Uncategorized
How Philip Roth invented a myth called ‘Philip Roth’
Steven J. Zipperstein set to work on his own biography of Philip Roth before anyone knew that Roth’s authorized biography would be pulled from shelves after accusations of sexual misconduct by its author, Blake Bailey. Zipperstein and I first spoke when he was wrapping up his draft. He was pondering Roth’s legacy. He wanted to discuss a Roth-like character I had put in my novel, How I Won a Nobel Prize, in part because he was surprised to discover a younger writer riffing on Roth so openly.
Zipperstein’s book, Philip Roth: Stung By Life, which is part of Yale’s Jewish Lives series, distinguishes itself with an approach that focuses more on Roth’s intellectual and artistic development than on a comprehensive reconstruction of his sexual history. Though Roth was devoutly anti-religious, Jewishness is a major theme that provides a surprisingly sturdy handle with which to grasp the family ties and cultural traditions that remained Roth’s persistent obsessions on the page, even as he resisted them in life.
Zipperstein, who is a professor of Jewish history and culture at Stanford, delivers an admiring, thorough, and swift account of an immensely single-minded writer’s unabating struggles with ambition, romance and the politics of his time. The book also has some fascinating scoops‚ major interviews and materials to which Zipperstein alone had access. We had a lot to talk about, and this interview has been compressed for length and clarity.
Julius Taranto: Start with the obvious: Why did you devote so much time and thought to a Philip Roth biography when there were rival biographical efforts that you could not have known would go up in flames?
Steven Zipperstein: Roth first reached out to me after I published my book, Rosenfeld’s Lives, and we were in touch intermittently for years. I was persuaded that there was really a book to be written, that I could actually do something new, when I discovered the Yeshiva University tape and came to realize the vast discrepancy between what Roth actually experienced and what he believed he experienced and then recorded on the page.
The Yeshiva University tape is one of one of several remarkable bits of journalism on your part, unraveling a remarkable bit of self-mythologizing on Roth’s part.
As part of its 75th anniversary celebration in 1962, Yeshiva University sponsored a panel about the ethnic responsibilities of a writer. Roth, who had at this point published only Goodbye, Columbus, was a featured speaker alongside Ralph Ellison. What Roth remembers — he devotes an entire chapter to this incident in his memoir — is that it was an inquisition, the audience hated him. As a result he decided he wasn’t going to write about Jews anymore and devoted three excruciating years to his next novel in which there are no Jews, and it’s a defining moment in his life.
I learned that the event was taped. Roth had threatened the university with a lawsuit if it was published or aired, but he agreed to give me access. By the time I acquired it, Roth was already dying in the hospital, so the last conversation I had with him was about this tape. It contradicts his memory in every conceivable way. The audience loved him and laughed at his jokes. Those who disliked him rushed to the stage once the program ended. And their criticism was all that he recalled.
I now see Roth’s purported rejection by the Jewish mainstream as a tale he invented (and earnestly believed) in order to justify his preexisting sense of rage and alienation.
Rage was a crucial factor in Roth’s fiction from the beginning. One of the people who contacted me, partly because of the implosion of Blake Bailey’s biography, and because of the apparent difference between my life and Blake’s, was Maxine Groffsky, who hadn’t spoken to anyone before about her relationship with Roth. They’d dated for years, and she was in many ways the model for Brenda Patimkin, the girlfriend in Goodbye, Columbus. But, at least as I was able to reconstruct it, Maxine was little like Brenda Patimkin.
She wasn’t rich or high status, and Roth was never especially subservient to her, the way Neil Klugman is to Brenda.
Still, in fiction Roth gives us Brenda Patimkin. That’s a projection of his rage and ambition.
Where do you think that came from?
I wrestled in the book not to be reductionist. I try to suggest that to understand Roth, you really need to understand the interplay between Roth and mother. Her fastidiousness was through the roof. Roth and his brother Sandy wouldn’t even use the bathrooms in friends’ houses because none were as clean as theirs. That’s a category of a very special kind. It’s a feature of Roth’s life from the outset to figure out what it means for him to really want to satisfy her and at the same time to be aware of what Benjamin Taylor calls his “inner anarchy.”
Mickey Sabbath – a rageful, overweight, unkempt, disgraced, perverted puppeteer – seems like the character through which Roth expressed his “inner anarchy” in its least-filtered form.
This man who engages in daily exercise, who’s trim, who’s incredibly disciplined in his work habits: Mickey Sabbath is what he imagines he is on the inside. In Sabbath’s Theater, he’s undressing himself. He’s allowing the reader to come closer to all that he fears he could be, the person who he knows exists and that he keeps hidden. It’s a book very much in conversation with Maletta Pfeiffer.
They had an on-and-off affair for more than twenty years, and she’s the model for Drenka in Sabbath’s Theater.
I think Maletta more than anyone else becomes privy to Roth’s secrets because he’s convinced that he’s met someone who has an all but identical attitude toward life, towards sensuality and sexuality, and who for the longest time he greatly admires.
But he’s wrong, isn’t he? You spent time with Maletta, and she showed you her diaries and her unsent emails to Roth — documents she never showed to any other biographer or journalist. I’m going to quote from your book, because I think this has real importance for how we interpret the portrait of mutual sexual ecstasy in Sabbath’s Theater. In one of her draft emails in 1995, Maletta wrote: “All the things you did to me. You made me go and talk to whores. . . . That never excited me. I just did it to please you. . . . I never liked it. All the things I did with you. I cannot even write about them. What you put in the book.” It’s quite dark to reconsider Sabbath’s Theater with the understanding that the model for Drenka was often not as enthusiastic as Roth believed her to be.
In contrast to the accusations against Blake Bailey, there’s no evidence of any coercive behavior on Roth’s part in his sexual life – but it’s clear that his sense of Maletta was, I think, not altogether accurate.
She’s romanticized, both in fiction and in Roth’s mind. This relates to a theme that I picked up on in your description of the arc of his career. Alongside his ambivalent relationship to Jewishness and family life, there is a parallel ambivalence between sentimentality and irony. Early in his career, he is so critical of Jewish sentimentalists like Leon Uris and Herman Wouk. But he has his own version of sentimentality emerge later in his career, particularly in American Pastoral and The Plot Against America. He becomes nostalgic for his parents’ world, for FDR, for the sense of moral security that he imagines they had.
He wrestled with nostalgia. He hated nostalgia, and he hated the strengths of family life. He is seeking his whole life to be extraordinary. But he also fantasizes, overtly in Portnoy’s Complaint, about the joy of not needing to strive, the joy of being mediocre. Roth deeply admires his father and wishes on some level that he was like him but also knows in every orb of his body that he wouldn’t actually want to be like him, committed and monogamous and dutiful. He writes from that ambivalence time and time again. And I think, as I suggest in the book, that’s why Zuckerman is the stand-in that stays with Roth, in a contrast to Kepesh, who is more one-sided and selfish and disposable.
I sensed your special affection for The Ghost Writer. Its portrait of writing within domesticity is extraordinarily well-rounded. Perhaps in response to criticism from Irving Howe, Roth maintains a balance in The Ghost Writer that he wasn’t trying to maintain in other works. And you argue, persuasively, that Lonoff is not really a portrait of Bernard Malamud, as is commonly thought, but is much more profoundly Roth’s projection of his own future.
Roth worked assiduously against balance and proportion in many of his other books. Zuckerman inhabits Roth’s ambivalence, and Lonoff represents a future that Roth doesn’t want. Roth fears obscurity. He doesn’t want a body like Lonoff’s, but he fears down deep that this actually might end up being his body. That Hope might end up being his wife. He’s able to face his own terror, in this book and others, in ways that I find extraordinary, especially since beyond his writing desk he doesn’t manage that nearly as successfully.
You surface Roth’s notion that politics is the great generalizer, and literature the great particularizer, and that at a fundamental level, they really cannot abide one another. “How can you be an artist and renounce the nuance? But how can you be a politician and allow the nuance?” Did Roth have political commitments?
He’s a political liberal in the Clintonesque sense, without using it as a curse word. But as is true for many aspects of his life, he’s willing to challenge his presuppositions. That’s something he certainly does in American Pastoral, which probably satisfied readers like Norman Podhoretz rather too much. He does something not dissimilar in The Counterlife with regard to Israel. His own inclinations are dovish. That book was all the more powerful for me for its capacity to portray with a degree of sympathy extreme Israeli figures that Roth politically deplored. One of the characteristics of Roth that I ended up admiring the most was the way in which he so often excoriated his own commitments, challenged them, and exposed them for their own weaknesses.
He tells Benjamin Taylor that he cares intensely about his “moral reputation.” That not something that one expects from the author of Portnoy’s Complaint or Sabbath’s Theater. How would you describe the values that Roth wanted to be associated with? It can’t be mainstream civility.
What he values above all is freedom as he understands it. And what he’s hoping a biographer will do is to portray him as someone who spends his life exploring the wages of freedom and the underbelly of unfreedom – hence his political commitment to liberalism, and hence his deploring ideologues who disparage freedom. He’s immensely preoccupied with his reputation, but he also takes incredible risks with it. He is insistent that those risks are unavoidable for a writer and that to avoid them means inevitable mediocrity.
The post How Philip Roth invented a myth called ‘Philip Roth’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
France Moves to Criminalize Anti-Zionism Amid Surging Wave of Antisemitism Targeting Jews, Israelis
French Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu delivers a speech at the National Assembly in Paris, France, Jan. 20, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Sarah Meyssonnier
The French government is moving to criminalize anti-Zionism in a sweeping bid to confront a deepening surge in antisemitism targeting Jews and Israelis across the country, as officials warn of a growing climate of fear and intimidation nationwide.
Speaking at the annual gathering of the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions of France (CRIF), the main representative body of French Jews, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu announced that the government would introduce a bill criminalizing anti-Zionist expressions, signaling a move to tackle antisemitism in all its forms, not just traditional manifestations.
“To define oneself as anti-Zionist is to question Israel’s right to exist. It’s a call for the destruction of an entire people under the guise of ideology,” the French leader said.
“There is a difference between legitimate criticism of the Israeli government and rejecting the very existence of the Jewish state. This ‘blurring’ must stop,” he continued.
“Calling for the destruction of the State of Israel is calling to endanger the lives of a people and cannot be tolerated any longer,” Lecornu added. “Hatred of Jews is hatred of the Republic and a stain on France.”
The European Jewish Congress (EJC) commended Lecornu’s announcement, praising him “for his clear and principled commitment to criminalize calls for the destruction of any state, including Israel.”
“Calling for the destruction of the State of Israel is calling to endanger the lives of a people and cannot be tolerated any longer”
We commend
PM @SebLecornu for his clear and principled commitment to criminalize calls for the destruction of any state, including Israel. pic.twitter.com/dvCd2iMtUB
— European Jewish Congress (@eurojewcong) February 20, 2026
During the ceremony, CRIF president Yonathan Arfi warned that Jewish communities in France are under mounting threat, stressing the urgent need for action against the country’s rising antisemitism.
“Antisemitism knows no truce. The conflict in the Middle East has acted as a catalyst. But the hatred growing in our country is a French problem, and there is no reason to expect a rapid decline,” Arfi said.
In April, the French government is expected to endorse a private bill proposed by Jewish Member of Parliament Caroline Yadan, who represents French citizens abroad — including thousands living in Israel — with backing from right-wing parties likely ensuring the majority needed to pass the legislation.
Yadan explained that the bill is designed to combat emerging forms of antisemitism, emphasizing the urgent need for stronger legal measures to protect Jewish communities in France.
“This is a clear statement: Our Republic will not become accustomed, will not look the other way, and will never abandon the Jews of France,” the French lawmaker said.
« Il faut une étape supplémentaire : appeler à la destruction d’Israël, c’est appeler à la mise en danger de tout un peuple. »
Je remercie le Premier ministre @SebLecornu d’avoir annoncé, ce soir, lors du dîner du @Le_CRIF, l’examen, en avril prochain, de ma proposition de loi… pic.twitter.com/hruoRSP5iE
— Caroline Yadan (@CarolineYADAN) February 19, 2026
Like most countries across Europe and the broader Western world, France has seen a rise in antisemitic incidents over the last two years, in the wake of the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
According to the French Interior Ministry’s annual report on anti-religious acts, antisemitism in France remained alarmingly high last year, with 1,320 incidents recorded across the country.
Although the total number of antisemitic outrages in 2025 fell by 16 percent compared to 2024’s second highest ever total of 1,570 cases, the report warned that antisemitism remains “historically high,” with more than 3.5 attacks occurring every day.
The most recent figure of total antisemitic incidents represents a 21 percent decline from 2023’s record high of 1,676 incidents, but a 203 percent increase from the 436 antisemitic acts recorded in 2022, before the Oct. 7 atrocities.
Even though Jews make up less than 1 percent of France’s population, they accounted for 53 percent of all religiously motivated crimes last year.
Between 2022 and 2025, antisemitic attacks across France quadrupled, leaving the Jewish community more exposed than ever.
Uncategorized
Hamas Invokes Oct. 7 Conspiracies Blaming Israel in English — While Openly Taking Credit for the Attack in Arabic
The personal belongings of festival-goers are seen at the site of an attack on the Nova Festival by Hamas terrorists from Gaza, near Israel’s border with the Gaza Strip, in southern Israel, Oct. 12, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
As the US-backed peace plan for Gaza moves toward reconstruction, members of Hamas have invoked conspiracy theories to blame Israel for the Palestinian terrorist group’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of the Jewish state — a different story than the one that Hamas has told in Arabic celebrating its role in leading the massacre.
In a Feb. 9 interview, Hamas media representative Osama Hamdan alleged that “the real attack was by the Israeli forces, and they were shot by the helicopters, and there were missile strikes against them under the slogan that there were Hamas militants [among them].”
The interview was conducted in English for the Norwegian Broadcasting Company (NRK) by Afghan-Norwegian anchor Yama Wolasmal. Following Hamdan’s comments, Wolasmal appeared in disbelief, pressing Hamdan in connection to videos published by Hamas’s armed wing, the Qassam Brigades, that show insignia-wearing militants shooting civilians at the Nova music festival in southern Israel.
“If these [Palestinian men donning Qassam Brigades headbands] were not your fighters, then who were they?” the anchor asked.
Hamdan repeatedly claimed they were Israeli forgeries, even when asked to clarify for the record.
The comments echo conspiracy theories that have circulated primarily in English-language activist spaces, which claim that most Israeli civilian casualties in the Oct. 7 onslaught were either self-inflicted or the result of Israeli fire, while Hamas fighters targeted only soldiers.
Coming from a senior Hamas official, the claim marks a departure from the organization’s usual messaging. In Arabic media, Oct. 7 is a major source of pride for Hamas’s leadership, and one of the main triumphs of its ruling tenure in Gaza. In video of a speaking engagement commemorating the one-year anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack, Hamdan himself commended the “1,400 fighters who chose to enter” and attack Israel.
Other prominent Hamas officials have referred to the success of the Oct. 7 invasion and used the attack as a rallying cry. In one of many such instances, the chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau, Khalil al-Hayya, bragged that the Islamist group was planning a “new Oct. 7” against Israel. In a propaganda pamphlet published by Hamas titled “Al-Aqsa Flood: Two Years of Perseverance and Wishing for Liberation,” the Oct. 7 massacre was described as “a blessed moment of rebirth.”
In contrast, the message that Hamas and allied militant factions were responsible for few civilian casualties is far more prevalent among Western pro-Palestinian audiences. While Hamas attempts to project an image of military might, daring, and resilience to its domestic and Arab audience —positioning itself as the leader of a historical assault and ensuing national war — it has also made use of the media to project weakness and victimization to its Western audience.
In order to sustain the latter image in Western media spaces, Hamas has denied or recast documentation of its fighters’ actions on Oct. 7. To this end, Western sympathizers of the organization have pushed claims that minimize and deny the actions of Hamas terrorists and attribute them to Israeli misinformation. They insist that Qassam Brigades fighters killed only Israeli military personnel and did not participate in wanton violence and sexual cruelty, despite extensive documentation from Israeli investigations, survivor testimony, and statements by Hamas fighters themselves.
Proponents of this narrative, including Hamdan in his interview earlier this month, frequently point to an article published in Haaretz in November 2023, which claimed that Israeli helicopters accidentally opened fire on some festivalgoers at Nova amid operational chaos. Another line from the investigation mentioned that pilots at one point “fired indiscriminately,” although this referred to shooting at the gap in the border fence to prevent the passage of fighters to and from Gaza.
Even as the initial report was preliminary, it was quickly picked up by numerous anti-Israel media figures and decontextualized to imply that Israeli helicopters had been the chief killers at Nova and elsewhere — committing a “false flag” massacre that could then be blamed on Hamas to justify the ensuing Israel–Hamas war in Gaza.
Some proponents of this theory often invoke the so-called “Hannibal Directive” — an Israeli military protocol introduced in 1986 to prevent the capture of Israel Defense Forces personnel by terrorist groups. It was abandoned by the military’s top brass in 2016. The protocol reportedly sanctioned use of force to prevent soldiers from being taken hostage, even if it resulted in increased civilian and military casualties.
Critics of Israel have cited the Hannibal Directive to falsely imply that Israeli forces deliberately fired on kidnapped civilians to prevent them being taken hostage. Figures across the political spectrum, from far-left journalist Max Blumenthal to far-right internet personality Nick Fuentes, have amplified such claims. Variations of these arguments have also appeared in coverage by outlets such as Al Jazeera and Middle East Eye, which have highlighted the helicopter-fire allegations and questioned Israeli casualty narratives.
Hamas diplomat Bassem Naim made similar claims to Hamdan’s on Oct. 9, 2023, when he alleged that “Hamas have not killed any civilians” in an English interview with Sky News.
Uncategorized
U2’s New EP References Holocaust, Hitler, Women’s Rights Protests in Iran, Deceased Palestinian Activist
The Irish rock band U2. Photo: BANG Showbiz
The Irish rock band U2 released an EP on Wednesday titled “Days of Ash” that addresses a wide range of topics, including the “Women, Life, Freedom” uprising in Iran, the Holocaust, the killing of a Palestinian activist, ICE raids in the United States, and the Russia-Ukraine war.
“Days of Ash,” which was released on Ash Wednesday and is now available on all streaming platforms, is the first time U2 is releasing a collection of new music since 2017. The EP features five new tracks – “American Obituary,” “The Tears Of Things,” “Song Of The Future,” “One Life At A Time,” and “Yours Eternally” (ft. Ed Sheeran & Taras Topolia) – and the recitation of the poem “Wildpeace,” written by Israeli poet Yehuda Amichai. The poem is read on the EP by Nigerian artist Adeola Fayehun. It begins with the following lines: “Not the peace of a ceasefire / not even the vision of the wolf and the lamb / but rather as in the heart when the excitement is over / and you can talk only about a great weariness.”
In a new interview with the U2 fanzine “Propaganda,” which is being relaunched as a one-off digital zine to accompany the new EP, lead singer Bono talked about the music referencing Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, concerns about antisemitism, his condemnation of the Hamas-led terrorist attack in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and his criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for how he is managing the Israel-Hamas war.
The title for “The Tears of Things” is a reference to the 2025 book by Richard Rohr titled The Tears of Things: Prophetic Wisdom for an Age of Outrage. The book is about the Jewish prophets and imagines a conversation between Italian sculptor and artist Michelangelo and his marble statue of the Bible’s King David.
“If you put a man into a cage and rattle it long enough/A man becomes the kind of rage that cannot be locked up … The tears of things/Let the desert be unfrozen,” Bono sings in the track. He also sings about “six million voices silenced in just four years,” which is a reference to the six million people killed in the Holocaust. Bono told “Propaganda” the same song includes a reference to a true story about Mussolini and Hitler meeting. Hitler’s name in the song is replaced by the word “shadow,” Bono explained.
“Mussolini came to see me/A shadow by his side,” Bono sings. “Church bells ring, a vanishing/Then the vanishing denied/Six million voices silenced in just four years/The silent song of Christendom/So loud everybody hears.”
The track concludes with the lyrics: “River, sea and mountain/Desert, dust and snow/Everybody is my people/Let my people go.”
Bono told “Propaganda” it is “the moral force of Judaism that helped shape Western civilization.”
“Some of my favorite bits … some of the greatest hits of Western civilization … were gifted to us by brilliant Jewish minds … mathematicians, scientists … writers … not to mention singwriters,” added the singer-songwriter, who said he comes from a “Judeo-Christian tradition.”
“There has never been a moment when we have needed the moral force of Judaism more than right now,” he explained. “And yet, it has rarely in modern times been under such a siege. From where I stand, as a person with a limited view, Judaism, one of the great and noble religions, is being slandered by far-right fundamentalists from within its own community … I could argue the same about Christianity or Islam.”
Antisemitism “has been a scourge for millennia,” and “was rising long before Oct. 7 and the resulting war in Gaza,” Bono said. “As with Islamophobia, antisemitism must be countered every time we witness it. The rape, murder, and abduction of Israelis on Oct. 7 was evil, but self-defense is no defense for the sweeping brutality of Netanyahu’s response,” he continued.
The musician also talked about how the Israel-Hamas war has resulted in “deep knock-on effects for the Jewish diaspora and their safety … As if all Jews are to blame for the actions of Netanyahu, Smotrich, and Ben Gvir.” He was referring to Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir.
When asked later on in the interview about criticism he has faced, especially in Ireland, for not speaking out enough against the conflict in Gaza, Bono said, “I’ve written on Israel and Gaza, but in terms of actions I’ve been focused on the things I know more about.”
Bono also told “Propaganda” that the song “One Life at a Time” on the new EP is inspired by Palestinian activist and filmmaker Awdah Hathaleen, whose was killed last year by an extremist Israeli settler in the West Bank. Hathaleen was featured in the Oscar-winning documentary “No Other Land,” which focuses on Israel’s demolition of Palestinian homes in the West Bank village of Masafer Yatta and criticizes Israel’s military actions. The lyrics of “One Life at a Time” do not reference Hathaleen by name, but the band’s lyric video for the track features a picture of Hathaleen’s face, as well as image of Israel’s West Bank security barrier and the Dome of the Rock.
“Song of the Future” honors the 2022 Women, Life, Freedom movement and uprising in Iran as well as the protesters killed, including 16-year-old Iranian Sarina Esmailzadeh, who was beaten to death by Iranian security forces. Esmailzadeh is the “star of our song,” Bono told “Propaganda.”
“This new EP is a response to current events, inspired by the many extraordinary and courageous people fighting on the frontlines of freedom,” U2 said. “Four of the five tracks are about individuals – a mother, a father, a teenage girl whose lives were brutally cut short – and a soldier who’d rather be singing but is ready to die for the freedom of his country.”
The first track of the EP, “American Obituary,” is dedicated to Renee Good, a mother of three and protester who was fatally shot on Jan. 7 in Minneapolis, Minnesota, by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent during a protest.
The track “Yours Eternally” is about the war in Ukraine.