Uncategorized
Commemorating Philip Roth means confronting his limitations head on
(JTA) — Next Sunday marks the 90th anniversary of Philip Roth’s birth. In celebration of the famed novelist’s work, a scholarly conference titled “Roth@90,” sponsored by the Philip Roth Society, will be held starting Wednesday at the Newark Public Library. That will be followed by a weekend of high-profile events — staged readings, panel discussions, a bus tour of Roth’s old Newark neighborhood — co-presented by the library and the New Jersey Performing Arts Center.
Exactly 10 years ago, we commemorated his 80th birthday in a similar fashion. Dozens of Roth scholars made learned presentations about his work, of which Roth attended exactly zero. Later that week, the author read aloud from his novel “Sabbath’s Theater” in front of hundreds of fans, friends and well wishers. The proceedings were televised on C-Span.
Roth was being acclaimed for having just wound down an exemplary career. With the exception of the Nobel Prize, what garland evaded him? Was there a high-culture literary platform where his name wasn’t a virtual watermark? Could he publish any novel without hundreds of reviews being written in newspapers across the world? Was there a serious fiction writer out there with greater renown?
So much has changed in the decade between the two conferences. To begin with, Roth died in 2018. In that same span, the country witnessed the election of Donald Trump and the fissure it exposed in society in general and the Jewish community in particular. America endured one convulsive racial reckoning after another. Finally, in October of 2017, the #MeToo movement gained massive public salience.
All of those events, along with digital media’s indomitable ascent, have combined to affect and reshape Roth’s literary legacy. That legacy is far less assured than all the (justified) praise and lionizing that will occur this week might suggest.
Let’s start with Jews. The Trump era yielded two seemingly irreconcilable data points. On the one hand, Jewish-Americans endured the Charlottesville riot, the Tree of Life synagogue attack and a stunning rise in antisemitic incidents. On the other, there was staunch support for Trump among Orthodox Jews and supporters of Israel’s right wing.
Leaving that conundrum for others to parse, I simply note that Orthodox Jews and right-wing Zionists are almost completely absent in Roth’s fiction. A young Roth wrote a sensitive portrait of Holocaust survivors who want to start a suburban yeshiva in “Eli the Fanatic.” He also sketched a militant religious-nationalist Zionist in “The Counterlife,” Mordecai Lippman, who, according to Roth biographer Blake Bailey (about whom more below), was based on Elyakim Haetzni, one of the so-called founding fathers of the settlement movement. In the same novel, a version of the narrator’s brother falls under the settlement leader’s sway.
And that’s it, across a half century of writing. For traditionalist Jewish readers, whose political and social influence in the United States and Israel is substantial and growing, Roth’s fiction is not a mirror, nor a signpost, nor a scroll upon which is inscribed some essential truth.
The Jews who populated his stories, the Jews he best understood, were of Ashkenazi descent, white, liberal, assimilated and secular. His courage was to valorize them over and against other Jews who viewed them as defective, lost or even as apostates. Thus Anne Frank in “The Ghost Writer” was portrayed as a patron saint of secular Judaism. Elsewhere, his stories abound in proud, professionally accomplished diaspora Jews. They rarely think about God. Synagogue attendance is reserved strictly for lifecycle events and High Holy Days, if that.
A novelist, of course, is not a political clairvoyant. However, the immediate future of Judaism is being greatly shaped by Jews whose population and influence are growing and whom Roth rarely portrayed. In this manner, another stellar writer like Cynthia Ozick — herself Orthodox and quite attuned to the mindset of her co-religionists — might fare better commercially and emerge as more relevant than her friend in the coming decades.
Roth didn’t just write about Jews. In my book “The Philip Roth We Don’t Know: Sex, Race and Autobiography,” I pointed out that depicting non-Jewish Black people was an unrecognized “obsessional theme” across his 28 novels and 25 short stories. Much to my dismay, I found Roth’s multi-decade treatment of his African and African-American characters often to be crude, thoughtless and sometimes racist.
Familiarize yourself with the degrading portraiture we receive of Black people in “The Great American Novel” (1973), or a short story like “On the Air” (1970), and you might reconsider what Roth was after in “The Human Stain,” in which an academic who is accused of racism turns out to be an African American who had been “passing” as white and Jewish. The book, the 2001 Pen/Faulkner Award winner, is often seen as a sensitive treatment of racial issues in America, and perhaps as the author’s attempt to extend the hand of friendship to another oppressed minority.
In fact, my best guess is that, as with many Jewish writers post-1967, Roth was shaken by the deterioration of the Black-Jewish alliance. His frustrations were reflected in prose that often referenced Black communities in his hometown of Newark but showed little curiosity about their lives or sympathy for their plight.
Obviously, this type of literary rendering of African Americans — or any minority group — is disturbing and dated. Insensitive racial representation inspires calls for publishers to drop authors. They disappear from high-school or college syllabi. This bodes ominously for the afterlives of the titans of post-World War II American fiction, including John Updike, Saul Bellow Bellow and Norman Mailer, all three of whom have been accused of being racially insensitive and worse.
Roth’s marketability also seems to be sailing into a squall regarding gender. As women began demanding an accounting of sexual abuse and misogyny within the media, entertainment and other industries, numerous think-pieces wondered how the author of “Portnoy’s Complaint” — whose libidinous narrator identifies most of the women in his life by debasing nicknames — would fare in such an environment. Would he — should he — be “canceled”?
The question is more complex than his admirers and detractors make it out to be. No doubt, many of Roth’s male characters mistreated women. Accusations of Roth himself doing the same exist, but they are fairly rare, unsubstantiated and contested. The dilemma for researchers is that Roth was a deeply auto-fictional writer. You sense his presence in his stories — especially when protagonists share much of his biography, including Nathan Zuckerman and Peter Tarnopol, and when characters are named “Philip Roth.”
It’s hard not to speculate about the relation between the author and the many misogynistic fellows who cut an erotic swath through his pages. There will, of course, be readers who give him the benefit of the doubt. They might observe that Roth’s toxic males provide evidence of women’s experiences that needs to be explored, not censored.
Not helping him cleanse his reputation were the numerous allegations of sexual misconduct leveled against his hand-picked biographer, Blake Bailey. The ructions engulfing Bailey came to dominate the discourse about Roth, leading to a peculiar cancellation by proxy.
The episode also revealed that Roth had instructed his estate to eventually destroy a massive trove of personal papers he entrusted to Bailey. This led Aimee Pozorski (co-editor of Philip Roth Studies), myself and 20 other Roth scholars to issue a statement reminding his executors that “scholarship can only be advanced when qualified researchers engage freely with essential sources.”
As if all these concerns weren’t enough, his grim prophecies about the demise of an audience for serious literature seem to be coming true. “The book,” Roth worried, “can’t compete with the screen.” Meanwhile, the English major is in a very bad way, and the institution of tenure is under siege. Professors (insufferable as we might be) teach the next generation who to read and how to read. Writers might not like them, but they need them.
Roth is also getting the scrutiny that he was at pains to avoid in his lifetime. His disregard for scholars who might be critical of him always struck me, one such scholar, as misguided. Instead, he surrounded himself with friends — friends who had preternatural access to major media platforms. These friends built upon his own interpretations of his own work. It doesn’t mean they lacked wisdom. It just means that when they talked about Roth, they talked about what Roth wanted them to talk about. To wit: Jewish Newark, his sundry interpretations of his life, his pesky ex-wives and lovers, the close-mindedness of his critics, and so forth.
I think, in this cultural moment, it’s prudent to confront Roth’s limitations head on and chart one’s own path through his fiction. I pitch him to my students as a writer with some racial, religious and sexual hang-ups — who among us is innocent of those charges? I also present him as a bearer of unique and meaningful insights. Let scholars (while they still exist) parade those insights into sunlight.
I’ve tried to illuminate that his fiction was preoccupied, for 50 years, by how individual and collective bodies (like the Jews) change. Transformation, metamorphosis, metempsychosis — his obsession with those themes, I’ve noticed in my classrooms, is shared by Gen Z. If the span between Roth@80 and Roth@90 has taught us anything, it is that Roth was right: Life is about radical, unpredictable flux. Now his own legacy is in flux. I wonder who will read Roth@100.
—
The post Commemorating Philip Roth means confronting his limitations head on appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
UK Approves US Use of British Bases to Strike Iran Missile Sites Targeting Ships
People use their cameras as a USAF B-1 bomber approaches to land at RAF Fairford airbase, used by United States Air Force (USAF) personnel, amid the US–Israeli conflict with Iran, in Fairford, Gloucestershire, Britain, March 17, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Toby Melville
The British government gave authorization on Friday for the US to use military bases in Britain to carry out strikes on Iranian missile sites that are attacking ships in the Strait of Hormuz.
British ministers met on Friday to discuss the war with Iran and Iran‘s blocking of the Strait of Hormuz, according to a Downing Street statement.
“They confirmed that the agreement for the US to use UK bases in the collective self-defence of the region includes US defensive operations to degrade the missile sites and capabilities being used to attack ships in the Strait of Hormuz,” the statement said.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in a post on X that Starmer was “putting British lives in danger by allowing UK bases to be used for aggression against Iran,” adding “Iran will exercise its right to self-defense.”
Starmer said this week Britain would not be drawn into a war over Iran. He initially rejected a US request to use British bases for the strikes on Iran, saying he needed to be satisfied that any military action was legal.
But the prime minister modified his stance after Iran conducted strikes on British allies across the Middle East, saying that the United States could use RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia, a joint US-UK base in the Indian Ocean.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly attacked Starmer since the conflict started, complaining he was not doing enough to help him.
On Monday, Trump said there were “some countries that greatly disappointed me” before he singled out Britain, which he said had once been considered “the Rolls-Royce of allies.”
The Downing Street statement on Friday called for “urgent de-escalation and a swift resolution to the war.”
Opinion polls in Britain suggest widespread skepticism about the war, with 59% of those surveyed by YouGov saying that they were opposed to the US-Israeli attacks.
Uncategorized
French Appeals Court Rules Vandalism of Memorial for Murdered Jew Not Antisemitic
A crowd gathers at the Jardin Ilan Halimi in Paris on Feb. 14, 2021, to commemorate the 15th anniversary of Halimi’s kidnapping and murder. Photo: Reuters/Xose Bouzas/Hans Lucas
A French appeals court has acquitted Tunisian twin brothers of antisemitism charges after they cut down an olive tree planted to honor Ilan Halimi, a young French Jewish man tortured to death two decades ago, in what appears to be yet another instance of France’s legal system brushing aside antisemitism as a potential motive for crime.
On Wednesday, the Paris Court of Appeal upheld the decision from the initial trial in October to dismiss the charge that the crime was motivated by antisemitism, which would have increased the punishments for the two brothers. The judges found no evidence that the assailants knew of Halimi’s identity or history or acted with the intent to target his memory because of his religious affiliation.
The court’s ruling this week upheld the original convictions, sentencing both men to eight months in prison — one with a suspended sentence, meaning he will only serve time if he reoffends or violates certain conditions, and who has since been deported to Tunisia. Both men are also barred from entering France for five years.
The two 19-year-old undocumented men with prior convictions for theft and violence were arrested in August for vandalizing Halimi’s memorial in the northern Paris suburb of Épinay-sur-Seine.
During the initial trial in Bobigny, in northeastern France, the brothers faced charges of “aggravated destruction of property” and “desecration of a monument dedicated to the memory of the dead on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion,” offenses carrying sentences of up to two years in prison.
The court acquitted them of committing an antisemitic hate crime, ruling that they were unaware they had desecrated Halimi’s memorial.
Even though they admitted to being in the garden on the night of the incident, the brothers denied cutting down the tree and claimed they were unaware of Halimi’s story, leading the court to rule that the act was not antisemitic in nature.
Halimi was abducted, held captive, and tortured in January 2006 by a gang of about 20 people in a low-income housing estate in the Paris suburb of Bagneux.
Three weeks later, Halimi was found in Essonne, south of Paris, naked, gagged, and handcuffed, with clear signs of torture and burns. The 23-year-old died on the way to the hospital.
In 2011, an olive tree was planted in Halimi’s memory. Last year, in one of the latest attacks on his memory, the memorial in the northern Paris suburb of Épinay-sur-Seine was found felled — probably with a chainsaw.
Since the attack, French authorities have been working to replant olive trees to honor Halimi’s memory.
This latest case is by no means the first in France to raise alarm bells among the Jewish community, as courts have repeatedly overturned or reduced sentences for individuals accused of antisemitic crimes, fueling public outrage over what many see as excessive leniency.
In February, a French court tossed out antisemitic-motivated charges against a 55-year-old man convicted of murdering his 89-year-old Jewish neighbor in 2022.
According to French media, the magistrate of the public prosecutor’s office refused to consider the defendant’s prior antisemitic behavior, including online posts spreading hateful content and promoting conspiracy theories about Jews and Israelis, arguing that it was not directly related to the incident itself.
In May 2022, Rachid Kheniche threw his neighbor, René Hadjadj, from the 17th floor of his building, an act to which he later admitted.
At the time, Kheniche told investigators that while having a discussion, he tried to strangle Hadjadj without realizing what he was doing, as he was experiencing a paranoid episode caused by prior drug use.
After several psychiatric evaluations, the court concluded that the defendant was mentally impaired at the time of the crime, reducing his criminal responsibility and lowering the maximum sentence for murder to 20 years.
Kheniche was ultimately sentenced to 18 years in prison and six years of “socio-judicial monitoring.”
Last year, the public prosecutor’s office in Nanterre, just west of Paris, appealed a criminal court ruling that cleared a nanny of antisemitism-aggravated charges after she poisoned the food and drinks of the Jewish family she worked for.
Residing illegally in France, the nanny had worked as a live-in caregiver for the family and their three children — aged two, five, and seven — since November 2023.
The 42-year-old Algerian woman was sentenced to two and a half years in prison for “administering a harmful substance that caused incapacitation for more than eight days.”
Even though the nanny initially denied the charges against her, she later confessed to police that she had poured a soapy lotion into the family’’ food as a warning because “they were disrespecting her.”
“They have money and power, so I should never have worked for a Jewish woman — it only brought me trouble,” the nanny told the police. “I knew I could hurt them, but not enough to kill them.”
The French court declined to uphold any antisemitism charges against the defendant, noting that her incriminating statements were made several weeks after the incident and recorded by a police officer without a lawyer present
In another shocking case last year, a local court in France dramatically reduced the sentence of one of the two teenagers convicted of the brutal gang rape of a 12-year-old Jewish girl, citing his “need to prepare for future reintegration.”
More than a year after the attack, the Versailles Court of Appeal retried one of the convicted boys — the only one to challenge his sentence — behind closed doors, ultimately reducing his term from nine to seven years and imposing an educational measure.
Uncategorized
US Sending Marines and Amphibious Assault Ship to Middle East, Officials Say
US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth holds a briefing with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine, amid the US-Israeli war on Iran, at the Pentagon in Washington, DC, US, March 19, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Evan Vucci
The US military is deploying thousands more Marines to the Middle East, officials told Reuters on Friday, as President Donald Trump accused NATO allies of cowardice over their reluctance to send forces to help open the Strait of Hormuz.
The narrow waterway, conduit for around a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies, has been effectively closed to most shipping since the United States and Israel launched the war against Iran almost three weeks ago.
Vital energy infrastructure in both Iran and neighboring Gulf states has also been attacked, and oil prices have jumped about 50% since the start of the war on Feb. 28, threatening a global economic shock.
More than 2,000 people have been killed, mostly in Iran and Lebanon, while Americans, facing sharply higher prices, appear increasingly concerned at signs the war could expand further.
A new Reuters/Ipsos poll showed almost two-thirds of Americans believe Trump will order troops into a large-scale ground war, with only 7% supporting such a move.
On Friday, Israel’s military said it carried out two large waves of air strikes on Tehran and central Iran, targeting weapons production facilities and sites storing ballistic missile launchers and components. Israel faced multiple waves of missile attacks from Iran, according to the Israeli military, triggering air raid sirens in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, where explosions from interceptions were heard.
Fragments from an Iranian missile struck Jerusalem on Friday, landing just outside the Old City, which is sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims, according to a photograph released by the police. There were no reports of injuries or casualties.
Kuwait’s state oil firm said its Mina Al-Ahmadi refinery had suffered multiple drone attacks that set some units alight, the latest energy facility hit by Iran in recent days.
TROOPS DEPLOY
Three US officials told Reuters that 2,500 Marines, along with the USS Boxer, an amphibious assault ship, and accompanying warships would deploy to the region, although they did not say what their role would be.
Two officials said there had been no decision on whether to send troops into Iran itself. Sources have earlier told Reuters that possible targets could include Iran‘s coast or Kharg Island oil export hub.
Trump said the United States was close to reaching its goals in the war, which include degrading Iran‘s military and preventing it from developing a nuclear weapon, and may wind down its military effort.
Trump also called US allies “cowards” for declining to help open the Strait of Hormuz while fighting continued in a conflict they were not consulted about beforehand.
Several allies have pledged to join “appropriate efforts” to ensure safe passage through the strait, but Germany and France have both said fighting must stop first. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said he would speak to Trump this weekend.
The UK government authorized the US to use its bases in Britain to strike Iranian missile sites that are targeting ships in the strait.
END OF RAMADAN AND PERSIAN NEW YEAR
As Muslims around the region tried to celebrate Eid al-Fitr, which ends the fasting month of Ramadan, and Iranians marked Nowruz, the Persian New Year, new Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei issued a message of defiance.
Khamenei, who has not been seen in public since the Israeli attack that killed his father and predecessor Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on the war’s first day, said Iranians had responded with unity and resistance and “dealt a disorienting blow to the enemy.”
US and Israeli officials say Iran can still hit back, even though weeks of bombing have severely weakened the government and depleted its stock of missiles and drones.
Iran‘s Revolutionary Guards said they had attacked Haifa and Tel Aviv with multi-warhead missiles and used drones to attack weapons stocks at US bases, including Sheikh Isa air base in Bahrain. No comment was immediately available from US forces.
The semi-official Iranian news agency Tasnim said intelligence minister Esmail Ahmadi was killed, the latest of dozens of leading figures assassinated by Israel.
“We have nobody to talk to,” Trump said. “And you know what? We like it that way.”
FUEL PRICES CLIMB AHEAD OF US ELECTIONS
Soaring US diesel and gasoline prices may hurt Trump’s core political support as his Republicans prepare to defend slim majorities in November’s congressional elections.
On Friday, the benchmark price of Brent crude oil was up slightly, near $110, after surging the day before on growing fears that the largest ever disruption to world energy supplies would trigger a global economic shock.
Flows of crude and petroleum have dropped by about 12 million barrels per day – roughly 12% of global demand – due to output cuts and export halts by Gulf producers.
Those barrels cannot easily be replaced by the industries that rely on them, and will be felt for months or even years.
A major Qatari gas field was disrupted by an Iranian strike, and Iraq on Friday declared force majeure on all oilfields developed by foreign oil companies.