It is not uncommon for a writer to refer to the other person within, that double who sits at the desk and is capable of producing what will later be called a work of fiction. We often read confessions about that certain other who can work wonders with words and devise intricate plots. Novelists respond to the question of inspiration with bizarre answers, leaving the reader to wonder: who is the true writer behind a complex novel?

When this other appears intentionally in a work of fiction, it's called the alter ego. Philip Roth introduced Nathan Zuckerman as an alter ego, and over time, Zuckerman became Roth's double. The Zuckerman Novels are now part of university curricula worldwide and include two of Roth's masterpieces.

Operation Shylock, published in 1993, has a complex structure and plot that challenges the reader. The prose is of high quality and rhythmic drive. The novel explores themes such as duplicity, truth and lies, and the place of fiction in a clashing world. The title refers to Roth's mission in Athens for the Mossad, and the story ends with a meeting between Roth and Smilesburger in Manhattan.

Operation Shylock holds an important place in Roth's body of work, coming after a nervous breakdown he experienced. The novel won the PEN/Faulkner Award for best novel in 1993. In my opinion, while the plot is ambitious and at times lacks direction, it is still a remarkable work by a great writer.

There are still a couple of big-hitters among the Roths I have left that will be first-time reads for me.

One is Sabbath's Theater, which Roth himself considered his best work and which the great Harold Bloom was tremendously fond of. The other is I Married a Communist.

However, after revisiting this one after many years, I think the only other Roth I've read that quite matches its sheer brilliance in both conception and execution is The Ghost Writer.

Like that book, and like many Roth books but especially that one, Operation Shylock is steeped in questions of identity and issues pertaining to Jewishness. It delves into what it means to be a Jew, what one owes to those who have come before, both ancestors and parents and other immediate family, as well as those who perished in the Holocaust. It also explores what one takes from being a Jew, whether observant or totally secular.

But where The Ghost Writer largely focuses on Nathan Zuckerman, his fledgling writing career and his life on a smaller scale, Operation Shylock tackles current events in Israel in early 1988, right on the cusp of the Intifada, during the John Demjanjuk trial, not long after the murder of Leon Klinghoffer, and much more. It invokes a litany of other issues central and otherwise germane to Jewish identity, such as the Holocaust, the Israeli treatment of Palestinians, Jonathan Pollard, anti-Semitism, Borscht Belt shtick, the Chofetz Chaim and his instructions for living morally as a Jew, Zionism, and perhaps most crucially of all, the concept of "Diasporism".

Here, a second "Philip Roth" is espoused, whom the first Roth, our protagonist, tracks down in Jerusalem and seeks to confront and dissuade from continuing to impersonate him, leading to both comedy and moments of tension not far off from a le Carre novel.

It's a real kaleidoscopic whirlwind of a book, in which every side of these complex political and cultural matters is given its say via some of the most compellingly drawn characters in Roth's corpus. Throughout, he is absolutely masterful at keeping the reader on their toes with well-timed tonal shifts and leaving some motives ambiguous.

As he purports to be relating true events in his narration, and this is probably the most compelling of his several experiments with blurring fiction and non-fiction, he uses the ambiguity to underscore the difficulty of ever fully understanding the motivations of others and the temptation to sacrifice fidelity to the historical record in order to tidy up or render more satisfying the narrative one is putting together.

In the end, as in life, Roth seems to conclude only that there are rarely any cut-and-dried answers to the complicated questions of our modern world.

Erections are a natural physiological phenomenon in the male body. However, when a person becomes overly obsessed with erections, it may raise concerns. There could be several reasons for this obsession.

One possible reason is related to self-esteem and body image. Some men may feel that a strong and frequent erection is a sign of their masculinity and sexual prowess. They may believe that if they cannot achieve or maintain an erection easily, it reflects poorly on them as men.

Another factor could be the influence of media and society. The portrayal of sexual attractiveness and performance in the media often emphasizes a certain ideal of male sexuality, which may include a constant ability to have erections. This can create unrealistic expectations and lead to an obsession with achieving and maintaining erections.

In some cases, underlying psychological issues such as anxiety, stress, or relationship problems may also contribute to an obsession with erections. These emotional factors can affect a person's sexual function and lead to an excessive focus on erections as a way to cope with or compensate for these issues.

It is important to note that an obsession with erections can have a negative impact on a person's mental health and overall well-being. If this obsession is causing distress or interfering with daily life, it may be advisable to seek professional help. A healthcare provider or mental health professional can assess the situation, identify the underlying causes, and provide appropriate treatment and support.

I read this book in 1997. Even now, when I look at it from time to time, I can remember every single sentence. It's truly astonishing. How is this possible? It's almost the polar opposite of my experience with Woolf. Now, I'm not making a value judgment here. I love both authors equally. But it makes me wonder how Roth managed to imprint so many pages of sentences so deeply into someone's memory.

I really, really enjoyed this book as well. It was the first late-stage Roth that I ever read. So, it's quite difficult to compare it to the others that I read later on. Those other books, I completely adored for their generosity, accessibility, intelligence, humor, audacity, and just everything about them. Each one had its own unique charm and quality that made them stand out. But this first Roth book holds a special place in my heart.

It's as if it opened up a whole new world of literature for me. It introduced me to Roth's unique style and way of telling a story. And ever since then, I've been hooked on his work. I can't wait to explore more of his books and see what other literary treasures he has in store for me.

This tale is just plausible enough to make me wonder if something like this actually happened to Roth. I suppose that is exactly the point.

The man is a self-obsessed genius. His writing is so good that I've become a bit obsessed by him too.

I know that he is never someone I would personally admire. Nor do his characters rate highly for "likeability". But, man, do they stick in your head. I mean, Smilesburger, really? It sounds like a really happy place to grab a shake and some fries along with your sandwich. But no, somehow he turns that name into something full of shadowy power and menace.

And the long argumentative bit about "Diasporism", basically a philosophy whereby the Jews would be a whole lot better off if they just abandoned Israel and left the desert to the Arabs. Who else could possibly lay out an argument for a "No State Solution" and make it sound pretty well reasoned? It's truly remarkable how Roth can take these seemingly ordinary or even absurd concepts and transform them into something thought-provoking and deeply engaging. His ability to create such complex and memorable characters and storylines is what makes him such a unique and influential writer.

What, truly, is one's identity? Is it singular and unchanging, solely owned and known by ourselves? Or is it variable, multiple, and contradictory, shifting according to memory, circumstances, time, events, and the influences of others on our lives? Roth, in this captivating and complex "novel" (is it?), presents numerous questions regarding the malleability and uncertainty of identity, whether it be one's own, that of those we encounter, or that of a people.

He commences the story with his experience of "madness," a period of extreme mental disorder ultimately determined to be caused by a sleeping pill that induced psychosis in some. (This apparently occurred to him in reality.) Evidently, his identity as a prolific writer, one of America's most renowned and brilliant authors, is completely altered during this time; he becomes a different person. As he recovers, he discovers that another man claiming to be "Philip Roth" is in Israel, garnering attention in the press by advocating a new diasporism for the Jews - that they should leave Israel and return to Europe, their homeland for many centuries. This doppelganger "Philip Roth" closely resembles the real Roth in appearance, even fooling those who know him personally. The motivation behind his plan is that the future portends the destruction, once again, of the Jewish people, either by their hostile Arab neighbors or by their use of the atomic bomb in defense, which would damage their moral standing in the world.

The real Roth vacillates between ignoring the impostor, strongly confronting him, or playing along with the farce of this outrageous impersonation. He encounters George Ziad, a Palestinian and an old university friend, who, in contrast to his former worldly perspective and broad views, is now completely obsessed with the injustice of the Israeli occupation of his homeland. Roth gives the impression to Ziad and others that he is indeed the one advocating this emigration scheme. (Including a humorous riff on how an American Jew (Irving Berlin) with beautiful subtlety destroyed Christian conceptions of the divinity and sanctity of Christ.)

A parallel motif in the story is the trial in an Israeli court of John Demjanjuk, also known as "Ivan the Terrible," who is accused of being the monstrous camp guard who sadistically killed many Jews in the gas chamber. Demjanjuk, too, has another identity, that of a naturalized American citizen, an auto factory worker from Cleveland who led a typical American life. Questions about his true identity, whether he is the horrendous Ivan or the ordinary John, the auto worker, surround the proceedings.

Then there is the identity of the Jewish people themselves and, by extension, the Jewish state. Has the identity of the Holocaust survivors been so thoroughly transformed by their experience that they no longer resemble who they once were? If they have a new identity (and how could they not?), what are we to make of it? Roth opines harshly on the persona of "victimhood" that the Jews and the state of Israel portray and use in a self-righteous and cynical manner to perpetuate their political and national hegemony over the Palestinians and validate the legitimacy of their claims to statehood. Are they, as "occupiers" of Palestine, mirroring, even if to a much lesser extent, the position of their former tyrants?

Of course, no one in the story is who or what they seem on the surface. The phony Roth has a different real life, or is his revelation about his true identity false? He is a cancer-stricken zealot who is using his resemblance to Roth as a means to fulfill his life-sustaining needs. Roth's Arab friend, despite his overt and passionate hatred of the Israelis, may or may not be their collaborator; while he claims to be a confidant of high authorities in the PLO, he might actually be in the service of the Mossad. Smilesburger, initially an aging caricature of a Jewish immigrant to America now returned to Israel, is really a powerful operative of the Mossad. Ziad attempts to enlist Roth to meet in Athens with a group of Jews who are ostensibly secretly funding the PLO, a contact that will lead to a meeting with Arafat, which the PLO can then exploit for publicity purposes. Roth resists, but Smilesburger urges him to attend this meeting as a spy for the Israelis to enable the Mossad to counter their financial ties with the PLO. By the end of the book, Smilesburger is attempting to persuade Roth to remove from his book the details of the Athens encounter as it is detrimental to the interests of Israel. Roth does so, but leaves the impression that this "confession" is based on true events, not a work of fiction.

Throughout the story, Roth delves deeply into the manifestations of anti-Semitism that have existed and continue to exist. He writes, as the leading American novelist on matters of Jewish sensibility, of ideas and perspectives that no other contemporary author can express with greater intensity.

Many critics have placed Operation Shylock, along with American Pastoral and The Human Stain, among the finest works of 20th-century American literature. It is difficult to disagree.

Roth's continuous blurring of the lines between fiction and reality is not merely a literary device in this novel; it is the very essence of the plot.

A friend alerts Roth that he himself is in Israel for the trial of John Demjanjuk, even though the author is actually in New York. The character Roth then flies off to Israel to uncover the identity of this impostor, and the book unfolds like an accordion, revealing one doppelganger after another.

Is Demjanjuk truly the guard "Ivan the Terrible" from the Sobibór extermination camp in Ukraine? Is the impostor Roth an agent of the Mossad? Is the man on the street an agent? Is Roth's novelist friend George Z a double agent?

The narrative repeatedly emphasizes reality, only to undermine itself pages later. This is quite possibly the highest point of the author's playfulness in this regard, blurring the boundaries between what is real and what is imagined, keeping the reader on the edge of their seat and constantly questioning the nature of truth and fiction.

Philip Roth presents a thrilling and complex exploration in this novel.

He offers a wide range of perspectives on Jewish life and history, delving deep into the Israel-Palestine issues and also touching on the broader aspects of humanity. The story weaves together elements of distance and involvement, identity theft and conspiracy, featuring both real people and some truly outlandish characters.

While it may seem to drag on at times, with an abundance of voices and viewpoints that could potentially be overwhelming, this carnivalesque novel has its own charm and value. It is a work that demands to be read to the end, as it reveals a rich tapestry of ideas and emotions.

Despite its length and complexity, it offers a unique and thought-provoking look at various aspects of life and society, making it a worthy addition to any reader's collection.

Don't try this at home!

Philip Roth's book that begins with the statement "I learned of the existence of the other Philip Roth in January 1988..." You'll bow down to the rich palette of colors that the author has, especially when the continuation justifies his choice.

Famous, veteran, moderate, successful, and high-level writers, don't try something like this in your own book. It's the surest recipe for failure.

From then on, there are various negatives that prevent me from sharing the general enthusiasm:

Among the first:

+ Full and uncomplicated fictional and real coverage of the Jewish issue and Jewish psychology.

+ Perfect self-referentiality, not only of the book's hypothesis but also of the author with the protagonist and his comrade.

+ A great wealth of references to politics, art, public life, etc.

+ Excellent translation by Spyros Vrettos, with a few mistakes. A very detailed explanatory appendix, without which many details of the work would be lost to the non-Jewish reader.

+ Vivid characters. Persuasive Pipik (something very difficult) and impressive Jinx.

+ A nice ending and a note from the author, in perfect harmony with the central idea.

And among the others:

--The need to refer to the appendix very often, even three lines before the end of the book.

--Really excessive verbosity. Many adjectives, all relevant and correct, but overly many. And overly detailed analysis of thoughts, even for the tiniest topic. Constant telling, minimal showing. They can't easily fill 530 pages with such a simple plot. This was by far the biggest drawback of the book for me. He would say one thing, even the simplest, even the most insignificant for the story, and it would take three or even ten pages until he did it so carefully that you would forget where you left the scene. Boring many times. I threw the book. It took me a month and a half to finish it.

--Uncontrolled and unnatural verbosity in the dialogues. One character would start a speech under the most chaotic conditions without end, and the interlocutor would never interrupt him, except to unleash an even greater one. Artificial, boring, and tiring.

--The syntax. Okay, Philip, it's more than clear that you know how to handle the language perfectly, but that doesn't mean you have to make life difficult for everyone. Long-winded sentences, continuous parentheses, balloon-like thoughts, and other not-so-nice things. Beyond the titanic work required for the translation (Vrettos is a hero), you tire the reader, at least the average one, who is not obliged to go back every three and a bit five or ten lines above to remember the verb or the subject or some other syntactic element of the sentence. Everything is correct, I'm not saying, but we're not detectives or doing grammar exercises. As a member of the association for the rights of the reader, I demand a more relaxing and attractive writing style.

--The self-praise. There is also a limit, Philip. The self-references are perfect, but not everyone in Philip Roth's book can say, without the slightest irony, how terrifying and great a writer Philip Roth is. And no, from a certain point on, I can't take it as satire. After a number of eager applauding characters, only self-praise remains, as self-mockery is completely lacking. You missed many opportunities, Philip, to do this well. Two or three characters who would have laughed at your self-indulgence for the endless blabbering would have nicely broken the continuous flow of your odes to yourself. There wasn't even one.

While Philip Roth is in Israel interviewing another writer, he finds himself in a rather complex and unexpected situation. He has to confront not only another Philip Roth who is preaching Diasporism but also deal with the Mossad and a Palestinian friend who confuses the real Roth for the fake Roth.

Despite the obvious potential for an exciting espionage novel with such a setup, Roth chooses a different path. He decides not to focus primarily on the plot. Although there is the possibility to develop a detailed and engaging story, the plot component in this novel is, in fact, noticeably shorter compared to that of an Eric Ambler novel. The rest of the novel, which constitutes at least half, if not more, is a non-fiction like discussion. It delves into various aspects such as the experience of being Jewish, the act of writing a novel, and duality, with a fair amount of repetition.

I don't have anything against tangential discussions in a novel. In some cases, they can enhance the enjoyment of the story and make it more profound and meaningful. However, in those instances, the discussion serves to complement the story, with the story remaining the central focus. In "Operation Shylock," unfortunately, the plot seems to exist merely to label the work as Fiction and to have something more than just "discussions on duality, the experience of being Jewish, and the act of writing" to put on the back cover.

Ironically, considering this is a novel written by Philip Roth where the main character is also Philip Roth, the character component is one of the weakest among the six novels I've read by him so far. It's not that the characters are terrible; it's just that he has achieved much better character development in most of his other works.

I was also quite disappointed that this novel won the PEN/Faulkner Award. I've read several PEN/Faulkner winners, and most of them have left a deep impression on me.

The only redeeming factor of this novel is the last chapter. It offers an amazing conclusion to what is otherwise an unremarkable story. It almost makes me want to increase my rating to three and a half stars. But not quite.

I wouldn't recommend this novel to first-time readers of Philip Roth. For them, I would suggest "The Human Stain" or "The Plot Against America" instead. This one seems more suitable for those who are already fans and admirers of Roth's writing.

This is by far the most Jewish book I have ever come across. It's not because it is 'inherently' Jewish in some essential way, but rather because the very word "Jew" makes up approximately one-third of the entire text. I would be extremely curious to see the results of a ctrl-f search for the actual number of times it is used. My hunch is that it must be at least a thousand.

This book also features numerous angry single-paragraph monologues or rants, ranging from 2 to 10 pages in length, representing every conceivable perspective held within Israel and Palestine. There are Jews on Israel, Israelis on the Diaspora, Jews on non-Jews (goyim), Palestinians on Jews, and even Jews on Jews.

To be honest, I was actually quite enjoying this book until the last hundred pages. It was then that a brutal ten-page monologue on the morality of Jews critiquing other Jews made me realize that I have absolutely no interest in this insular way they divide the world into two distinct categories: Jews and the "goyim." This entire Jewish subject matter is, to me, similar to what a non-American character said Roth's book on baseball was to him, perhaps like Finnegans Wake.

What truly detracted from my enjoyment of this otherwise uniquely interesting story was the fact that half of the book was overly long-winded and rambling, with no real connection to the narrative. It was such a disappointment. However, I'm not going to give up on Roth just yet. I have a feeling that this particular book may have been more of an exception rather than the norm.

The first book by Philip Roth that I read left me with the desire to explore the rest of the author's work.

This paranoid novel, in which the writer Philip Roth and a doppelgänger with the same name live and challenge each other, is not a light read, but it is a treatise on Jewish culture that, at various moments, has its share of comical elements - in a humor that is based on taking the various events of the book to the extreme.

Intriguing, different, and good. It makes you think deeply about identity, culture, and the power of the written word. Roth's ability to create complex characters and a captivating storyline is truly remarkable. As I delved deeper into this novel, I found myself becoming more and more immersed in the world he had created. It's a book that stays with you long after you've finished reading it, and one that I would highly recommend to anyone interested in literature that challenges and engages the mind.