Has being human in modern human society become a stigma? Judging by the novel The Human Stain, humanism in contemporary society is considered to be some kind of social defect.

He was not a firebrand or an agitator in any way. Nor was he a madman. Nor was he a radical or a revolutionary, not even intellectually or philosophically speaking. Unless it is revolutionary to believe that disregarding prescriptive society's most restrictive demarcations and asserting independently a free personal choice that is well within the law was something other than a basic human right. Unless it is revolutionary, when you've come of age, to refuse to accept automatically the contract drawn up for your signature at birth.

So he was branded for being just human. What one thinks doesn’t matter. What matters is the way how one can pretend that one thinks exactly the way the others all around do think. Conformity and hypocrisy has become a social norm.

In such a society, it is dangerous to be different. People are pressured to fit into the established mold and suppress their true selves. This leads to a lack of authenticity and individuality, and ultimately, a society that is less vibrant and creative. We need to question these social norms and encourage people to be true to themselves, even if it means going against the grain. Only then can we hope to build a more just and inclusive society.

This is the heaviest book I have read. In part, it was even repulsive. I read it slowly and in small sips.

I will start my review of "The Human Stain" with the fact that in this novel I felt Philip Roth's personal relationship with me as a reader. For example, all kinds of plot devices that make a story exciting for the "market" were saved. In this way, I felt to a great extent the excitement that Roth experienced while writing the novel, which discusses its themes only through the creation of brilliant heroes. Without the excessive scattering and pose that play for the selection of the plot in the general case.

The themes

It is difficult for me to structure my understanding of the themes that Roth discusses in "The Human Stain". It is easy for me to ask the questions that the textuality of the novel managed to pose to my modest intellect:

1. If your father is black, your mother is white, and you are born with the phenotype of a white person and choose to live as a white person in the second half of the 20th century, does anyone have the right to judge you for running away from your origin? Is this flight from origin or flight to the other half of yourself?

2. When society is sensitive to the issue of "political correctness", does it have the right to judge you for the fact that you don't care about political correctness, but you only care about yourself?

3. When political correctness is the daily norm, can the relationships between people preserve their singularity? And is singularity important for the relationships between people or should they always be polarized in a political/social aspect and exist only through the prism of the general/state/society?

These three points pose questions that overlap in their context and Roth nullifies them from beginning to end. I will think about the dilemmas of the heroes of "The Human Stain" for a long time. I recommend it to every fan of Philip Roth. It's worth it.

Philip Roth is known for dealing with serious topics in his novels, and this one is no exception.

Here, he delves into themes such as discrimination, shame, identity, and the act of judging others.

The story explores the complex relationship between truth, rumors, and illusions in the human experience.

It makes us question how difficult it is to truly know someone and how challenging it can be to live in a circle filled with lying and anger.

In a discriminatory community, individuals may feel compelled to lie in order to be accepted, which in turn can lead to feelings of anger and resentment.

Roth's exploration of these themes forces us to confront our own biases and prejudices and to consider the consequences of our actions.

Overall, this novel offers a powerful and thought-provoking look at the human condition.

From the early years of his childhood, the only thing he desired was to be free: not black, nor even white, just to be on his own and free. His aim was that his destiny should be determined by his own decision, as humanly possible, rather than by the ignorant and hate-filled intentions of a hostile world. Why should he accept a life under other conditions?

In the 1950s America, in a world where people's destinies and lives were predetermined according to their skin color, Coleman Silk, a green-eyed and white-skinned 'black man' who refused the path drawn for him. First, he entered the naval forces where blacks were not accepted. Then he left his family and roots behind and continued to a university where whites were whites. He continued his life as a teaching staff, putting individuality and freedom at the center. During the period when he was the dean at a university in a small American town, he initiated changes in the faculty. With his brave and sharp actions, he almost demolished the oligarchy at the university. Meanwhile, he also created his own enemies. And in 1998, he was branded as a racist for the silliest, most baseless, and most 'foolish' reason in the history of the university. The investigation that began, similar to a witch hunt, became the beginning of the irreversible destruction in Silk's life.

The story is told by his alter ego, the writer Nathan Zuckerman, whom we know from Philip Roth's other books. Coleman Silk's life is told gradually between the past and the present, and in the meantime, both recent American history and the subconscious of society are laid out before our eyes.