32/CHRONICLESnwithin the modern poet of an ahennrationahty, of the mascuhne pure reasonnof an Apollonius at the feast ofnpoor Lamia … has provided both andazzhng clarity of analysis and expressionnand has threatened to initiate anpotentially fatal disunity within thentotal personality, setting reason at oddsnwith imagination, skepticism againstnthe impulse toward faith, surgical selfconsciousnessnagainst the impulse towardnsynthesis.”nJames Applewhite is himself a brilliantnpoet, and his conclusion here isnso apprehensi’e that a reader may feelnit has autobiographical as well as intel­nlectual basis.nHe chooses as example of the disunifiednpersonality Poe’s deeply romantic,nicily intellectual, detectivenAuguste Dupin. “Purely consciousnDupin has looked upon irrational apenwith cold calculation. The ape, misunderstood,nhas responded’ with outragenand violence.”nHis proposition seems true enough,nthough a bit awkward. Dupin had littlenconnection with the natural landscape.nPerhaps we might remembernmore clearly that favorite subject ofnRomantic painting, the Falls atnReichenbach in the Swiss Alps. Turn-nWhen He Was Good by Brian Murrayn”A man who writes a book, thinks himself wiser ornwittier than the rest of mankind; he supposes that hencan instruct or amuse them, and the pubUc to whomnhe appeals must, after all, be the Judges of hisnpretensions.”n—Samuel JohnsonnZuckerman Bound: A Trilogy &nEpilogue by Philip Roth, New York:nFarrar, Straus & Giroux; $22.50.nPhilip Roth’s lirst book, a collectionnof stories called Goodbye Columbus,nwas a critical smash. Reviewersnhailed it as witty, energetic, and accuratelyndetailed; they noted with astonishmentnthat Roth was only 26, andnthey predicted a distinguished career.nGoodbye Columbus earned Roth thenNational Book Award and a threeyearnstint as writer-in-residence atnPrinceton.nGoodbye Columbus appeared inn1959. Roth’s next book—publishednthree years later—was Letting Go, an600-page novel that tracks the laborednpassage from innocence to experiencenof a self-absorbed and largely unpleasantnacademic. Letting Go had its admirers,nbut many critics agreed that itnwas too long and turgid, and morenthan a tad pretentious. Roth spent fivenyears sweating over his next novel,nBrian Murray is professor of Englishnat Youngstown State University.nWhen She Was Good (1967), whichn. also did littie to increase his readershipnor reputation. More than one criticnnoted that When She Was Good—thenonly Roth novel with an entirely non-nJewish cast — was both flat andnunconvincing. Jonathan Baumbach,nwriting for Commonweal, suggestednthat Roth’s portrayal of a family ofnMidwestern Protestants was “an accomplishmentncomparable, say, tonZero Mostel doing an extended imitationnof Jimmy Stewart.”nRoth’s next novel, Portnoy’s Complaint,nwas one of the biggest sellers ofn1969. It brought Roth more thann5500,000 in advance royalties andnpaperback sales, and another $250,000nfrom the Hollywood producers whonturned it into a widely flacked movienstarring Richard Benjamin and KarennBlack. For months, Portnoy’s Complaintnwas a major topic of discussionnon radio and television talk shows andnin offices and bars, throughout NorthnAmerica. Everybody read the thing,nor — perhaps more commonly —nthumbed through its pages in search ofn”the good parts.”nPortnoy’s Complaint dealt with sub-nnner’s studies of it are only the mostnfamous of a famous lot. And it wasnhere that A. Conan Doyle sent SherlocknHolmes to his death, locked innthe deadly embrace of his evil counterpart.nProfessor Moriarty, that obscenenavatar of the primordial unconscious.nMoriarty is not a very cheerful representativenof the unconscious, but thennwe are not always at liberty to choosenwhat the infinite may send to us.nApplewhite has demonstrated whatnthe Romantics knew, that we had betternbe receptive.njects that—even in the startiing 60’sn—were considered taboo. AlexandernPortnoy, its 33-year-old narrator, ramblesnon and on about his obsessiesexualnfantasies and masturbatorpractices—andnhe spares no details.nHe calls his chronically constipatednfather a “moron” and a “schmuck”; henattacks his mother with even greaternvituperation. According to Portno}’,nshe is the “big smothering bird” whoncaused his lack of confidence and hisnexcessi^e fear of germs—particularlyngoyische germs; who left him “markednhke a road map from head to toe withnmy repressions.”nPraise for Portnoy’s Complaint camenfrom influential quarters. Time, fornexample, called it “skillfully paced”nand “too funny not to be taken seriously.”nBut its detractors probably outnumberednits defenders; indeed nonnoel published in the 60’s was asnwidely and aggressively slammed.nKingsley Amis—writing in Harper’sn—suggested that Portnoy’s Complaintnwas little more than “a heail’norchestrated yell of rage,” and that,ninevitably, “rage wears one down.” InnThe Hudson Review, J. MitchellnMorse called Roth “a servile entertainer”nwho had thrown together “a seriesnof burlesque skits” and “a swirl ofncontemporary cliches about Jews inngeneral: Jews Have a Strong FamilynLife. Jewish Family Life Is Hell. JewsnAre Either Extraordinarily Intelligentnor Extraordinarily Stupid and Gross.nSome Intelligent Jews Are AlsonGross. …”nScores of Jewish commentators ech-n