Portnoy's Complaint

 Philip Roth is an acclaimed writer, winner of The National Book Award, Pulitzer Prize and other awards.

The New York Times critic writes: “I know not since "Catcher in the Rye" have I read an American novel with such pleasure.”

I did enjoy Portnoy’s Complaint. The first part was an amazing joy to read. Later on it gets a bit more complicated for me. Like with Portnoy, some of these complications should be referred to an analyst, perhaps.

First of all, there is a certain unease with which I read sections of the book…the ones with sperm flying on the bulbs in the toilet, or in the eye; the masturbations in the bus, in the liver, anywhere (?!?)…

The novel is labeled “insanely funny”…perhaps for good reason? The analyst would identify the reasons for this shyness, the uncomfortable feelings with each I go through pages of erotic “Mommy porn” (that’s what they call it today?

This is not to say that I did not like the book. I did. As mentioned before in my notes on what I read- I do not call myself the Judge of Great books which I just happen to misunderstand, miss the mood.

Philip Roth, or Portnoy has authors he likes and books he doesn’t.

I find the book and the hero very complex and modern.

I was thinking that the mores in the book would be outrageous, in a different time, or space-even today, in parts of the Middle East and elsewhere, I am sure this book is blacklisted.

The parents of Portnoy are flabbergasted by the things he does or says.

At issue are a few things: the writer has to, or can move with his times- Jane Austen writes about her times and Philip Roth describes habits, sexual desires, acts, complications which are all around us today; on TV, in print, in the Hollywood blockbusters.

There is a passage in “The People vs Larry Flint”, where Larry Flint shows photos on a screen with the horrors of war and love making, even porn pictures-and Flint is asking what is bad, evil, what should be illegal? War or sex.

There is a lot of sex in Portnoy’s Complaint; in the second part I thought perhaps a bit too much for me, or at least enough to prevent me from Absolutely enjoying the book.

As it is I consider, together with the critics, that this is a masterpiece.

The fact that it gave me pause for thought, made me debate with myself: wouldn’t it have been better if this Israel part was not here, or perhaps different…can be one of the great qualities of the book.

It didn’t just leave me in absolute Awe, with nothing to say, dumb struck. It made me dispute some aspects; it turned a mirror towards me.

There are many experiences, idiosyncrasies, fears, limitations I share with the hero. That’s what most of the readers find and it is a good reason to like the book and one of the strokes of genius- Roth found the essence, the Universal in many of the lines.

Maybe not the sticky shtick on the light bulb…that never happened to me. But that’s the comic of the absurd?

I look forward to reading The American Pastoral.