Talk:Philip Roth

message: Just to explain my revert. The last edits by anonymous User:69.210.106.253 amounted to removing all of the links in the article with no substantive additions.
--Polynova 18:27, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: Must Wikipedia refer to American Jews as "Jewish-American"?  Most Jews I know reject this phrase, not wanting to compromise or express any sort of ambivalence about their Americanness, and not wanting to contribute to the ethnic balkanization that some on the far left and right would foist on us (see esp. David Hollinger, Postethnic America, rev. 2000). -- Mark Satin, Washington DC USA
:I agree, but I only see a reference to "Jewish-American" in the second section, which I've changed slightly. I believe that it needs to be noted that Roth is Jewish as so many of his books revolve around Jewish themes, but I agree that "Jewish-American" is an awkward phrase. See the change I made.  Moncrief 04:38, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
*"Jewish-American" is no more awkward than "African-American," "Irish-American," "German-American," or "Native-American," and they are ALL commonly used phrases -- it seems that Jews love to celebrate their unique cultural heritage and ethnic separateness among themselves yet don't like to actually talk about it in public. Bring it out into the open; I'm doing my part and putting it back in.  --64.12.116.196 11:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree. The term African-American is appropriate because originally their roots come from Africa. Irish-Americans came from Ireland. Native-American are native to America. Jewish-American gives me the indication that there would be a country that "Jewish-Americans" came from. Since Jews have been scattered throughout the world for so long I find it rather foolish to call them Jewish-Americans. Cptnspoon19 08:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish-American? 

message: I'm very skeptical about this assertion, currently at the end of the second paragraph of Roth's 'Life and Career':
Specifically, Martinson is the inspiration for female characters in several of Roth's novels, including Mary Jane Reed (aka "the Monkey") in Portnoy's Complaint.
I have never seen Margaret Martinson mentioned as a model for The Monkey, and I'd be very surprised if she was. We do know that she was the model for Maureen Tarnopol, the wife of protagonist Peter Tarnopol in My Life as a Man, a fact long assumed, and then confirmed in Roth's memoir The Facts. This character, with her solid build, tree-trunk legs, and lack of interest in sex, more closely resembles Portnoy's Pumpkin, Kay Campbell, than The Monkey, who is sexually voracious, and has a "hard little handful of a model's ass." 
Of course, I'd be very intrigued to see a source which states otherwise.
-David Gooblar (August 30, 2005)
"confirmed in Roth's memoir The Facts" - I'm not 100% sure that this is a memoir; it may instead be a pseudo roman a clef. Same goes for Patrimony: A True Story. The claim to factuality in the title/subtitle may be deception. Does anyone know? Perhaps the two books would therefore be most comfortable under the "Roth novels" heading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.31.32.30 (talk) 13:16, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Margaret Martinson the Monkey? 

message: The link to "Letting go" is to a wrong page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.217.179.200 (talk) 14:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Link 

message: That seems like a subjective, unsupportable statement to me. Is he more "decorated" than John Updike? I don't think so. A more neutral "Roth has won numerous prestigious awards" would be more appropriate, in my opinion. 207.69.139.7 19:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that you're somewhat right about that statement. It is true that it is arguable as he's about neck and neck with Updike when it comes to decorations. I think it can be stated however that he is ONE of the most decorated American writers of his era. There's no doubt he is highly decorated and it can be substantiated that there are not many other writers than have been lauded as highly as Roth. Cptnspoon19 08:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Philip Roth is arguably the most decorated American writer of his era

message: Not sure how far back the two line "criticism" section goes, but it seems rather silly to me atm. General languange ("Some have criticized Roth heavily") currently reads as though this is somehow a common view, but then cites one critic; the article then segues awkwardly into awards and honors section. Obviously, any major novelist is going to have critics on both sides of the fence, but Roth is a case where praise has been nearly universal. IMO the article would be better if the Crit and A&H sections were merged into something like "Critical Reception", and the prose was NPOV tempered a bit better to show that Roth, while heavily praised (by X, Y, etc. for reasons X, Y) has also had his detractors (X, Y, for reasons A, B)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.243.239.166 (talk) 13:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Criticism" section 

message: Does Philip Roth belong in this category? At the time his ancestors left Europe, they would have been living in Austria-Hungary, not Ukraine which wasn't an independent nation at the time. There's no evidence that the Roths were ethnically Ukrainian either. In what sense is he "of Ukrainian descent"? —D. Monack talk 03:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "American Jews of Ukrainian descent" 

message: In an interview on the October 3, 2010 episode of CBS Sunday Morning, Roth said, "I don't have a religious bone in my body," and in response to the question "Do you feel there's a god out there?" he answered "I'm afraid there isn't, no."   
He also said, "when the whole world doesn't believe in god, it'll be a great place."  I'm sorry I don't know how to cite this or if it's worth using.  Thanks. 71.193.165.73 (talk) 18:50, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non Believer 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:38, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Philip Roth.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Should we add this in? 
* Author Roth rebukes Wikipedia over Human Stain edit http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19527797  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.250.138.33 (talk) 03:15, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Becuase I thought it might be relevant to include information about a personal spat he had with Wikipedia on his biography on Wikipedia? But I've noticed since I first suggested this it's already on the Human Stain article and there is something about not duplicating information on Wikipedia, right? So I assume we don't need to add this now, correct? 212.250.138.33 (talk) 19:42, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute with Wikipedia 

message: I assume that if I put this in someone would take it right out as unsourced, but maybe someone has a source.
Roth, while not an erotic writer, became known, or in the popular mind is linked with, bodily functions, including masturbation and bowel movements. This started with Goodbye Columbus, seconded by Portnoy's Complaint. If this is unfair I don't know, but for the association alone it should be in there. I do think that of major twentieth-century American writers he is the most into things like this. And in contrast with Henry Miller, Anais Nin, and John Updike, his characters think a lot about intercourse, and would love to have it, but there isn't as much of it. deisenbe (talk) 11:49, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roth and bodily functions 

message: This article is listed in :Category:Atheist writers, which is supposed to be used for people who write about atheism. Obviously Roth was both an atheist and a writer -- but I'm not convinced that he warrants inclusion in this category. However, I haven't read everything he wrote, so I'd appreciate some informed opinions on the subject. Thanks in advance. Anomalous+0 (talk) 12:25, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The category seems to be :Category:American atheist writers. But I don't think he wrote much about atheism per se. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:44, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Atheist writers 

message: I am noting several of my edits which, hopefully, helped improve this article for readers: 
# In the first section following the intro, I created spacing for readability.
# I also removed an erroneous and unsourced sentence at the end of this section. According to  his obituary, Roth was injured during basic training and received a medical discharge. He did not spend 2 years in the army. 
# I removed the section tag - this section has enough references. 
# I also added a new section title -"Academic career" - again for readability. Thanks. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:18, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Several edits

message: Hi User:Seqqndlyfe, why do we need both ‎:Category:Jewish American novelists and :Category:Jewish writers? Surely the later is a parent Category for the former? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:42, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories again