as good... let alone better than Blood Meridian... which is simply harrowing. There's really no way to gauge McCormack as a writer without reading Blood Meridian, Suttree, Child of God, and the Border Trilogy. It would be like judging Roth without the "Zuckerman novels", American Pastoral, and Sabbath's Theater or Don DeLillo without White Noise and Underworld.

I found 'The Road' equally harrowing. I suspect that it ranks along side 'Suttree' and 'Blood Meridian' as his best.

[sixsmith]

http://nymag.com/arts/books/features/31522/

The above is a pretty good overview of De Lillo's work. I forgot Mao II which really is just a string of set pieces but contains some great writing nevertheless.

[mal4mac]

I once read that 'Underworld' marked the emergence of a great novelist but its was perhaps not a great novel... his obsession with the interconnectedness of history and the trajectory of 'plots' can become tiresome... 'Underworld' just collapses under the weight of its own paranoia.


I started Underworld, but gave up after about fifty pages, finding it tiresome indeed. I'm British so maybe I found it difficult to relate to the "history". For instance, baseball means nothing to Brits!



His best work is probably "White Noise", a very, very dark and satirical attack on American academia and modern social neuroses. I’d start with Libra though and then ‘White Noise’. “Running Dog” is also underrated and worth a look. Given its considerable length ‘Underworld’ is, I think, only for the De Lillo fan so I’d leave that until you have an opinion one way or the other. Steer clear of 'Cosmopolis' and ‘The Body Artist’ which, respectfully, both suck.


Thanks for this advice. Harold Bloom and other top critcis really rate DeLillo very highly so I might approach him again through this route.



Roth is probably my favourite novelist. In one way, contemporary America has become his concern as well. Yet where De Lillo seeks to present the culture almost as a character itself, Roth is concerned with how the individual (read libidinous Jewish male) is first undermined and then destroyed by societies various follies.


I've read several of Roth's novels over the decades and have enjoyed all of them. He manages to have instant universal appeal while still being American/Jewish. He is very popular in the UK, and I think deservedly so. But to say he is your "favourite novellist" is a very strong statement. Above Tolstoy? Above Dickens? Hardy? Conrad? Twain? Conrad? ...

I Read the "The Dying Animal" recently and liked it, so I look forward to the ones you say are better!, Note that Bloom rates the Zuckerman Bound novels as "the best", so you might wnat to cross swords wioth him. I'm reading Bloom's "Novelists and Novels" at the moment which has chapters on Roth, McCarthy, DeLillo, Pynchon, and many others!



As to how they stack up against McCarthy’s ‘Blood Meridian’, I think ‘White Noise’ is its equal and ‘Sabbath’s Theatre’ its better. Personally, I think ‘Suttree’ is McCarthy’s masterpiece but BM is certainly a singular work of near genius. Certainly superior to the bloated ‘Border Trilogy’


I recently read McCarthy’s ‘Blood Meridian’ and "singular work of near genius" really describes it! Bloom stresses that strangeness is part of the canonical, and this work is certainly very strange (in a good way!) The plot moves along very well, and the interesting/ambivalent/psychotic characters are gripping - like a bunch of Long John Silvers become much more violent and in no way kid-friendly. Parent breathe easy easy - kids won't read it - the language is too demanding. I needed to look up about four words a page, and most of them were not in my Concise OED! It's as demanding linguistically as Love's Labours Lost. Fortunately, the hard words did not seem essential to the plot -- mostly describing features of the landscape or involved in side conversations in Spanish -- so I ended up just guessing, and that seemed to work very well. Maybe Cormac was not expecting us to understand all the words to increase the strangeness and feeling of alienation -- anyway it worked that way for me! Be warned, read it, and a large, naked, shaved, dancing judge will appear in your waking nightmares for weeks afterwards... In summary, for me, it combined the madness of Dostoevsky C&P with the epic, frontier quality of Tolstoy's "The Cossacks". Not as good as either of these, of course, but still good!

[promtbr]

Just read (and reviewed on blog) Roth's The Ghost Writer... I'm officially impressed. (had only read his Goodbye Columbus before)

What Roth novel should I read next?

What Delilo should one read (besides White Noise)?


--

[susan_p]

I'm still waiting for J.D. Salinger to die. Presumably he has at least two completed manuscripts that he has tucked away in his files.

:thumbs_up Now that would be interesting to uncover :) I think it was Nabokov who recently had some unpublished stuff unearthed too - I'd read that the publishers wanted to have it on bookshelves by the end of this year. Anyway, from the list that the others posted, I think my vote goes with Pynchon and Roth. I kinda like how even Obama has stated publicly (http://www.infloox.com/person?id=37309ec1) that he's learned so much by reading Roth. I'm currently working through Exit Ghost and love it so far! I like Pynchon's work too, but I'd like him as an author better if he didn't do the whole "I'm so mysterious" thing...

[JBI]

What he said. On Blood Meridian alone he wiped the floor with Roth...(not that I don't like what I have read by Roth. Pynchon IS awesome, I am just not sure he inhabits the same world...I have yet to read Inherent Vice...

The 2009 Nobel discussion is heating up, and it has been noted its a 14 year dry spell for Americans. Pynchon tho maybe the giant of all, would not show up for a Nobel Prize acceptance, so am guessing that leaves him out...

Stlukesguild has read way more of either Roth or McCarthy than I have, but all I needed to to read was BM..


---

No point speculating, it won't go to an American for another few years, unless one we don't know of gains more notoriety. As good as these four authors are (again, another Bloomian thread, sigh) they all are past their time - all of these authors are really authors of the 80s - even though, for instance, Pynchon's great works were written before then, it would seem that his real soul is rooted in the 80s - I think that was when, as a thinker too, he was taken the most seriously. McCarthy, as I see him, is sort of two authors - one is the No Country For Old Men author, the popular Cohen Brother's movie-adaptation McCarthy, and one is the Blood Meridian sort of eccentric Faulknarian McCarthy. As for the other ones, I think they are popular enough, and perhaps will provide him with a little more economic stability, but the Blood Meridian McCarthy is in a realm of his own - that work is terrifying - that judge is one of the most potent characters I have ever come across - but still, for that work, are they going to give him a nobel? Perhaps, it doesn't really matter anyway.

As for Roth, I think the tradition he sort of represents is all but dead already - there are a few people who get him first hand left (of his generation), but I think as part of a sort of American Jewish experience - a sort of outlet, he, like Woody Allen, is a little bit foreign to contemporary audiences. The whole American-Jewish tradition as a whole seems to have gone a bit crazy, with a sort of connection on some parts, whereas a huge distance on other parts within the community, and a general sense (from my feeling, and I have met many New Yorker Jews) of lack of connection - the whole archetype Roth creates and destroys with Zuckerman to me seems to be something of a past presence - the New Jewish consciousness seems to have changed from that post-WW2 intensely family and community oriented socialist-Yiddish culture to a sort of hazy blur far away from any Yiddish or Socialist roots. Still, probably the best of the four authors - he certainly I would think is the most consistent.

DeLillo to me seems the embodiment of that post-modern pre-collapse-of-the-soviet-union mentality that dominated the 80s - the unreal post-modern Eliotic-unreal-city filling a sort of cultural nihilism - or underworld - Pynchon's static-filled TV screen as a lifestyle. I think if anything, he is working out of a sort of 1980s - the gap between 1950s idealism, 60s and 70s counter culture, and Clinton-era politics. I think, it is no surprise that Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation came just a few years before White Noise, as the whole Baudrillardian mentality seems manifest in what I've read of DeLillo up until Underworld (the last book of which I have read), but even so, I think he is still very rooted in a 1980s mythology.


Still, I hate playing the valuing game, and I think all four of these authors offer a sort of different perspective of the US, which sort of culminates in a 1980s mythology (McCarthy perhaps a little less so, as he generally seems rooted in earlier, Faulknerian traditions, which build more on a historical mythology).


As for the Nobel Discussion, I can almost guarantee it going to neither of these guys - politically, culturally, and in terms of movement, I think these guys aren't likely to be awarded. If I were to guess one of them, I would say probably Roth, since he seems the least nihilistic of the four, but even so, I can't really see a Nobel going to any of these guys. My guess would be the awards flicker between Western European countries and politically motivated central figures for a few more years, before they essentially break off from mainstream European traditions all together, and try to capture more political writers from different places (Pamuk was a start, except, from what I know, he is still deeply rooted in European literary traditions) - As far as I am concerned though, none of these guys really needs a Nobel, and it would probably be better if they didn't receive one, given that they already are known well enough, and write in English, meaning the exposure will not effect the availability of texts or translations.

[Madame X]

McCarthy, as I see him, is sort of two authors - one is the No Country For Old Men author, the popular Cohen Brother's movie-adaptation McCarthy, and one is the Blood Meridian sort of eccentric Faulknarian McCarthy.

Are the two so different? Of McCarthy I’ve only read Blood Meridian, but I’ve seen the film adaptation of No Country for Old Men, which may have had a more tangible ‘direction’ to it, if you will, but if the film is at all true to the book it doesn’t seem to speak much for the author’s versatility with the same sort of apathetic “manly men” with smart wounds running around a few cacti trying to kill each other off on principle…for our express entertainment, of course. ;) No doubt I’d like the book better but that’s probably not saying much.

Speaking of films: I also hear that an adaptation of Blood Meridian will be joining the box office in the not-so-distant future, too. What do you think; Vin Diesel as Judge Holden? :D

[JBI]

Are the two so different? Of McCarthy I’ve only read Blood Meridian, but I’ve seen the film adaptation of No Country for Old Men, which may have had a more tangible ‘direction’ to it, if you will, but if the film is at all true to the book it doesn’t seem to speak much for the author’s versatility with the same sort of apathetic “manly men” with smart wounds running around a few cacti trying to kill each other off on principle…for our express entertainment, of course. ;) No doubt I’d like the book better but that’s probably not saying much.

Speaking of films: I also hear that an adaptation of Blood Meridian will be joining the box office in the not-so-distant future, too. What do you think; Vin Diesel as Judge Holden? :D

I think they are quite different, especially now when he is becoming a sort of cult author for the works other than Blood Meridian. They all have similar design, except that Blood Meridian is more like Moby Dick, and As I lay Dying, whereas the rest are kind of like softer versions of Faulkner-style fiction, with less of a sort of epic flare, and more of a conventional structure and cohesiveness. The idiom of Blood Meridian is like a sort of intense poetry, whereas the other novels to me seem prosaic in comparison.

[mpeachhead]

This is getting slightly off topic, but since you're the one who mentioned Suttree, it's technically your fault...

That's one of the few I've read by McCarthy, and while I found the prose wonderful and the various episodes entertaining and thought provoking, I couldn't get past the overall lack of a plot or conflict. I'd like to hear your thoughts on what justifies the inclusion of so many disconnected incidents into a single narrative. Thanks.

I agree about Suttree. It's beautifully written and entertaining, but there was a surprising lack of conflict, and the ephiphany at the end felt hamhanded to me: "I found out that I was the only Suttree" or some such vague nonsense.

[mpeachhead]

DeLillo to me seems the embodiment of that post-modern pre-collapse-of-the-soviet-union mentality that dominated the 80s - the unreal post-modern Eliotic-unreal-city filling a sort of cultural nihilism - or underworld - Pynchon's static-filled TV screen as a lifestyle. I think if anything, he is working out of a sort of 1980s - the gap between 1950s idealism, 60s and 70s counter culture, and Clinton-era politics. I think, it is no surprise that Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation came just a few years before White Noise, as the whole Baudrillardian mentality seems manifest in what I've read of DeLillo up until Underworld (the last book of which I have read), but even so, I think he is still very rooted in a 1980s mythology.


Have you ever read Mao II by Delillo? I think your characterization of him is apt based on that novel, which is the only one I've read. However, I think the same ideas there can be applied to today's world. I recall some character in that novel discussing the answering machine as a symbol of disconnect in people's lives--the notion that we don't enjoy talking to one another and prefer a machine, and I immediately thought of text messaging. What would Delillo have to say about that?

I'm not as familiar with Roth. I was addicted to McCarthy for a long time, but I've gotten over him. No one can write as well as he can, but he is deeply flawed at times. I couldn't connect with any of the characters in Child of God and Outer Dark, Suttree had no real ending or resolution that I could ascertain, and the Border Trilogy is filled with these long soliloquies that don't seem realistic. For instance, there is knife fight in Cities of the Plain, where the pimp starts waxing philosophically during the action. Each slice of the knife is punctuated by a series of paragraph length oratories that completely take me out of the action and are not believable within the context of this very realistic world he has created. The man needed to learn that less is sometimes more. I believe he did. Everyone raves about Blood Meridian and Suttree, but No Country for Old Men and The Road are my favorite works by him, and coincidentally, they are his most recent.

[sixsmith]

I've read several of Roth's novels over the decades and have enjoyed all of them. He manages to have instant universal appeal while still being American/Jewish. He is very popular in the UK, and I think deservedly so. But to say he is your "favourite novellist" is a very strong statement. Above Tolstoy? Above Dickens? Hardy? Conrad? Twain? Conrad? ...

Yes. Favourite not best. I still enjoy novels that reflect my own foibles and aspirations. As a 20 something, neurotic male, i find a good deal of solace in Roth.


DeLillo to me seems the embodiment of that post-modern pre-collapse-of-the-soviet-union mentality that dominated the 80s - the unreal post-modern Eliotic-unreal-city filling a sort of cultural nihilism - or underworld - Pynchon's static-filled TV screen as a lifestyle. I think if anything, he is working out of a sort of 1980s - the gap between 1950s idealism, 60s and 70s counter culture, and Clinton-era politics. I think, it is no surprise that Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation came just a few years before White Noise, as the whole Baudrillardian mentality seems manifest in what I've read of DeLillo up until Underworld (the last book of which I have read), but even so, I think he is still very rooted in a 1980s mythology

I think that’s about right. There's been some analysis suggesting that "Mao II" demonstrates a fairly explicit connection with Baudrillard's work. And although its been said many times, there is no doubt that September 11 has probably exploded De Lillo's trajectory. "Falling Man" was a novel of a man without a country.


What Roth novel should I read next?

What Delilo should one read (besides White Noise)?

For Roth i'd go with "Portnoy's Complaint" or "Sabbath's Theatre". Both are brilliant and very different to "The Ghost Writer". I think consecutive Nathan Zuckerman gets tiring.

For De Lillo, i'd go "Libra". Relatively straight forward narrative with discernible and fascinating characters.

[mal4mac]

I recently read Roth's recent novel "Indignation", where he turns back time to explore the neuroticism of youth. It's like a restrained Portnoy's complaint, and a good one to read on the train to College at the start of term. :-)

[Mariamosis]

I think I'm in the minority here but I read The Human Stain by Roth a few years ago and really didn't like it at all. I felt like there was no substance and that he could have told the entire story in less than half the space without it losing anything.

Haven't read any DeLillo yet, though.

I would have to agree in that I read 'The Human Stain' and was not taken by it. It has been a while now and am therefore unable to remember exactly what reasons I had for this.

[JBI]

Have you ever read Mao II by Delillo? I think your characterization of him is apt based on that novel, which is the only one I've read. However, I think the same ideas there can be applied to today's world. I recall some character in that novel discussing the answering machine as a symbol of disconnect in people's lives--the notion that we don't enjoy talking to one another and prefer a machine, and I immediately thought of text messaging. What would Delillo have to say about that?

I'm not as familiar with Roth. I was addicted to McCarthy for a long time, but I've gotten over him. No one can write as well as he can, but he is deeply flawed at times. I couldn't connect with any of the characters in Child of God and Outer Dark, Suttree had no real ending or resolution that I could ascertain, and the Border Trilogy is filled with these long soliloquies that don't seem realistic. For instance, there is knife fight in Cities of the Plain, where the pimp starts waxing philosophically during the action. Each slice of the knife is punctuated by a series of paragraph length oratories that completely take me out of the action and are not believable within the context of this very realistic world he has created. The man needed to learn that less is sometimes more. I believe he did. Everyone raves about Blood Meridian and Suttree, but No Country for Old Men and The Road are my favorite works by him, and coincidentally, they are his most recent.

The whole concept of the answering machine, online messaging, and other indirect forms of communication has been part of discourse for a while - Innis in the 40s, when he pretty much invented communication theory already was preaching how textual forms of communication were disonnecting people to anythign meaningful in their lives - McLuhan built upon that, but he was of the mind that Television and Radio were oral forms, rather than textual forms - something which they disagreed on, and which I think Innis was right about.

The actual fore-fronting though, came with Baudrillard and Lyotard around when DeLillo was getting started - that whole school of post modern thought, I think, died out a bit with the end of the Cold War, and after the Gulf War, when new forms of argument began to take the front stage in discourse - post-modern apocalyptic fiction, which DeLillo is, I would argue, developing, in his Waste Land style landscapes is very much a product of certain thinkers, mentioned above. His adherence to Simulacra as a means of showing disconnection is straight out of the theoretical works of post-modern thinkers. He'd probably agree with your assessment - but keep in mind, he wasn't the first to write like that - Pynchon too displays traces of this sort of thing - his static TV screen, and his anti-mystery ending of Crying of Lot 49 seem to emulate a sort of disconnection which is prevelant in surrounding works. That's why I put them all as 1980s writers - because I feel, even though some of their works were "before their time", their intellectual thought (though rooted in different camps of thought) seem to be out of the 80s.

[perico]

I'm not as familiar with Roth. I was addicted to McCarthy for a long time, but I've gotten over him. No one can write as well as he can, but he is deeply flawed at times. I couldn't connect with any of the characters in Child of God and Outer Dark, Suttree had no real ending or resolution that I could ascertain, and the Border Trilogy is filled with these long soliloquies that don't seem realistic. For instance, there is knife fight in Cities of the Plain, where the pimp starts waxing philosophically during the action. Each slice of the knife is punctuated by a series of paragraph length oratories that completely take me out of the action and are not believable within the context of this very realistic world he has created. The man needed to learn that less is sometimes more. I believe he did. Everyone raves about Blood Meridian and Suttree, but No Country for Old Men and The Road are my favorite works by him, and coincidentally, they are his most recent.

It may be that I'm from McCarthy's old stomping grounds in Tennessee, but his Appalachian novels are some of his most harrowing work, in my view. Lester Ballard is the sickest character I have ever come across in a novel, and one of the most interesting.

The same could be said for Suttree. The geography is my home, and I know the characters (not literally, but you could say that I know exactly the type of people referred to and the dialogue used), so it may be that it makes more sense to a person like me who has experience first hand with similar people.

I'd take the Crossing over the Road or No Country any day of the week. Reading Book I is the only time that I can ever remember truly crying where tears were literally pouring, and connecting the final book was overwhelming. Didn't really care for Pretty Horses as much, but felt that Cities of the Plain is underrated.

You can really read any book the Border Trilogy without reading the others, although I'd recommend reading Cities after reading the other two.


Roth is brilliant, in his own right. I haven't read DeLillo, so I wouldn't want to compare them, but I would highly recommend Roth to anyone. Start with the Zuckerman trilogy though as your first introduction. Some of his novellas and earlier work can be quite "imaginative."

[dfloyd]

with these post modernist writers. I've read one of the Zuckerman novels, but found it so bad I can't remember the title. Am listening to The Plot Against America on cd now. I't's a little better, but nothing great. Delilo's Underworld started off great with a replay of the 1950 Pennant Race playoff. It was interesting to me since I saw Bobby Thomson hit the Shot Heard Round the World (on early tv). Having Frank Sinatra, Toots Shore, and Jackie Gleason at the ball game and bringing their conversation into the story was a bit of genius. But then everything bogged down and I got bored with it. It was due at the library so I had to take it back. Of those mentioned, I think Pynchon is the best writer. I really enjoyed V. I'm going to try to have the library get a few of his books on cd. I never read post modernists, but listen to them when driving or doing household tasks. My reading time is strictly for classics. Presently reading Childhood, Boyhood, and Youth by Tolstoy and Aristotle's Politics and Poetics.

[Modest Proposal]

That list--Roth, Pynchon, DeLillio and McCarthy--is Bloom's suggestions of the best living American authors and I tend to agree. I also agree with StLukes that 'Blood Meridian' is the best single book of the bunch of theirs I've read. I wouldn't even compare it to 'The Road' or 'No Country for Old Men', though they are each great, 'Blood' is incomparably better. Of course I rank it as about as good as any prose has ever been written in the US.

Pynchon and DeLillio I found similarly funny, absurd and relevant. 'White Noise' and 'Lot 49' are both extremely prescient and entertaining, though I found Pynchon's prose to be more complex. All of that said I think Roth is better than them at constructing a powerful novel and powerful character's. 'The Human Stain' was FANTASTIC. The implications and philosophical inquiries into the extent of identity politics and Puritanism in the US was troublingly accurate. I do however, dislike some of his work that centers too much around the physical act of sex and its many--many, many--variations. 'Everyman' was depressing without much catharsis and 'Portnoy's Complaint' was hilarious but almost pointlessly grotesque. I wish he devoted more time to other complex aspects of life. There seems to be a consistent theme of older Jewish men entering relationships with beautiful young woman--usually from a lower class, illiterate or supposedly unintelligent--and their performance of non-traditional sexual practices.

Essentially, McCarthy is my favorite of the four with story and lyricism. Roth is the best at constructing--characters, sentences and novel's in general. DeLillio and Pynchon I see as following these two in terms of power and artistic merit.

[Jozanny]

Pardon me, but I am interested in putting Philip Roth on my reading list, but I have little idea of where to start, as reviewers have been less than enthused in recent years, and Leon Wieseltier has just demolished Roth's latest title, The Humbling.

I am most aware of The Human Stain, but not sure I particularly care-- more than that, Amazon says HS is the last in a series, so my footing isn't altogether sure on one of the most famous authors I have yet to experience. Guidance?

Of the two, I probably prefer DeLillo, but feel obligated to get Roth in.

[Modest Proposal]

Pardon me, but I am interested in putting Philip Roth on my reading list, but I have little idea of where to start, as reviewers have been less than enthused in recent years, and Leon Wieseltier has just demolished Roth's latest title, The Humbling.

I am most aware of The Human Stain, but not sure I particularly care-- more than that, Amazon says HS is the last in a series, so my footing isn't altogether sure on one of the most famous authors I have yet to experience. Guidance?

Of the two, I probably prefer DeLillo, but feel obligated to get Roth in.

I read 'Human Stain' first and had no trouble with its being part of the trilogy. American Pastoral is also excellent, so I would think that the trilogy--being 'American Pastoral', 'I Married a Communist' and 'Human Stain'--is a great place to start. They are all late works by him, but he is one of the few authors who seems to get better into his 70's.

[dfloyd]

I tried Delilo's Underworld, and found the first section very good about Bobby Thompson's home run - the shot heard round the world. The dialog in the grandstand between Frank Sinatra, Jackie Gleason, and Toots Shore (Shoor?) was very good, but the book turned tedious and I returned it to the library. I never used to return a book unread, but I am now at the age where if a book falls apart, I go on to something else.

I read McCormac's No country for Old Men and The Road; I am now reading Blood Meridian. The Road was short, so I finished it, but I wouldn't recommend it. It is very repetitive and no where near as good as the other two mentioned. Personally, I liked No Country better than what I have read thus far of Blood. I'm going to try a couple of more of McCormac's novels: all the Pretty Horses and Sutree.

I have read Pynchon's V. and liked it very much. I want to read some more if our library get's them in. I tried his new book: Inherent Vice, and IMHO it is awful, unless you like on-the-street sex talk for Cunnilingus and Fellatio.

[sixsmith]

I read 'Human Stain' first and had no trouble with its being part of the trilogy. American Pastoral is also excellent, so I would think that the trilogy--being 'American Pastoral', 'I Married a Communist' and 'Human Stain'--is a great place to start. They are all late works by him, but he is one of the few authors who seems to get better into his 70's.

'American Pastoral' is by no means a bad place to start and the rear trilogy of late Zuckerman is no small achievement. That said, 'Sabbath's Theatre' is by far his strongest late work and for mine, the strongest American novel of the late 20th century. Moreover, for all its considerable strengths, there is a rather crude moral agenda behind a book like 'American Pastoral': the fulmination against American innocence sometimes becomes a little too conspicuous for mine.

Joz, might I suggest an alternative entry point? 'The Counterlife' is a novel about the creation of identities: it is divided across two different lives and loosely (if constantly) informed by the question of Israel. It is, I suppose, a post modern work but a rare welcome addition to that shapeless movement. Sentence by sentence, its up their with Roth's finest and certainly the stylistic superior to his later works (which don't get me wrong are very good). Alternatively, you could begin with 'The Ghost Writer', the novel which introduces Nathan Zuckerman who is the 'author' of all the books mentioned save for 'Sabbath's Theatre.' Or 'Operation Shylock' is a rather explicit (overt) but nonetheless compelling examination of the distinction between life and art. I'd steer clear of the Kepesh books and certainly don't start with 'The Humbling': I fear that it may be a very minor work.

[Dinkleberry2010]

About twenty-five years ago, I read The Professor of Desire by Philip Roth. It was so bad that I have not read anything by Roth since. I can honestly say it is one of the worst books I have ever read. For all I know, Roth may have written some good books, but The Professor of Desire--yuck.

[Jozanny]

Thank you both, Modest, Six. I made some notes and am not in any particular hurry, as I am overburdened with all types of titles and notes I need to take, but Roth is one of those who I know of by reputation but who has otherwise escaped me. Perhaps this is due to Jewish identity issues--not that I ever made a conscious decision to avoid him over that.

I might, of course, just simply start with Portnoy's-- but getting to him will stay on my radar.

[bouquin]

So far, I have read one DeLillo (The Body Artist) and one Roth (American Pastoral) - and I prefer the latter, hands down.