Sexual Assault Allegations Against Biographer Halt Shipping of His Roth Book

W.W. Norton, citing the accusations that the author, Blake Bailey, faces, said it would stop shipping and promoting his new best-selling book.

“Philip Roth: The Biography” went on sale earlier this month.

“Philip Roth: The Biography” went on sale earlier this month.

Credit...

W.W. Norton, via Associated Press

By Alexandra Alter and Rachel Abrams

April 21, 2021

Earlier this month, the biographer Blake Bailey was approaching what seemed like the apex of his literary career. Reviews of his highly anticipated Philip Roth biography appeared before the book came out, with major stories in magazines and literary publications. It landed on the New York Times best-seller list this week.

Now, allegations against Mr. Bailey, 57, have emerged, including claims that he sexually assaulted two women, one as recently as 2015, and that he behaved inappropriately toward middle school students when he was a teacher in the 1990s.

His publisher, W.W. Norton, took swift and unusual action: It said on Wednesday that it had stopped shipments and promotion of his book. “These allegations are serious,” it said in a statement. “In light of them, we have decided to pause the shipping and promotion of ‘Philip Roth: The Biography’ pending any further information that may emerge.”

Norton, which initially printed 50,000 copies of the title, has stopped a 10,000-copy second printing that was scheduled to arrive in early May. It has also halted advertising and media outreach, and events that Norton arranged to promote the book are being canceled. The pullback from the publisher came just days after Mr. Bailey’s literary agency, The Story Factory, said it had dropped him as a client.

In an email Wednesday night, Mr. Bailey denied the allegations, calling them “categorically false and libelous.” A lawyer for Mr. Bailey, Billy Gibbens, said in an email that his client “disagrees with Norton’s decision to stop promoting his book.” Some of the allegations were reported earlier by The Times-Picayune/New Orleans Advocate and The Los Angeles Times.

Image

Blake Bailey was handpicked by Philip Roth to write his biography. Norton said this week that it would stop shipping and promoting the book because of the allegations, which Mr. Bailey has denied.

Blake Bailey was handpicked by Philip Roth to write his biography. Norton said this week that it would stop shipping and promoting the book because of the allegations, which Mr. Bailey has denied.

Credit...

Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times, via Getty Images

An acclaimed literary biographer of masters like Richard Yates, John Cheever and Charles Jackson and the author of a memoir of his own, Mr. Bailey has received the Guggenheim Fellowship and was a Pulitzer finalist for his Cheever biography. Mr. Roth handpicked him to write the biography after meeting with him in 2012; he terminated an earlier agreement with another biographer in 2009.

While one early review in The New Republic was critical of both Mr. Bailey’s and Mr. Roth’s treatment of women in the biography, other reviews were more positive. In The New York Times Book Review, the novelist Cynthia Ozick called it “a narrative masterwork both of wholeness and particularity, of crises wedded to character, of character erupting into insight, insight into desire, and desire into destiny.” The Washington Post described it as “a colorful, confident and uncompromising biographical triumph.”

Several of the allegations against Mr. Bailey focus on his behavior when he was an 8th-grade English teacher at Lusher, a middle school in New Orleans, but a previously unreported allegation is from 2015.

That same year, Valentina Rice, a publishing executive, met Mr. Bailey at the home of Dwight Garner, a book critic for The Times, and his wife in Frenchtown, N.J. A frequent guest at their home, Ms. Rice, 47, planned to stay overnight, as did Mr. Bailey, she said.

After she went to bed, Mr. Bailey entered her room and raped her, she said. She said “no” and “stop” repeatedly, she said in an interview.

Mr. Garner, who had previously been an editor at The Times, said he had first interacted with Mr. Bailey when he had assigned him book reviews to write. Mr. Garner did not know Mr. Bailey well, he said, and this was the only time he had been invited to his house.

Mr. Garner was horrified to hear Ms. Rice’s account, he said. He added that he and Mr. Bailey do not have a relationship.

A friend of Ms. Rice, Eliot Nolen, told The Times that she remembers Ms. Rice saying that she was assaulted by Mr. Bailey about a week after the party. Ms. Rice said she decided against reporting it to the police.

About three years later, prompted by the growing #MeToo movement and encouraged by friends, Ms. Rice, using an email account under a pseudonym, wrote to Julia A. Reidhead, the president of Norton, accusing Mr. Bailey of nonconsensual sex. She also emailed a New York Times reporter, who responded, but Ms. Rice decided not to pursue it further and did not reply.

“I have not felt able to report this to the police but feel I have to do something and tell someone in the interests of protecting other women,” she wrote, adding: “I understand that you would need to confirm this allegation which I am prepared to do, if you can assure me of my anonymity even if it is likely Mr. Bailey will know exactly who I am.”

Ms. Reidhead did not respond, Ms. Rice said. But a week after she sent it, Ms. Rice received an email from Mr. Bailey, who said that his publisher had forwarded her note.

“I can assure you I have never had non-consensual sex of any kind, with anybody, ever, and if it comes to a point I shall vigorously defend my reputation and livelihood,” he wrote in the email, which The Times reviewed. “Meanwhile, I appeal to your decency: I have a wife and young daughter who adore and depend on me, and such a rumor, even untrue, would destroy them.”

“We took this allegation very seriously. We were aware that the allegation was also sent to two people at Mr. Bailey’s former employer and to a reporter at The New York Times, a news organization that was well equipped to look into it,” a Norton spokeswoman said. “We did take steps, including asking Mr. Bailey about the allegations, which he categorically denied, and we were mindful of the sender’s request for a guarantee of anonymity.”

Former students recall him as a charismatic role model who treated them as intellectual peers. But he also created an atmosphere of intimacy that could cross the line, like encouraging students to write about romantic relationships in journals that they submitted to him for comments. “There was an environment of dirty jokes and permissiveness,” said Elizabeth Gross, a former student who now teaches at Tulane University. Some students said his remarks and behavior were attempts to “groom” them for sexual encounters years later.

Eve Peyton, 40, a former student who now works in publicity at a high school in New Orleans, said that Mr. Bailey raped her when she was a graduate student. When she was his student, he treated her as “one of his special girls,” she said, attention that felt flattering and reaffirming at the time.

In June 2003, she was a graduate student at the University of Missouri School of Journalism and engaged to be married. She and Mr. Bailey both happened to be visiting New Orleans at the same time and met for drinks. Afterward, he invited her back to the place he was staying, where he kissed her, initiated oral sex, and when she squirmed away, he pinned her to the bed and forcibly had sex with her, she said. He finally stopped when she told him she wasn’t using birth control, she recalled.

After he drove her to her father’s house, where she was staying, Mr. Bailey said he had “wanted her” since the day they met, when she was 12, Ms. Peyton said.

She told two friends about the assault shortly after it happened but didn’t go to the police, in part because she was overwhelmed and wanted to move on with her life, she said. She later began seeing a therapist with experience in sexual assault counseling.

One of her friends, Catherine Roach, who is now a professor of art history at Virginia Commonwealth University, remembers the call from Ms. Peyton that summer.

“She called me and told me that he raped her, that she told him no and he didn’t stop,” Ms. Roach said. “I remember that she told me that he held her down.”

In an email reviewed by The Times, Mr. Bailey apologized to Ms. Peyton for his behavior days after the encounter, and asked her not to speak to others about it. She last heard from him in the summer of 2020, when Mr. Bailey wrote her again, in a message also reviewed by The Times, in which he alluded to “the awfulness on that night 17 years ago” and said he was suffering from mental illness at the time.

Today, even hearing his voice on the radio, promoting his book, is painful, Ms. Peyton said. “It seems inescapable.”

Until the recent allegations emerged, Mr. Bailey led a charmed literary life. He lucked into biography when he convinced the daughter of another novelist, Richard Yates, to cooperate on an authorized biography. A book deal followed, which led to several other biographies. In 2012, Mr. Bailey approached Mr. Roth, after learning the novelist had cast off his earlier chosen biographer. Mr. Roth agreed and gave him unprecedented access to his archives and papers. On a panel, Mr. Bailey said he won Mr. Roth over by assuring the novelist that he would not take “too prim or judgmental of a view of a man who had this florid love life.”

In halting the distribution of the book to retailers, Norton took a rare step to distance the company from the author. Publishers will occasionally pull or recall books over major factual inaccuracies or fabrications, but it’s rare for revelations about an author’s private behavior to result in a book’s life cycle being cut short. Norton’s response, which will impede the sales of a best-selling book, is a financial blow for the company, which paid Mr. Bailey a mid-six-figure advance, according to a person familiar with the deal.

The controversy that has engulfed Mr. Bailey erupted in part because of the publicity he has received for his Roth biography, which led some of the women accusing him of misconduct to come forward.

Some of them have noted that they were bothered not only by the praise lavished on Mr. Bailey, but by the way, in his Roth biography, that he seemed to excuse the writer’s misogyny. Several literary critics seized on the fact that in the biography, Mr. Bailey brushed off Mr. Roth’s mistreatment of women.

The discussions about Bailey’s behavior toward his former students began to build in a private Facebook group and later spilled into public as several women left comments accusing Mr. Bailey of grooming his female middle school students on a site operated by the blogger Ed Champion, which highlighted Mr. Roth’s misogynistic views.

After reports of Mr. Bailey’s misconduct came to light, some prominent authors and critics have distanced themselves. The writer Mary Karr, in a tweet, remarked that she had just participated in an event with Mr. Bailey to discuss the Roth biography. “I wake to find Bailey credibly accused by three of his former eighth-grade students of grooming them for sex when they turned eighteen,” she said. “I support any brave young woman speaking out.”

Comments 341SKIP TO COMMENTS

The comments section is closed. To submit a letter to the editor for publication, write to letters@nytimes.com.

Reader PicksAll

Sort by: Newest

Krish Rama Krishna commented April 22

K

Krish Rama Krishna

Kobe, Japan

April 22

I’m curious why Bailey hasn’t  been prosecuted. And if he has not been  the subject to such a criminal prosecution, is Norton w/in its legal rights to pull the book, even under a morals clause? I doubt it.

Me Too has gone berserk: a woman makes a sexual accusation and the world trembles. If the accusation is serious, prosecute. If not, treat it as an unsubstantiated allegation, maybe true, maybe not. Its never been assessed in a court. That’s why we have something called, “the rule of law.”

159 RecommendShareFlag

Samm commented April 22

S

Samm

New Yorka

April 22

Please, this may sound old-fashioned, but I am giving this advice to young ladies in all sincerity and empathy, as a father might.

Never, ever, go behind locked doors or into secluded outdoor areas, with a male friend for whom you have no immediate interest in a sexual relationship.

If you enjoy his company, and want to entertain the possibility of a future relationship, go to a coffee shop or something ,wearing a frumpy jogging outfit, or such . In my entire life I have gone on countless first-dates, but I've had only one  date like that, and I have never forgotten that most unique and admirable girl after  decades of separation. It makes me cry to even think of her.

33 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

Lizzie commented April 22

L

Lizzie

Bethesda MD

April 22

Yes, let’s blame the women.  Sigh.

185 RecommendShareFlag

KathleenI commented April 22

K

KathleenI

Oakland

April 22

Unfortunately a lot of sexual assault happens in the home or with known people. Make sure as a father to educate yourself on domestic violence and inform your daughters so they know what to look out for when they are dating.

92 RecommendShareFlag

NZ commented April 22

N

NZ

LA

April 22

@Samm This is a joke, right? Here's some advice: look up 'victim blaming.' Maybe you can decide from there if you have some addition advice you'd like to give the young men out there.

147 RecommendShareFlag

VIEW ALL REPLIES

rabbit commented April 22

rabbit

rabbit

nyc

April 22

Ridiculous to punish readers and damage the legacy of Mr Roth, instead of simply letting this play out in court.

Yes men should be held accountable. But the new narrative being promoted is that men are always to blame and women must always be believed, which is absurd on its face and not justice.

First of all the man had already apologized but now Ms Rice is exacting revenge. This unfortunate mess is what the courts are for. Perhaps a court will award some percentage of the book's profits. But meanwhile powerful media and publishers should not be in the censorship business. That is a slippery slope.

88 RecommendShareFlag

John commented April 22

J

John

Toronto

April 22

I find all the criticism of Norton here strange. A publishing house makes yea and nay decisions about books all the time. That’s what they do. And they have, usually, fairly clear-eyed rationale. Norton looked at the credibility of the accusations, saw a convergence of tumbling sales and terrible PR coming at them fast, and decided to cut their losses. That’s neither censorship nor cancel culture. It’s business.

154 RecommendShareFlag

Tracy commented April 22

T

Tracy

Sacramento

April 22

It feels like Claire Bloom gets the last laugh and there is some justice in that.

103 RecommendShareFlag

Alan Paul commented April 22

A

Alan Paul

Alanpaul

April 22

https://newrepublic.com/article/161640/philip-roths-revenge-fantasy-review-blake-bailey

This New Republic review provides some insights into why the book is so deeply flawed. Mr. Roth hired a misogynist to whitewash his misogyny. It’s not an incidental part of his story or something that can be separated from the book itself.

That said, I’m not sure the book should be pulled, but it’s important context and why it’s not the same as pulling the work of any artist who has behaved criminally. Norton’s mishandling of this is at the heart of the decision. That seems clear.

39 RecommendShareFlag

Concerned in NYC commented April 22

Concerned in NYC

Concerned in NYC

NYC

April 22

These allegations address a man who has had tremendous opportunities and successes, while committing crimes against women.

Now, they are taking him down.

40 RecommendShareFlag

B.L. commented April 22

B

B.L.

Houston

April 22

I think Norton should ship the book -- but NYT and other publications need to re-review it, asking "is Roth's treatment of women handled in an insightful and fair way in this biography?"  maybe we could also think about editorial process for trade nonfiction books like this. Do they get rigorous-enough peer review? Are the editors contacting peer reviewers who will give enough critique of the information about women in these biographies of towering male figures? What happens if prestigious biographers make only pro-forma changes in response to  peer critiques==is the publication allowed to go ahead?

30 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Alan commented April 22

A

Alan

Alanpaul

April 22

That’s a great idea - the re-review.

There is no peer review.

15 RecommendShareFlag

RuthlessTruth commented April 22

R

RuthlessTruth

Washington DC

April 22

The e-mails are particularly damaging.  They seem to admit that sexual abuse took place.  Mr. Bailey deserves severe consequences for his actions....if true.

However, embargoing his book is not the answer.  If the literary work is as fine as many think, let those who want to read it do so.

Let his compensation, past and future, go to those he abused.

48 RecommendShareFlag

EB commented April 22

E

EB

Irvine

April 22

When will they be taking the Picassos off the walls? I am waiting.

121 RecommendShareFlag

william mcgowan commented April 22

W

william mcgowan

nyc

April 22

Sorry to be obtuse, but I think someone needs to explain why, morally and contractually, a writer/ artist needs to forfeit the ability (NB: not the "right") to market a literary effort of some distinction b/c of prior ALLEGED sexual misbehavior. Was there a morals clause in his contract? Do the allegations (years old, btw), somehow undermine the integrity of the research or scholarship? Do they make a reader less absorbed, convinced? Conversely, misled or manipulated? Also: Does anyone else think Roth himself might be either twirling in his shroud or guffawing?  Or that this is, after long last, an apt endpoint for #MeToo, and the ridiculous Feminization of Publishing?

72 RecommendShareFlag

NR commented April 22

N

NR

New York

April 22

The knee-jerk reaction by the publisher rankles this feminist. The word of a few people suddenly coming forward as this biography was published.

This isn't a Harvey Weinstein situation. As far as the  several former middle school students who accuse Bailey of "grooming them for sex" when they were in high school, if that were true, I would expect more than one of them to accuse him of sexual assault.

It's the timing of the accusations and the association with Roth's sex life with the biographer's that disturbs me more than the women's accusations.

It sounds like Mr. Bailey has some issues, but from what I've read, the situation with the grad student sounds murky.

And Ms. Rice, for goodness sake, either come out and report your experience to the police or don't. Writing under a pseudonym to the president of Random House, than emailing an NYT reporter and then deciding not to pursue the matter makes me question your motives.

And to Norton Publishing, you've wimped out. A well received biography of one of the greatest American novelists now pulled from distribution because of unsubstantiated accusations.  What cowardice!

104 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Alan commented April 22

A

Alan

Alanpaul

April 22

Please read the extensive coverage of the young women who were groomed in the New Orleans Times Picayune.

90 RecommendShareFlag

Mary C. commented April 22

M

Mary C.

Brooklyn, New York

April 22

This article is constructed on a slippery slope.  To quote the Times in paragraph 2, allegations against Mr. Bailey have emerged. Right there, the Times evades its reporting responsibility, no doubt because it is a part of the story.  Who made these allegations, when were they made? Norton, as of Wednesday, "These allegations are serious."  Ms. Rice's  allegations, though, "emerged" in 2018, three years after the initial assault.  Norton punted to the author at that time.  The NY Times, who in recent weeks has reviewed and flacked this biography extensively, also was alerted by the victim, who then backed off, it would seem, because she realized she couldn't remain anonymous.  The alleged rape took place in the house of a NY Times writer.  The writer is "horrified," but when was he horrified?  This article is reticent in developing this timeline and explaining fully why these allegations are suddenly serious when they weren't considered so three years ago.  Reporting by other newspapers and a private Facebook site allowed this material, then, to "emerge."  The Times' evasions here foster the narrative that these allegations are vindictive and hence dubious, rather than slow "to emerge" as in the Weinstein case and so many others within the media world. Giving up one's anonymity does not until very recently often lead to  anything but opening oneself up to be pilloried.  I implore the Times, absolutely a leader in the Weinstein case and others, to report this more rigorously

68 RecommendShareFlag

Michael commented April 22

M

Michael

New York

April 22

It is as if Philip Roth were rewriting his biographer's life from beyond the grave, with the New York Times playing a predictable role. In its insidious wording, the article in three places presents Roth's "misogyny", "mistreatment of women", and "misogynist views", as if these were unquestionable and undisputed facts. They are not, they are opinions one can disagree with books in hand (Roth's for example.) It seems to be made deliberately unclear, in this context, whether they are meant to apply to Roth's fiction, or to his biography, or whether such a distinction should matter at all when such a gorgeous occasion for righteous indignation presents itself. Not only is this dishonest journalism, it also muddles the question of Bailey's possible  guilt. Rape is a crime and should be prosecuted if proven. It is not a crime for a biographer, or anybody else, to disagree with ("excuse", "brush off") the lazy unexamined knee-jerk pieties, judgments and salivations that inevitably occur in proximity to Philip Roth's name. These things should not be conflated. And yet they are ... Would the publishers have pulled the bio if its subject had been somebody else? I don't claim to know, but the authors of this article seem to have made up their minds already.

56 RecommendShareFlag

Milou commented April 22

M

Milou

Louisiana

April 22

Thanks NYT, for bringing this to my attention. My local Barnes & Noble still has copies of this Roth biography in stock, so I just bought one online with pickup at the store. Nothing feels better than buying a banned book and supporting authors cancelled by the crazy #MeToo people. And I especially say that as a New Orleans native and graduate of both Newcomb and Tulane Law.

As for the women involved in this sordid #MeToo takedown, (1) do you really believe that some 8th grade english teacher was grooming you for sex, but waiting until you were 18? In your dreams. The guy probably thought he’d never see you again, and (2) if you’re a grad student in your 20’s and you meet your old 8th grade teacher, who is now a famous biographer, at a convention, have drinks with him in a bar, accept an invitation to go have more drinks with him in his what, hotel room?, and proceed to do same, then omg, what do you think he wants to do once he gets you alone??? Are you that naive that you really didn’t think he’d try to have sex with you??? Drinks in the bar followed by drinks in the hotel room is a CLASSIC prelude to sex at the convention. Duh! If you don’t want the guy to put the moves on you, don’t go have drinks with him in his hotel room!!!

#MeToo has done nothing for me except make me doubt women and feel sorry for men.

75 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

Maggy commented April 22

M

Maggy

New Orleans

April 22

@Milou drinks are drinks, and No still means No. A woman should be able to say No at any time and otherwise it is rape. Attitudes like yours are all too prevalent and blame the woman for "leading", "teasing", or as Mr Bailey apparently put it "not knowing how the game is played".

83 RecommendShareFlag

KathleenI commented April 22

K

KathleenI

Oakland

April 22

Even if you go to the room but change your mind that is not an excuse for forcing sex when someone says NO.

77 RecommendShareFlag

Jensetta commented April 22

J

Jensetta

NY

April 22

@Milou

Hello. Just read your comment on the premise that through their actions women are 'just asking for it."  Hope your travel from the 1950s went well. How long are you staying?

99 RecommendShareFlag

Will commented April 22

W

Will

Nueva York

April 22

And yet Mein Kampf remains available at Barnes & Noble

72 RecommendShareFlag

Diego commented April 22

D

Diego

South America

April 22

This is insane.  Publishers now act as if they were the Catholic Church of 50 years ago.  But instead of being moralistic about the book, they're moralistic about the author.  "I will only publish your book if you have behaved well around women..."  (What other sins will be added to the filter in the coming years?).  I am looking for a publisher that has the guts to simply do its work: publish valuable or interesting stuff, regardless of whether the author is a sinner, or in his way to jail.  Let authors defend themselves.  Your job is to defend the work.  What a prudish and cowardly phase are we in.

108 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

Matt commented April 22

M

Matt

Canada

April 22

Are we talking about the same Catholic Church that concealed the rape of thousands of children?... because then I think that Simon & Schuster is very much the opposite.

37 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@Diego

Eh . . . I don't want to give any money to someone credibly accused of violent crimes. Having distribution stopped makes it less likely I'd unknowingly be in the position to do so.

Prudish = unwilling to overlook sex crimes? Sounds a lot like "White Lives Matter." Women just need to get over it, right?

32 RecommendShareFlag

rabbit commented April 22

rabbit

rabbit

nyc

April 22

@raph101 you want to be protected from unknowingly paying for something tainted? Even the Taliban might laugh at that level of moral squeamishness. Don't buy the book, that's all. Your choice. But don't prevent me from doing so.

34 RecommendShareFlag

RS commented April 22

R

RS

Alabama

April 22

I do wish Philip Roth were alive to write his (novelistic) take on this, just as he wrote about the Clinton-Lewinsky matter in "The Human Stain."

26 RecommendShareFlag

Scientist commented April 22

S

Scientist

Wash DC

April 22

He can always self-publish the book with Mellon Press, a vanity press. I bet they won’t turn it down.

16 RecommendShareFlag

CC commented April 22

C

CC

NYC

April 22

Norton has made a colossal mess of this. The person who knew of the accusation against Bailey and did nothing should be fired. (Worse, the email was forwarded to Mr Bailey, potentially jeopardizing the woman's safety.)

But to pull this book from bookstores is WRONG. Go ahead and halt all publicity and promotion; that's fine. But this is a decade-long  (and unique) work of scholarship that deserves to be in the public sphere, whatever its flaws as a literary work. Redirect the profits to the alleged victims. But to pull a book from stores is appalling to me. Why not critique the author and have lively debates about, say, his approach to Roth in light of his own relationships with women? Why not be critical thinkers? To buy Mr Bailey's work, do we have to like him, want to befriend him, admire him, or consider him a moral exemplar?

I happen to believe the women speaking out now, but no matter: what right do we have to judge the private lives of authors, whether they be alcoholics, drug addicts, or just bad, unpleasant people? Why not pull every copy of "Lolita" from bookstores? How about Picasso's paintings? (He was an abusive tyrant, horrific  toward women, as we all know.) Why are Hemingway's books still in print? Pull those too. How about any writer who has cheated on a spouse? Where does this end??

If the allegations (any of them) against Mr Bailey are true, his behavior is despicable. We can judge him harshly if we wish. We can also read his books.

143 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@CC Why not just read Philip Roth? Why do you have to know about his life?

12 RecommendShareFlag

bruce commented April 22

B

bruce

ithaca

April 22

@Jake what an utterly irrelevant comment—you’re suggesting people shouldn’t be interested in biography?

36 RecommendShareFlag

North Carolina Observer commented April 22

N

North Carolina Observer

Asheville NC

April 22

Does Blake have recourse to suing his accuser for slander (or libel))?

Was there any kind of "morals clause" in the writer's contract with the publisher?  Can the writer sue the publisher for breach of contract?

20 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Simon Studdert-Kennedy commented April 22

S

Simon Studdert-Kennedy

Santa Cruz

April 22

@North Carolina Observer: Suing his accuser(s) might be risky for him given that, in this country, truth is an an absolute defense to charges of slander or libel.

21 RecommendShareFlag

SeaBeeUK commented April 22

SeaBeeUK

SeaBeeUK

London, UK

April 22

I just love due process.  When is it going to happen?

37 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

SeaBeeUK: In court.

6 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@SeaBeeUK

In the course of a criminal proceeding. So far none of his accusers has felt safe enough to report him to the cops; that might change.

6 RecommendShareFlag

Simon Studdert-Kennedy commented April 22

S

Simon Studdert-Kennedy

Santa Cruz

April 22

@SeaBeeUK: His accusers get to give their accounts (quite credible apparently) and defend them in a civil trial — should he choose to sue them. His publisher gets to do whatever its contract with him doesn’t specifically prohibit. If he and anyone else don’t like it — tough. Due process doesn’t enter into it; that only applies in the case of someone charged with a violation of the penal code, which I gather isn’t going to be happening in this case because of the statute of limitations.

10 RecommendShareFlag

ElleJ commented April 22

E

ElleJ

Ct.

April 22

Aren’t adults entitled to decide what books we want to purchase and read?  I resented my parents’ censure of my reading material growing up, but it’s really getting old having decisions that are rightfully mine being dictated by allegations of sexual abuse on the part on an author.  The slippery slope has taken us over the cliff.

63 RecommendShareFlag

Dagwood commented April 22

D

Dagwood

San Diego

April 22

Terrible, to deny people who want to read what seems an excellent and interesting biography. Is the author guilty of a crime? Let the courts decide. And even if convicted, leave the decision about reading him up to readers. Ok, so you don’t want him to earn any money...because after all, he might be a molester and nothing but a molester, right?

People can voice their objections to the man all they wish, and readers can do what they wish with those opinions. But please: no book/record/film burning, ok?

49 RecommendShareFlag

Nick commented April 22

N

Nick

Chicago

April 22

Why take all this out on the poor book?  What did the book ever do to anybody?  Those praising W.W. Norton's decision should remember that there will never be another Philip Roth biography with the advantages this one has.  Mainly, Roth can never be interviewed again, can never again describe or illuminate the incidents in his life.  Many of his friends and associates are also out of reach, either aging or dead.  Roth's papers, which Bailey relied on, go to his literary executors, who may or may not destroy them.  If this book goes down the memory hole, it is gone forever and nothing can equal or replace it.

Rape is a violent felony and the rape accusation against Bailey is serious.  His email to the accuser lends it credibilty; something bad seems to have happened that night.  But the grooming accusations are empty.  Blake Bailey's students cannot know what was in his thoughts 30 years ago.  They couldn't read his mind then and they can't go back in time and read it now.  They have no way whatsoever of knowing if assigning Lolita to middle schoolers or sexy jokes in class were part of a grand strategy to get them into bed on their 18th birthdays.  It is very wrong that charges built from speculation and vague memories only, as the grooming counts against Blake Bailey are, can destroy a career and undermine a superb work.

51 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Maggy commented April 22

M

Maggy

New Orleans

April 22

@Nick We were close family friends with some of his 12 year old students in the early-mid 90s and we were shocked to hear of his conduct at that time; the assignments were decidedly creepy; he was dating a former pupil who was an older sister of one of his 7th grade pupils. And I knew another student whose story later was very similar to Ms. Peyton's.  Even he admitted that his behavior was deplorable, but he is careful to emphasize that it was not illegal. He was very careful to wait until they turned 18, so it was not statutory rape. But it was still rape and I guess he still does not understand that.

50 RecommendShareFlag

Michael Joseph commented April 22

Michael Joseph

Michael Joseph

Roma

April 22

Norton took the most logical and correct action, in my view, first by alerting its author of the accusation, and then pausing commerce to await further developments. I wholeheartedly commend its president Ms Reidhead for her decisive, compassionate and controlled response.

33 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

James commented April 22

J

James

New York

April 22

@Michael Joseph per the article, Ms. Reidhead was made aware of the allegations in 2015. That's hardly swift action...

24 RecommendShareFlag

Michael Joseph commented April 22

Michael Joseph

Michael Joseph

Roma

April 22

I don’t see that information in the article, James. I see that an allegation just emerged that he raped a woman as recently as 2015.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Rita commented April 22

R

Rita

Wisconsin

April 22

Free speech is free speech. Stop with the censorship. Pretty much all humans are sexual. The current craze to tattle on everyone as guilty of this or that sexual comment, gesture, bad joke, or act in order to drum them out of the conversation, a job, a political office, a livelihood is just that. Part of the trendy, but just as dangerous new censorship. I want the freedom to hear from everyone. Good and bad. Right or wrong. Everything in between. I want to consider it. I want to know what I don't know. I have a lot of questions. I want access. I want my rights. Censorship - is there any quicker way to alienation of the people?

50 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Jessica commented April 22

J

Jessica

Brooklyn

April 22

I’m not sure you read the article, but he is accused of rape, not telling bad jokes.

54 RecommendShareFlag

A.L.P. commented April 22

A

A.L.P.

Illinois

April 22

At this point, given what's presented in this article, I agree with Norton's action.

These sexual assault allegations are serious, compelling, and devastating. If true, I hope justice is served for the women who were victims and who have suffered so much through the years.

The alleged pattern of conduct towards real (non-fictional) girls and women identified in this article is completely unacceptable.

Intellectually, I had followed, with profound interest, the different reviews of Mr. Bailey's biography of Roth. Even though I curiously searched for the role of Roth's novels in Roth's own life (and vice versa), throughout, the relations between Mr. Roth and the women in his life were constantly at the center of the discussion.

As a society, we do need a serious conversation on gender and sexuality-- not just on race and ethnicity.

29 RecommendShareFlag

Jonathan Katz commented April 22

J

Jonathan Katz

St. Louis

April 22

If he has committed crimes, he should be prosecuted.

This has nothing to do with the merits, or demerits of his book.

38 RecommendShareFlag

renee commented April 22

R

renee

New Paltz

April 22

I got my Bailey copy from Amazon for my Kindle.  So, I guess it is available.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Citizen commented April 22

C

Citizen

New York

April 22

There are many authors throughout history who we would not be able to read if all their books had been pulled because of their extra literary pursuits.

25 RecommendShareFlag

Michel Forest commented April 22

M

Michel Forest

Montréal

April 22

The comments associating Philip Roth with teb accusations against Blake Bailey are very much a sign of the times we live in. Mr. Roth is no longer alive to defend himself. Furthermore, he was never accused, let alone charged with sexual assault. Yet, some people are more than happy to immediately smear his reputation based on alleged accusations against his biographer. It seems to me like these same people are almost glad Blake Bailey has been accused because it gives them an opportunity to spill their venom at Philip Roth.

If Mr Bailey is indeed guilty of the accusations made against him, he will have to face the consequences. But accusing Philip Roth of seeing a « kindred spirit » in Bailey when he chose him to write his biography is at best dishonest. The subject of a biography is not responsible for the behavior of his biographer.

31 RecommendShareFlag

KHD commented April 22

K

KHD

Maryland

April 22

Norton made the ethical decision regardless of what motivated the decision.

I saw Bailey promoting his book on Christiane Amanapour's show. His response to a question about Philip Roth's checkered and misogynistic behavior towards women was dismissive and lacked any sensitivity. I was listening intently to the interview and then a red flag went up for me. Bailey came off as a guy with no character, and revealed both himself and Roth in that very moment. Amanapour did not pursue the line of questioning and the underlying issue surrounding Roth's lack of character was also avoided.

27 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

NR commented April 22

N

NR

New York

April 22

@KHD , Bailey doesn't need to measure up to your sensitivity monitor or anyone else's to write a biography.

As far as Roth's checkered behavior, yes, he slept with a lot of women.  But a lot of women also slept with him. Willingly.

And as far as Roth's character, have you read his novels? He explores human nature, all aspects of it, and is one of my favorite writers.

29 RecommendShareFlag

Chris commented April 22

Chris

Chris

Brooklyn

April 22

My guess is that Norton is suspending publication of the book because if they proceed with it they will not be able to act to recover any portion of the advance that they paid to Bailey.  Those of you who have copies (I am one) -- hang onto them; they'll be like Clifford Irving's bio of Howard Hughes.

11 RecommendShareFlag

David commented April 22

D

David

Maine

April 22

"The controversy that has engulfed Mr. Bailey erupted in part because of the publicity he has received for his Roth biography, which led some of the women accusing him of misconduct to come forward."  No kidding?  Never would have expected that.

11 RecommendShareFlag

robert plunket commented April 22

R

robert plunket

sarasota FL

April 22

Wow. This whole situation is a Philip Roth novel come to life. Exactly something he would write about. That's what makes it so fascinating.

22 RecommendShareFlag

Penny Norkus, LMHC commented April 22

P

Penny Norkus, LMHC

Cleveland

April 22

Of course the publisher rightly has to address liability-can’t have writers abuse ppl on the book tour w full knowledge of the numerous former allegations. That would make them complicit morally and legally. I as a consumer want to know who I’m supporting when possible and I don’t want to support those that repeatedly abuse women & children. Not expecting perfection nor purity but criminality seems a wise boundary. Plus I wonder how much inhumane attitudes are subtly conveyed in self-expressive works. Some have reported blatant misogyny in his former works. I’ll pass on this one.

12 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Milou commented April 22

M

Milou

Louisiana

April 22

Dear Penny,

Unlike you, I am now going to do my best to buy a copy of this Roth biography if I am lucky enough to get my hands on one. Frankly, I had no intetest in buying this book, but now I do. After the Farrow family full frontal assailt on Woody Allen, I immediately bought a copy of “Apropos of Nothing”. I’m an attorney and I believe in innocent until proven guilty. I’m also a bibliophile and detest censorship and “book burning” in whatever form it might take. If these women were raped or otherwise assaulted, let them take it to the police and the judicial system. Otherwise they should shut up and let this man live his life.

25 RecommendShareFlag

Sharon commented April 22

Sharon

Sharon

Madison, WI

April 22

W.W. Norton is way out of line: accusations and instant punishment with no due process, an authorized biography of a deceased, astoundingly brilliant writer that many would like to read.

Does Bailey get his book back to do with as he wishes?

"MeToo" has become ridiculous in this case: what is the remedy? A take-down of Philip Roth, too, because so many people  apparently disapproved of his personal life that perhaps the story of his life should now get the whole fury of "MeToo" treatment that couldn't affect his own book sales?

This is a kind of hysteria and not good for anyone, including the accusers.

I'm glad I got my copy to read before today's incarnation of The Spanish Inquisition swiveled its sensors in its direction.

53 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Mom2three commented April 22

M

Mom2three

Wayland

April 22

“Due process” refers to the rights of parties in legal cases. It has no meaning in the context of private contractual relationships, like the one between a writer and a publishers.

29 RecommendShareFlag

Milou commented April 22

M

Milou

Louisiana

April 22

Correct, mom of 3, but what does apply in this case is contract law. The publisher may well be guilty of breach of contract with Bailey and wind up owing him a pile of money. It’s also possible that Roth’s estate may have an interest her that has been abridged, who knows? Hopefully the publisher will be sued and made to pay damages.

12 RecommendShareFlag

DCNancy commented April 22

D

DCNancy

Springfield

April 22

Why don't publishers halt the sale of Trump's books? Seems he was right when he said he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and no one would care. Why isn't Trump held to a higher standard? There have been numerous accusations against him by women. Guess it helps if you have money to hire lawyers

103 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Jensetta commented April 22

J

Jensetta

NY

April 22

@DCNancy

It does, without doubt.  But there's something quite different here, I think.  Trump was accused of rape and sexual assault, and people chose to believe the accusations or not. But no one--or no one with any sense of decency--claimed that his importance as a political figure somehow renders void our commitment to justice.

3 RecommendShareFlag

Warren commented April 22

W

Warren

Morristown

April 22

Perhaps we should discontinue printing “The Art of the Deal”, although we all know Trump didn’t write it. Wonder if he even read it.

56 RecommendShareFlag

Joe Runciter commented April 22

J

Joe Runciter

Santa Fe, NM

April 22

I suspect that this corporate decision, like all current era corporate decisions, is about predicted profits vs predicted losses - in other words money.

16 RecommendShareFlag

Ted A commented April 22

T

Ted A

Massachusetts

April 22

Norton made a choice, a choice that Norton is within its rights to make. Norton made a judgement that given where society is at they deemed it prudent to do what they did to protect their reputation and economic interests. Time will tell if this was good or not.

That being said it is discomforting that persons accused of crimes can suffer such significant consequences without the legal due process that used to be afforded before such consequences were effectuated. This state of affairs has many causes. Social media is partially to blame. It’s also an arguably justified backlash to the long history of crimes against women having gone unpunished. Regardless, society will need to find a way to give victims justice they deserve and at the same time give those accused recourse given that not every person accused may be guilty. I believe accused people are more likely than not to be guilty, but for those that are not guilty and still punished... don’t they require some protection and justice too?

35 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Jensetta commented April 22

J

Jensetta

NY

April 22

@Ted A

Are you puzzled by the fact that the accusations have hovered above him rather than be directly addressed in a court? Are you puzzled about why young women with career prospects would have remained silent in Roth's early lifetime, and more recently when confronting Mr. Bailey, a man of considerable influence?

It's always easier to set difficult realities aside rather than unavoidable mess involved in confronting them.  Yes, of course individual rights and tastes matter, but so does a commitment to justice, especially given its wobbly footing at the moment.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Mask Of Comedy/Tragedy commented April 22

M

Mask Of Comedy/Tragedy

Northeast

April 22

The publisher is within their rights to hold back the book. Why should their name be associated with this? They are a private entity and have made a choice.

These are serious allegations. The publisher can always release the book later. But something tells me these allegations are going to stick. How did Bailey so quickly identify the anonymous accuser?

No wonder Roth chose him. Obviously saw him as simpatico.

I am tired of the notion that people who commit crimes against particularly women and children, have a right to carry on as if nothing as happened. Sure innocent until proven guilty, so let’s wait to see how it plays out. Why should money be made while society tries to determine what happened?

64 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

Karen Bruno commented April 22

K

Karen Bruno

New York City

April 22

@Mask Of Comedy/Tragedy Agree with you on why Roth chose him.  Interesting that Bailey is marred to a psychologist.

8 RecommendShareFlag

Milou commented April 22

M

Milou

Louisiana

April 22

“the publisher is within their rights to hold back the book.” No. They only have a right to take this action if the publishing contract the parties signed gave them that right. Otherwise, it’s a breach of their contract with the author and he can sue them for damages. I hope he does.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Eilo Wright commented April 22

E

Eilo Wright

NYC

April 22

Publishing contracts typically have a “reputational incident” clause, which basically states that if an author’s reputation collapses, the publisher doesn’t have to publish their book. I’d be shocked if WW Norton faced any legal ramifications for declining to publish this creep.

18 RecommendShareFlag

sassattorney commented April 22

S

sassattorney

NYC

April 22

People are being so dramatic up in here.  Since when has it been controversial to discipline or fire employees / contractors for potentially serious, criminal conduct?  Companies routinely require drug tests and arrest history (read: arrest, not conviction) in job applications, and decide not to hire people based on those disclosures.  Companies also routinely terminate employees for violating policies at work, even if that misconduct doesn't rise to criminal conduct, or if the person likely committed a crime but was never charged.  Bailey wasn't an employee, but tell me why the same principle doesn't apply here.

Seems to me people are up in arms because this involves sexual assault—and, accordingly, the believability of women.

69 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

judgeinmillvalley commented April 22

J

judgeinmillvalley

Connecticut

April 22

@sassattorney Why was this sexual

standard of conduct not held to Donald Trump, as a candidate for the presidency?  After Trump

became the president, the mounting number of his accusers were summarily dismissed as “all liars” by his press aid Sarah H. Sanders. The presidency was used to shield questions and action about his conduct. After Blake Bailey wrote his  biography of a respected and prolific author Phillip Roth, who was also sometimes called a “woman hater,” did allegations against Roth increase doubt about Bailey’s own character?  Did it increase the speed of punishment   before Bailey’s allegations could be fully investigated? In other words, was Bailey identified with the biographical company he kept?

.

4 RecommendShareFlag

EB commented April 22

E

EB

Irvine

April 22

@sassattorney This is only part of the story here. Stopping a book from being sold is NOT the same as firing an employee. It is censorship. Pure and simple. We can't talk about freedom of speech and applaud this censorship action all at the same time. They can do whatever within their contractual rights with the author. Stopping the book is height of hypocrisy. This is one woman's view, btw.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Kinda Kind commented April 22

K

Kinda Kind

NY, NY

April 22

A commenter's assessment (below) of Roth as "the preeminent literary figure of the late 20th century" is an opinion and not a factual matter. For example, Roth never received the Nobel Prize for Literature. Roth fans may argue with the Nobel's selections as simply the Nobel's "opinion"; however, at the least, the same argument certainly applies to Roth fans' opinions. In my opinion, Roth is not, and never was, a keen observer of any human condition except his own as he understood, or misunderstood, it.

47 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

Jonathan Katz commented April 22

J

Jonathan Katz

St. Louis

April 22

@Kinda Kind

Roth was a mediocrity.

Nothing to do with his biography.

7 RecommendShareFlag

NR commented April 22

N

NR

New York

April 22

@Kinda Kind , wow, Roth not a keen observer of human nature?!

You don't have to be a Roth fan to appreciate books like The Plot Against America or The Human Stain.  He was an amazing writer.

Some of the most compelling authors, musicians, actors, and directors have never won a Nobel, a Grammy, an Oscar, or a Tony.  Awards, they matter not at all.

12 RecommendShareFlag

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@Kinda Kind Roth's earlier and middle-period novels did tend to be conspicuously self-absorbed. His later novels tended not to be quite so obsessed with himself (thinly or not at all disguised) and his immediate surroundings and circumstances. That didn't necessarily make them better. In my reading, it made them more diffuse and less plausible. I agree, however, that there is no critical consensus that Roth loomed larger than all other writers in the period from 1960 to 2000, nor should there be. Certainly among those who took themselves seriously there were worse writers, but there were also fair number approximately equal and a fair number clearly superior. (I would not have awarded Roth a Nobel, but after Bobby Zimmerman I'm not sure the prize means anything any more anyway.)

2 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@Kinda Kind

It would be interesting to see a poll gauging Roth's appeal to men v women.

3 RecommendShareFlag

Rill commented April 22

R

Rill

Newton, Ma

April 22

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard, not a community standard.  The historic community standard has been reflexive disbelief of allegations of sexual assault.  That these allegations and a handful of others are believed over the accused's vehement denial does not even begin to swing the pendulum towards the middle. publish his book yoursslef if you don't want this fellow "cancelled", then .  Then he won't be cancelled for you.  The rest of us, including decision-makers at WW Norton, will make our own decisions.

31 RecommendShareFlag

Two Cents commented April 22

T

Two Cents

Portland, OR

April 22

Removing the Roth bio from sale is like tearing down confederate statues. The statues hurt those people who have felt the slings of racism. And that is enough to rid the landscape of the unnecessary monuments. Bios like Blake Bailey’s are women’s confederate statues. I applaud Norton’s moral courage. Bailey and Roth—killing two misogynists with one stone. The world is a slightly more equal place with them both dispatched.

49 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

I have had it commented April 22

I

I have had it

observing

April 22

Yea but some of us can make our own decisions on what to read or watch and still not endorsing the behaivor.  Stop treating the public like they have to be told what to think. It is becoming where I may turn Republican.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Mark commented April 22

M

Mark

New York, NY

April 22

@Two Cents:  Calling this "moral courage" on Norton's part is the Orwellian expression of the week.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Diane commented April 22

D

Diane

Georgia

April 22

@Two Cents Either a Civil War or a War Between the States, depending which version of history you believe.  Why were so many statues created (and streets and schools, buildings, colleges etc. named) in honor of losers?  Why have they enjoyed a place in the sun for so long?  Has moral courage been missing since 1865?   Maybe the victor is finally laying claim to the remaining spoils (by erasing the other side's story).  Woke wins!!

2 RecommendShareFlag

John commented April 22

John

John

Hartford

April 22

This woman said she was raped. This is not inappropriate touching by any remote definition. It is a serious crime. This raises the question of why she did not report this serious crime immediately to the police.

18 RecommendShareFlag

5 REPLIES

ESL commented April 22

E

ESL

Atlanta

April 22

@John Because what happens to women who report and press charges for rape is a re-traumatizing of one of the worst things that can happen to them. The judicial system is based on patriarchal beliefs that discounts a woman's experience and word.  And typically, victim-blames the woman instead of placing the focus squarely on the perpetrator's actions. Or at worst, he's not convicted, and the woman has been flayed open, emotionally, and psychologically for nothing and she bears these psychic wounds along with those already inflicted. Most rape and sexual offenses are not reported, and this number overwhelms the number that are. This speaks to my own experience as well as many women I know. Men who abuse take advantage of this and are emboldened to continue their heinous acts until real consequences occur. A woman or a child NEVER do anything to make rape happen. Society (esp. men) must hold men accountable for their actions and toxic masculinity must be dismantled for any true healing to occur.

64 RecommendShareFlag

ejonatha commented April 22

E

ejonatha

milwaukee

April 22

@John

This raises a question - Would you blame a man if he were a victim of a serious crime?

25 RecommendShareFlag

John commented April 22

J

John

Sydney, Australia

April 22

This happens frequently: look at male victims of police brutality.

5 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@John

Why didn't they report him to the police? Are you not aware we live in a disturbed patriarchy that is upheld, in part, by our law enforcement and legal systems? Even your question is victim-blaming.

If you are truly curious about why, and not using that question to shift the blame to the victim, I recommend reading, "Missoula: Rape and the Justice System in a College Town" by Jon Krakauer. He's an excellent reporter. You will learn why questioning a rape survivor's actions is a huge tell as to who might be to blame here.

10 RecommendShareFlag

NR commented April 22

N

NR

New York

April 22

@John, I agree. Many women do not report rape. But if someone is going to publicly accuse someone of rape, they should report it to the police and allow them to pursue an investigation.

6 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@John

Why didn't they report him to the police? Are you not aware we live in a disturbed patriarchy that is upheld, in part, by our law enforcement and legal systems? Even your question is victim-blaming.

If you are truly curious about why, and not using that question to shift the blame to the victim, I recommend reading, "Missoula: Rape and the Justice System in a College Town" by Jon Krakauer. He's an excellent reporter. You will learn why questioning a rape survivor's actions is a huge tell as to who might be to blame here.

10 RecommendShareFlag

NR commented April 22

N

NR

New York

April 22

@John, I agree. Many women do not report rape. But if someone is going to publicly accuse someone of rape, they should report it to the police and allow them to pursue an investigation.

6 RecommendShareFlag

Tess commented April 22

Tess

Tess

San Jose, California

April 22

I would not have purchased or read Roth's biography before these allegations came into public view, and I don't plan on reading it now. I was, however, disturbed by the recent NYT glowing write-up of its creation that contained only dismissive mention of Roth's lifelong misogyny (after all, most of his best friends were women!), as though a lifelong hatred, abuse, and belittlement  of half the human race was an unimportant footnote in the life of such a "great artist."

But once again, the 'cancel culture' screamers come to the rescue of any person (almost always a white man) suffering any consequence for "alleged" behavior, despite the credible claims against Bailey of multiple women, going back over 20 years. That's why women don't report or speak out; they are the ones who suffer cancellation, over and over again, every time they voice their pain. Having one's multimillion dollar book deal on hold is hardly equivalent to that kind of trauma.  As for Norton, since Bailey is under contract to them they have the right to determine the fate of the book they paid him to write, so long as they abide by the legal terms of that contract. I hope a strong investigative journalist does a good deep dive into Bailey's past actions towards women and former students -- that I will read.

114 RecommendShareFlag

mary commented April 22

M

mary

Wisconsin

April 22

The rape accusation seems a strong one with strong evidence and support, and the statute of limitations is not up on that.  We must try to make our legal system work as it should and not have trial by twitter or media-mob justice or vigilante militias of every sort.  We should not say the accuser is brave for sending an anonymous email.  We should say the accuser is brave for working with the prosecutor's office.  And we should not conflate this criminal violence with inappropriate pedagogy and the weirdness of dating former students.

26 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Linda Hoaglund commented April 22

L

Linda Hoaglund

Brooklyn

April 22

@mary Excellent point that the statute of limitations is not yet up on the allegation of rape.

8 RecommendShareFlag

DC commented April 22

D

DC

Maine

April 22

Allegations by women are to my mind, almost always to be believed. Men, if you're not there with me on that account, it's time to go back to the drawing board.

What woman in their right mind, in a world of infinite and immediate exposure, goes to the trouble of accusing a man of assault unless it actually happens? And there is a LOT of fire around Mr. Bailey's career.

So that's one aspect. The other aspect is that in light of his behavior,  Bailey's work on Roth necessarily becomes suspect. And it certainly won't help him in defense of Roth's misogyny; on this, I say, judge Roth's work and leave the man out of it. I won't say the same thing now of Bailey. He didn't sound particularly well-suited to Roth from the beginning, and I am twice as unlikely to read Bailey's book today than I was yesterday.

So WW Norton, whatever their reasoning, is correct to pause things and await some verdict, even as it is clearly going to end badly for the man and for his biography - and for their profits. Unfortunately, his years of scholarship are forever tainted and we will always now judge his work through the prism of personality. But please don't through the baby out with the bathwater: Read Mr. Roth, even if you have to hold your nose.

Of course, Bailey could take his chances and own up to his crimes, but it sounds like too much to ask from a big-shot biographer. Lawyers are going to eat up that mid six-figures in a matter of weeks.

19 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

Jonathan Katz commented April 22

J

Jonathan Katz

St. Louis

April 22

@DC

Some people are just crazy, deluded, or have vendettas.  Not necessarily in this case, but it does happen.

Recall the childcare center molestation cases of the "80's.  All entirely fictitious.

8 RecommendShareFlag

NR commented April 22

N

NR

New York

April 22

@DC , this business of always believing allegations by women is garbage.

I am a feminist, but there are women and men who lie, who blackmail, etc.

12 RecommendShareFlag

DC commented April 22

D

DC

Maine

April 22

@Jonathan Katz

Get real. There's a lot of smoke here, Jonathan. Mr. Bailey is the common denominator here. Unless all these disparate individuals are conspiring against him. Sure, that must be it.

It's okay to question any accuser's motivation but not when it's this obvious - so I think you should re-think the examples you use.

11 RecommendShareFlag

Maggy commented April 22

M

Maggy

New Orleans

April 22

@Jonathan Katz these stories are true. I knew another one of his victims whose experience almost 20 years ago was almost exactly same as the one told by one of the accusers. My friend had trusted "Mr. Bailey" as a mentor and was utterly devastated by this rape. She never reported it to the police as her emotions were conflicted - she was 18, and the man she had considered a hero and mentor had used her. She was full of shame and grief and has had to come to terms with this episode through hard work. Not crazy, deluded or fictitious. I hope Mr. Bailey is coming to terms with the damage he has done.

6 RecommendShareFlag

Andrew commented April 22

A

Andrew

Vancouver

April 22

This probably will be neither a matter for the police to investigate, or for any journalist who previously promoted this book to defend the book now that there are allegations.

The police won't be asked probably because the evidence is inadequate, and any journalists who may want to publish a contrary opinion probably won't do so because of the readership.

There's nothing really to be hoped for from institutions on this issue, and this is why I'm feeling quite miserable to wake up to this headline.

9 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Reader commented April 22

R

Reader

Europe

April 22

@Andrew

This is precisely why Norton is commended for their actions.  It may be the only repercussions that Bailey faces.

And my, what repercussions - exactly where they matter the most: public opinion.

18 RecommendShareFlag

Everbody's Auntie commented April 22

Everbody's Auntie

Everbody's Auntie

Great Lakes

April 22

@Reader Oh, and $$$$.

3 RecommendShareFlag

pollyb1 commented April 22

P

pollyb1

san francisco

April 22

What's the point of punishing the readers by withdrawing the book? Presumably the author received an advance but, if he also gets a percentage of sales, that could be escrowed until this issue is resolved. Or his advance could be returned as part of the penalty if he's convicted of something. These free-floating accusations are troublesome but, at this point, are accusations only.

24 RecommendShareFlag

5 REPLIES

Aimee commented April 22

A

Aimee

Chicago

April 22

@pollyb1 is not being able to read a book truly punishment?

10 RecommendShareFlag

I have had it commented April 22

I

I have had it

observing

April 22

When will it stop? At this rate and judgement 90 percent of artwork will be banned soon.

7 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@I have had it

90% of artists -- and biographers -- are rapists?

5 RecommendShareFlag

pollyb1 commented April 22

P

pollyb1

san francisco

April 22

@Aimee Some of us don't like someone else telling us what we cannot read, it's called censorship.

4 RecommendShareFlag

pollyb1 commented April 22

P

pollyb1

san francisco

April 22

@Aimee I

It may be for people who don't support censorship.

1 RecommendShareFlag

DSmytie commented April 22

D

DSmytie

California

April 22

I already have my copy and intend to read it. I do think we need to grasp the idea that very talented people can also be horrible people.  Given the age of these allegations there will be no “day in criminal court”, so all we have are the allegations, the “grooming” of students being the most despicable to me.  And given that even his agent has dropped him, I think there is more than smoke surrounding these allegations.

I’m all for the outing of these creeps, but let the market take care of their output. I agree with the publisher not to market or promote the book, and stop with the current press run.

13 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Mask Of Comedy/Tragedy commented April 22

M

Mask Of Comedy/Tragedy

Northeast

April 22

@DSmytie Yes very talented people can be horrible people. Are you referring to Roth or Bailey? How much weight should this biography have when the biographer has likely hidden the horrible things about Roth — because they are the same horrible things that the biographer has done? Does this not call into question the entire work? No wonder Roth chose him. I would prefer to read something that actually reveals the horrible things about Roth instead of pretending those, too, did not occur. I don’t think you will find that’s in this biography

10 RecommendShareFlag

renee commented April 22

R

renee

New Paltz

April 22

I don't think Philip Roth has ever been accused of assaulting a woman sexually.  Let's not confuse the author and the subject.  Many have already stated the issue of allegations versus established fact through investigation.  Roth has never hidden his sexual appetites.  Let us not forget that women also have their own agency in participating sexually with someone like Roth.

At present, I have the other biography of Roth, one of my favorite authors by the way, and will settle for that for now.  I have long decided that I will never again argue with women about Roth's treatment of women, as I have only met with incoherent rage.  Hope there  is a thorough and accurate investigation of this author's sexual behavior so that  readers can investigate their  own responses as well.

22 RecommendShareFlag

Alan commented April 22

A

Alan

McGovernville

April 22

Norton can do whatever they think is appropriate.  This is not a free speech or cancel culture issue.  These accusations seem credible, still it's funny to me, and I mean funny hilarious not funny peculiar, that no one came forward when his biographies of less celebrated authors were published.  It's as if this is happening as some kind of cosmic punishment of Philip Roth, who for years tried to control the circumstances of his biography and how he would be remembered.

49 RecommendShareFlag

MichiganChet commented April 22

M

MichiganChet

Pennsylvania

April 22

I figure that the vast majority of readers, male and female alike are perfectly capable of judging whether to read the book or buy it, or not based on who the author is and what he may or may not have done. I am deeply disgusted by rape, sexual harassment and abuse of minors. I am also quite resentful when someone else makes the decision for me or presumes to do so.

27 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Awestruck commented April 22

A

Awestruck

Hendersonville, NC

April 22

@MichiganChet The problem with this argument is that the book is published by a private press. The government has not chosen to censor it. No one has a particular "right" to read this book; thus, no one is "taking away" your decision-making ability or "presuming" anything about you, personally. It's not an infringement on your right to choose reading material.  And, heck, the book's out there; by now, someone's hawking it at an inflated price. You could certainly choose to boycott Norton -- and not read any other books under their imprint -- as a means of showing your displeasure. That is certainly your right.

13 RecommendShareFlag

Jeanie commented April 22

J

Jeanie

Seattle

April 22

A number of commentators question why the women didn’t report things at once, as if they are opportunistic in waiting until Mr. Bailey is receiving such acclaim.  This demonstrates such ignorance about rape and its impact. Please educate yourself. There are a lot of claims of “innocent until proven guilty” in comments, too.  No one has convicted Bailey; a private company has simply decided to pull his book.  If some commenters feel so protective of rights, why not *that* right?

72 RecommendShareFlag

Helvius commented April 22

H

Helvius

NJ

April 22

This article does not focus enough on the "grooming" aspect of Bailey's alleged behavior. According to NOLA.com (The New Orleans Advocate/Times Picayune), the biographer taught for nine years in a middle school where he (according to the accounts of several former students) prepped girls for future sexual relationships--and assaults, apparently.

How much of this "grooming" goes on in schools? It sounds like a new (?) word for behavior most of us saw in school at some point--- remember the flirtatious or overly familiar teacher who was interested in students' relationships and personal lives?  Or the 8th grade English teacher who assigned "Lolita"? Okay, maybe not that. (Blake Bailey is said to have done this.)

20 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Jonathan Katz commented April 22

J

Jonathan Katz

St. Louis

April 22

@Helvius

Mostly happens in expensive private schools, especially boarding schools.

Public schools have strict rules about teacher-student relationships.  They aren't peddling "individualized special attention".

2 RecommendShareFlag

Reader commented April 22

R

Reader

Europe

April 22

Congratulations to WW Norton.  Let them be a shining example of the best of so called ´cancel culture´ - especially for Europe.  I have never had the slightest interest in Philip Roth and his ilk of American macho, and have been surprised by all the attention to this latest glorification biography.   Now we learn that the biographer fits too well the subject.    Disgusting.

25 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

I have had it commented April 22

I

I have had it

observing

April 22

So in other words you have a choice not to read his work. So the rest of us have to go on board?

4 RecommendShareFlag

baba commented April 22

B

baba

ganoush

April 22

If the behavior of writers, actors, comedians, musicians,  etc.  comes up for judgment....there will be few left standing.

Both male and female creative types....including the biggest names.... have a lot of mess in their lives.

Some have done terrible illegal and immoral things.  Some are your favorite artists.

This doesn't excuse the damage....but attempting to draw moral lines and dole out punishments and cancellations is dangerous.

39 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

Cathy commented April 22

C

Cathy

Midwest

April 22

@baba

So illegal and immoral acts are supposed to be ignored because someone is a good writer, actor, musician, etc?  I know it happens, but these people shouldn’t be given a pass because they have a way with words or can croon like a songbird. Maybe if more of them were held to account in this way, they’d change their behavior and we wouldn’t have to be reading about a new one every few months.

15 RecommendShareFlag

Judith K Weinhaus commented April 22

J

Judith K Weinhaus

NY

April 22

@baba Are you kidding?  Woody Allen was protected by adoring fans for years.  Having talent does not give these men a free pass.

17 RecommendShareFlag

kelleher commented April 22

K

kelleher

vermont

April 22

there is no danger in accountability, only in corrupt acts.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Livonian commented April 22

Livonian

Livonian

Los Angeles

April 22

I believe these women.  The only other option is to believe that Bailey is the victim of a vicious, complex conspiracy to destroy him which seems extremely unlikely.

I still would love to read his book on Philip Roth.  There is value in reading about one of America's and the 20th Century's most important writers.  I hear it's a great biography.

Let Bailey hang in court.

But how is the publisher in any way responsible for Bailey's actions?  How does publishing his book in any way taint the publisher?  Why can't we separate the writer from his book from his actions from the publisher?

Are we no longer able hold two thoughts in our heads at once?:  Bailey may be a sexual predator; reading his book about Philip Roth is worthwhile; reading and publishing it is still okay if the writer is not.

THAT is the problem I have with much of the New Puritanism on the left: its utter lack of tolerance for nuance or complexity or ambiguity.

58 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

April May commented April 22

A

April May

San Antonio

April 22

These allegations go beyond nuance, complexity & ambiguity. They are criminal. If he engaged in this egregious behavior, he is more than a sexual predator, he is a criminal. And the alleged victim was 12! Had he been convicted in court, he would have been locked up for years & years.

22 RecommendShareFlag

Reader commented April 22

R

Reader

Europe

April 22

@Livonian

WW Norton probably has more knowledge than the public does at this point.  I suspect that they are getting ahead of the bad press or even litigation that will ensue.  From what we have read, Bailey belongs to an era of white male priviledge that we as a society are swiftly leaving in the rubbish bin.

Philip Roth belongs there as well.  He simply does not rank in the pantheon of writers who might merit excuse.

14 RecommendShareFlag

Kira Schaefer commented April 22

K

Kira Schaefer

Los Angeles

April 22

Isn’t it more about money, quite frankly? The publisher may not be ok with having someone who’s accusing of these things on their payroll who profits from every book sold. That’s my personal issue with authors, artists, musicians etc who are accused of heinous things: sure I can still enjoy their writing, music, movies, and so forth. But if I know that person will still directly be profiting off of every time I stream their song or when I buy their book, I may think twice. I feel that a publisher should have the right to say “we don’t want to help this person make more money.”

14 RecommendShareFlag

Hal F. commented April 22

H

Hal F.

CA

April 22

@Livonian

I agree completely.

1 RecommendShareFlag

Reflective Thinking commented April 22

R

Reflective Thinking

San Francisco

April 22

I bought the book weeks ago.  All of this news and all of the very varied comments  —  very confusing and extremely depressing.

7 RecommendShareFlag

KathleenI commented April 22

K

KathleenI

Oakland

April 22

As a woman and feminist I would never agree that Philip Roth’s books or his biography  should be censored because he was mean and exploitive in his treatment of women. I have read and appreciated many of his books.

Rape is a crime and a physical assault. You go to jail if convicted. Mr. Bailey is legally innocent until proven guilty. His publisher gets to act under different rules and reading this article I find enough to stop the presses until we know more.

33 RecommendShareFlag

C commented April 22

C

C

Toronto

April 22

I found I could never stomach Roth or some of the other mid-century American male writers. They seemed vulgar, male-focused, and boring — what was there for a girl to like?  I skipped from reading Mavis Gallant and Alive Munro as a teen, through some sixties female writes like Ursula Le Guin, then all the way back to the Edwardians. And I never made it back to the mid-century.

Who cares about these weird male writers in the middle years, after all? And why do professional male writers keep insisting on dredging them back into reviews and book pages as if they mattered?  I keep waiting for the NYTs book review to notice that they aren’t what sell papers, at least in my opinion. I’ve never met anyone who reads them. The men who would seem to be their natural audience are either too busy with their careers to read novels, or, the ones who theoretically have the time, too busy with Netflix and video games.

I would rather that Roth’s work was dismissed on its lack of merit of course, but this seems strangely fitting!  [It does make me a little squeamish though that accusations alone are enough now — although it was a lot of acquisitions, from broadly disparate groups of women.]

I don’t think anyone needs to worry that Shakespeare or Dostoevsky will be canceled. They are good (profound) writers, after all. That’s the difference.

33 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

David Henry commented April 22

D

David Henry

Concord

April 22

@C "I would rather that Roth’s work was dismissed on its lack of merit of course,"

Few readers of serious literature would find "lack of merit" in Roth. It's quite the opposite.

15 RecommendShareFlag

eb commented April 22

E

eb

maine

April 22

@C He, Roth, may not have been a wonderful person, but indeed some  feminist writers have described him as carrying and considerate. However, he is the only writer that can write a sentence of 250 or more words without one having to re-read it to understand the sentence.That humans don't always act nicely is part of the human condition. Do you want to hide all the horrors of humanity? After all, he is as far from some one like  Trump as there is, or in his case was. I am reading the biography--it is rather excellent.

14 RecommendShareFlag

Umberto commented April 22

U

Umberto

NY State

April 22

@C Dostoevsky was dogged by accusations that the rape of a girl in his novel The Demons (also known as The Possessed) was autobiographical.

4 RecommendShareFlag

ANNnoE commented April 22

ANNnoE

ANNnoE

Terra X

April 22

@eb

“the only writer that can write a sentence of 250 or more words without one having to re-read it to understand the sentence.”

Just no. You missed quite a few

1 RecommendShareFlag

ANNnoE commented April 22

ANNnoE

ANNnoE

Terra X

April 22

@eb

“the only writer that can write a sentence of 250 or more words without one having to re-read it to understand the sentence.”

Just no. You missed quite a few

1 RecommendShareFlag

WJH commented April 22

W

WJH

Illinois

April 22

Isn't it time to separate accomplishment from character. The book is what it is and can be judged on that basis. If you want to question the book because of the author's motives in judging his subject's relationships then that is a legitimate discussion. None of this negates the accomplishment. Michaelangelo Merisi better known as Caravaggio changed the course of western painting. First of all in his paintings the image was conceived of as something you would see if you were looking through a window equivalent to the frame. The image was not formalized or placed in a separate space from the viewer.  Secondly the light in his paintings was a dark indoor light like the light surrounding someone in a palazzo housing the painting. The light was the same as the light surrounding an indoor viewer. Virtually all later painters adopted these conventions. Carravagio was a murderer and likely guilty of sexual assault. By today's standards we would stop talking about him or looking at his work. The history of art would be full of meaningless gaps and devoid of logic. Why should the biographer's bad actions negate his insights and his research. It is just nuts.

24 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

A bookseller commented April 22

A bookseller

A bookseller

Chicago

April 22

@WJH Except the issue in this case isn't Roth's behavior, it's the multiple rape allegations against his biographer, and the question of it Norton wants to be tied to him further.  They, and not cancel culture, have made that choice to not taint their good name by association.

5 RecommendShareFlag

ANNnoE commented April 22

ANNnoE

ANNnoE

Terra X

April 22

@WJH

“If you want to question the book because of the author's motives in judging his subject's relationships then that is a legitimate discussion.”

Yes, that’s a big part of the problem Norton’s faced with

1 RecommendShareFlag

NS commented April 22

N

NS

VA

April 22

I am stunned by the number of comments attacking the decision of the publisher. It is almost as if the literary  mob is angry that they cannot read the book. Who cares if he raped women? His own words in the emails convict him.

Like all rapists, he thinks has a mental illness, but he is just a man who likes power over women.  Without those emails, his defenders would outright not believe the women.

There is no such thing as a one time sex offender. Ask any cop. Arrest anyone for sex offenses and you can be assured they have a long record of sex offenses. I am pretty sure there are more women with stories to tell about Mr Bailey.

These days whenever someone uses the word "cancel" you can rest assured the person being "canceled" has said or done something very awful. Consequences for doing or saying bad things is not cancel culture. It is consequences.

70 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Hal F. commented April 22

H

Hal F.

CA

April 22

@NS

This 'literary mob' is entitled to be angry.  If Mr. Bailey is shown to be guilty, he deserves whatever punishment is meted out.

But the biography of Roth should still be available.  I'm glad I was able to purchase it on amazon's site this am.  I hope others are allowed to purchase or read it if they so desire.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Independent American commented April 22

I

Independent American

USA

April 22

Little wonder women and girls don't report to the police when they've been raped or sexually assualted as THEY are put on trial, not their rapists. Add insult to injury, there are certain states looking to pass legislations concerning women's "consent", including if women are too inebriated to give consent- it will be considered consentual. These same certain states want these women who've gotten pregnant by their rapist to be unable and illegal to have abortions. America has a long way to go when it comes to treating women equally!

85 RecommendShareFlag

Asher commented April 22

Asher

Asher

Brooklyn

April 22

Because of sexual allegations against the writer, some decades old, a well-reviewed biography is being pulled by the publisher?

We have lost our minds. This is just madness.

46 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Deborah commented April 22

Deborah

Deborah

Montclair, NJ

April 22

@Asher

Did you read the article? These are not recovered memories or possible misinterpretations or some kind of rewriting of what happened. The man is credibly accused of a 2015 rape. He admitted to appallingly bad behavior with a former student.

And the biography is not “pulled”. Post-publication marketing has been suspended as well as a second print run.

28 RecommendShareFlag

mkd500 commented April 22

M

mkd500

New York, NY

April 22

@Asher Who is the royal "we" of which you speak? I can tell you one thing, it doesn't include me. And what does the fact that the biography was "well-reviewed" (it wasn't, across the board, just for the record, because more than one critic called out its creepy misogyny) have to do with the price of rice? Oh, that's right. Nothing.

7 RecommendShareFlag

T commented April 22

T

T

Atlanta

April 22

Actions have consequences. Go figure. Even when its inconvenient.  Rapists can afford amnesia. Rape victims never forget.

82 RecommendShareFlag

KathleenI commented April 22

K

KathleenI

Oakland

April 22

A rape is a rape is a rape. Men can easily overpower women without a gun or knife. The victim is stunned and traumatized and often does not react or report right away. Sorry if some are tired of MeToo but what we know so far is the tip of the iceberg.

68 RecommendShareFlag

Milton Lewis commented April 22

M

Milton Lewis

Hamilton Ontario

April 22

How ironic that the author of this lengthy bio of Roth is derailed for allegedly engaging in similar sexual indiscretions that he ignored in telling the “whole “ Roth story. One wonders why?

25 RecommendShareFlag

Kathleen Parr commented April 22

K

Kathleen Parr

Portland, ME

April 22

How awkward for Dwight Garner and his wife. I guess it used to be enough to simply sever your relationship with a houseguest you learned was a rapist under your roof. Blake Bailey's prominence/relevance/career should have been over the next morning (if not sooner).

27 RecommendShareFlag

mosenblum commented April 22

M

mosenblum

Illinois

April 22

Where does the concept of innocent until proven guilty apply here? The newly exposed allegations against  Mr. Blake for sexual misconduct are just these--allegations.

While Norton's rush to judgment in halting the distribution and sale of its Philip Roth biography will affect their bottom line, which, at first glance would appear to be a noble gesture on the publisher's part, their decision to do so is in my mind premature.

It is often difficult to separate an author's behavior from his/her work but imagine all of the great pieces of art, music and literature which would never have seen the light of day had they been banned due to  the misdeeds of their creators.

We need to allow these charges to work themselves through the the system in before arriving at a determination as to whether or not Mr. Blake is guilty as charged.  But in the meantime, the public deserves the opportunity to read what has promised to be a monumental biography of one of America's greatest writers.

257 RecommendShareFlag

27 REPLIES

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

@mosenblum

The moral cowardice in the publishing industry is staggering.

Norton is probably terrified their employees will walk out if they don't "hang" Mr. Bailey based on mere accusations alone.

Can you be woke and a fascist at the same time? It seems quite common these days.

76 RecommendShareFlag

Sharon commented April 22

Sharon

Sharon

Tucson

April 22

@mosenblum  When someone is shot dead, you have a corpse to examine.  When someone has been sexually assaulted you don't have "evidence" to look at, beyond what they say about it and those others to whom they spoke about it at the time it occurred.  You are splitting hairs insisting these are only "allegations" and insinuating what is claimed is not to be believed and shouldn't interfere with you having a good read.

86 RecommendShareFlag

R.P. commented April 22

R

R.P.

Bridgewater, NJ

April 22

@mosenblum   Yes, the current moral panic is very disturbing.  It won't be long before there are book burnings.

34 RecommendShareFlag

KR commented April 22

KR

KR

CA

April 22

@mosenblum

Only in a court of law does it apply.  Witness the Chauvin trial.

2 RecommendShareFlag

Lindsay commented April 22

L

Lindsay

Brooklyn

April 22

@mosenblum It has applied. Mr. Bailey still has his freedom. Promotion of one's writing is not a right.

48 RecommendShareFlag

Carter Cohn commented April 22

C

Carter Cohn

nyc

April 22

Norton has done a preliminary investigation and it found the accusations credible. It's paused the distribution of the book. This seems to be a fair-minded process.

95 RecommendShareFlag

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@mosenblum The great pieces of art? Whether the subject here is guilty or innocent, whether his publisher is right or wrong to halt promotion and further distribution, this is only a biography. The best biography ever written is not great art, and a biographer is not the equivalent of a novelist, painter, poet, sculptor, inventor, musician, inventor, scientist, or mathematician. He is merely a chronicler. Let’s try to have some perspective.

29 RecommendShareFlag

Echidna commented April 22

E

Echidna

CA, USA

April 22

@mosenblum "Where does the concept of innocent until proven guilty apply here?"

Simply put, that concept only formally applies if criminal charges are brought, when the burden of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) is on the state.

In business relationships, personal matters, etc. no such standard applies. You could consider the concept a moral guide, but no one has to observe it, especially when multiple, independent, credible accusations emerge from parties that likely will only suffer by bringing their accusations forward.

We all know that many people who have achieved artistic or other greatness have also done morally reprehensible things (e.g., Richard Wagner) - this neither diminishes their art (for the most part), nor does it exculpate them for their inappropriate behavior. Especially when that behavior involves sexual improprieties or even criminal sexual offenses, particularly against women.

How, in the light of emerging information, would you feel about your daughter attending a class, or sleeping over in a friend's house in such a context?

38 RecommendShareFlag

jrd commented April 22

J

jrd

ny

April 22

@mosenblum

There's no "system" -- at least, none fair to the alleged offender -- by which we arrive at a "determination as to whether or not Mr. Blake is guilty as charged."

In a free society, the public decides for itself what it wants to buy and read and whether it wants to accuse, forgive or ignore.  This is normally understood to be a duty of adulthood, rather than a corporate prerogative or a decision for the mob.

12 RecommendShareFlag

Schneiderman commented April 22

S

Schneiderman

New York, New York

April 22

@mosenblum

This is primarily (but probably not exclusively) about Norton trying to protect its business.  In this day of Twitter and Facebook, when everyone has a direct line to most everyone else in this country, companies are extremely concerned that even a few individuals - and certainly the larger numbers of those who feel very strongly about the Me Too movement - can boycott all of its lines of business.  The potential of such a boycott  - and the resultant negative publicity and loss of business - is simply too great a risk for Norton to run.  Thus, the targeted business eats the losses on this Philip Roth title to maintain the much larger profits on the other books.

8 RecommendShareFlag

kathleen cairns commented April 22

K

kathleen cairns

San Luis Obispo Ca

April 22

@mosenblum Of course these allegations need to be thoroughly evaluated. On the other hand, why should the publisher keep selling the book during said investigation? What's wrong with holding back the book for a few weeks or months? The author already received a six-figure advance. And there are lots of other ways for the public to read about Roth, if they want to.

34 RecommendShareFlag

Ed commented April 22

E

Ed

Deep South

April 22

@mosenblum

"It is often difficult to separate an author's behavior from his/her work but imagine all of the great pieces of art, music and literature which would never have seen the light of day had they been banned due to  the misdeeds of their creators."

Like Caravaggio?  Lately I keep reading how great Caravaggio was followed by what a horrible person he was.  It's a tiresome trope.

I don’t like the politics of certain actors (e.g., Clint Eastwood) but I enjoy their art.  I separate the actor from their work — except for Mel Gibson)

8 RecommendShareFlag

Amskeptic commented April 22

Amskeptic

Amskeptic

All Around The Country

April 22

@mosenblum  Proof of guilt occurs after allegations are broached. That is the way it works. We are in the allegation phase. If he is proven innocent, we will at least be informed of that. Perhaps we will read of a damages paid to him for wrongful claims. Perhaps we won't. This is the risk of public life whose gifts he has certainly sampled. Welcome to the other side of public life. As a reader who understands that we are at the allegation phase, may I state that while I find them credible thus far, but I will hold my personal judgment in abeyance for the time being..

10 RecommendShareFlag

Rill commented April 22

R

Rill

Newton, Ma

April 22

@mosenblum

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard, not a community standard.  The historic community standard has been a reflexive disbelief of allegations of sexual assault.  That these allegations and a handful of others are believed over the accused's vehement denial does not even begin to swing the pendulum towards the middle.

17 RecommendShareFlag

Tom Wilde commented April 22

T

Tom Wilde

Santa Monica, CA

April 22

@mosenblum ~

At first glance, your take on what W.W. Norton is doing here is very important to consider (as shown by the fact that your comment currently sits atop the Reader Picks).

But of course everything you say here is all too clear (and then some) to the immensely powerful private global publishing corporation, W.W. Norton.

So, we have to ask ourselves: What is W.W. Norton really doing here?

My take is that W.W. Norton is doing this because its corporate CEOs are at least as smart as the rest of us, and they know that at this point in time, it's absolutely crucial for them to both co-opt the public's currently very active (and growing) protesting power—in particular, that of the women making up at least half this potentially massive power—and also use this case to show us all that it can and will use its own immense power to shape the lives and discourse (i.e., the speech) of the entire nation.

So, W.W. Norton is both taming the rabble and flexing its corporate power—which is absolutely cannot/will not do unless it knows it's fully backed by all the interlocking corporate behemoths that own and run the world's most powerful economy.

That is, what W.W. Norton is doing here is further reinforcing the bulwark of corporate power, and thereby reinforcing—and enforcing—its ownership of our livelihoods.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Ben commented April 22

B

Ben

Toronto

April 22

@Jake

Never heard of Boswell's Life of Johnson?

5 RecommendShareFlag

Laura Lord Belle commented April 22

L

Laura Lord Belle

Canada

April 22

@mosenblum " But in the meantime, the public deserves the opportunity to read what has promised to be a monumental biography of one of America's greatest writers." Priorities, priorities, priorities huh? Re-evaluate your ..values sir. Also, seems you doth protest too much.

11 RecommendShareFlag

Jessica commented April 22

J

Jessica

Brooklyn

April 22

I agree that we should not rush towards financial repercussions based on accusations.

But I take exception to the sentence - “imagine all the great works of art, music and literature which would never have seen the light of day had they been banned due to the misdeeds of their creators.”

Imagine all the great works of art, music, and literature, which were never created, because young women, early in their careers, ran into predatory teachers, “mentors,” and colleagues. Like Blake - or like Roth himself.

We have no idea how much great art and science we have lost to centuries of misogyny. In my opinion we should mourn for that, more than for already-celebrated writers facing some potentially very deserved criticism.

33 RecommendShareFlag

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@Ben No, but I have heard of “The Life of Samuel Johnson” (same guy, but this is the actual title), the critical consensus of which is that it is not really a biography but rather a collection of essays. I haven’t read it, but if we were to allow that this is a biography, in the sense I obviously meant, that is, and that it is great art (I’m dubious about both propositions, but then I haven’t read it), then I might suggest that this is the exception that proves the rule.

3 RecommendShareFlag

Andrew commented April 22

A

Andrew

Washington D.C.

April 22

@jrd In a free society, corporations should not be forced to publish the work of somebody whose reputation could hurt their bottom line.

Mr. Bailey is free to publish the book himself if he is released from his contract. Individuals can, as you say, read or ignore the book.

16 RecommendShareFlag

Karen commented April 22

K

Karen

California

April 22

@mosenblum Did you read the entire article?  The Times reviewed a couple of emails from Blake that appear to support at least one of the claims, where he apologized and asked for silence.

16 RecommendShareFlag

Cristin commented April 22

C

Cristin

Colorado

April 22

@mosenblum First: Norton didn't decree a prison sentence. They pulled distribution for his second printing. Welcome to the world of professional ethics, where many organizations need to make difficult decisions in the absence of formal criminal charges. They investigate the accusations to the best of their ability. These accusations were determined to be credible. Two rapes, and grooming of preteen girls. As far as I know, Roth isn't accused of being a serial rapist and pedophile.

Second: Artists are fallible human beings who exist in a historical context. Some can behave in abominable ways that are symptomatic of the unfortunate norms of their time, and some are extra special complicated dirtbags even according to the twisted morays of their era. One place to examine an artist's work in a balanced way, in the context of their personal life and their historical milieu, exploring the good along with the bad, might be oh I don't know A BIOGRAPHY. If it's written by someone who is at least attempting to be objective and circumspect. Roth fired those types of biographers and hired a sycophant who shared his moral failings, who even outdid them a bit in spite of existing in a new era where no one has an excuse not to know better. Norton has standards to uphold. Not only is Bailey a rapist, but that fact reveals him to lack the basic competencies to write any bio of someone who lived in a world where women exist, and especially a bio of a writer like Roth.

18 RecommendShareFlag

Tom Wilde commented April 22

T

Tom Wilde

Santa Monica, CA

April 22

@Jessica ~

Bingo!~ Jessica!~ Bingo!~ :)

. . . though I would make a small tweak and add a few more words to say that we cannot even begin to imagine all the great works of art, music and literature that never came into existence because these "mentors" and these "educators" grotesquely preyed on young minds and young bodies to feed their own gnawing voids of mind and spirit, as evidenced very clearly in Roth's work and multitudes of others' (most often men's) works.

And I would also say that misogyny is only half the story here (and therefore dangerously so); both men and women in positions of power & authority over young minds & spirits have actively quashed this (typically) youthful creativity in the arts and sciences because these men & woman were installed in these positions because they could be fully trusted to serve and perpetuate this immense power—today popularly known as immensely powerful private multinational corporations.

And regarding these "mentors" and "educators," Noam Chomsky said it best many decades ago: "The intellectual tradition is one of servility to power, and if I didn't betray it I would be ashamed of myself."

We all must therefore nurture their betrayal at a societal level so that these young women & young men know—and no longer remain silent—when their creative minds & lively spirits are being mutilated by abusive power and illegitimate authority.

7 RecommendShareFlag

A bookseller commented April 22

A bookseller

A bookseller

Chicago

April 22

@jrd The publisher is made up of individuals who made this choice.  That they may not want their name associated with a rapist is both a moral and financial choice they are within their rights to make.

14 RecommendShareFlag

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

@Ed

Picasso was a truly terrible human being. But the work!

2 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@mosenblum

I'm curious as to what kind of evidence would convince you of the truth of the allegations, because this is an argument I see regularly used by rape apologists. The women's own word; testimony of their contemporary confidantes; his description of his actions as "deplorable." If these aren't sufficient, what is? Should they all have had the wherewithal to have the assaults videotaped?

15 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@Cristin

Brava!

4 RecommendShareFlag

KR commented April 22

KR

KR

CA

April 22

@mosenblum

Only in a court of law does it apply.  Witness the Chauvin trial.

2 RecommendShareFlag

Lindsay commented April 22

L

Lindsay

Brooklyn

April 22

@mosenblum It has applied. Mr. Bailey still has his freedom. Promotion of one's writing is not a right.

48 RecommendShareFlag

Carter Cohn commented April 22

C

Carter Cohn

nyc

April 22

Norton has done a preliminary investigation and it found the accusations credible. It's paused the distribution of the book. This seems to be a fair-minded process.

95 RecommendShareFlag

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@mosenblum The great pieces of art? Whether the subject here is guilty or innocent, whether his publisher is right or wrong to halt promotion and further distribution, this is only a biography. The best biography ever written is not great art, and a biographer is not the equivalent of a novelist, painter, poet, sculptor, inventor, musician, inventor, scientist, or mathematician. He is merely a chronicler. Let’s try to have some perspective.

29 RecommendShareFlag

Echidna commented April 22

E

Echidna

CA, USA

April 22

@mosenblum "Where does the concept of innocent until proven guilty apply here?"

Simply put, that concept only formally applies if criminal charges are brought, when the burden of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) is on the state.

In business relationships, personal matters, etc. no such standard applies. You could consider the concept a moral guide, but no one has to observe it, especially when multiple, independent, credible accusations emerge from parties that likely will only suffer by bringing their accusations forward.

We all know that many people who have achieved artistic or other greatness have also done morally reprehensible things (e.g., Richard Wagner) - this neither diminishes their art (for the most part), nor does it exculpate them for their inappropriate behavior. Especially when that behavior involves sexual improprieties or even criminal sexual offenses, particularly against women.

How, in the light of emerging information, would you feel about your daughter attending a class, or sleeping over in a friend's house in such a context?

38 RecommendShareFlag

jrd commented April 22

J

jrd

ny

April 22

@mosenblum

There's no "system" -- at least, none fair to the alleged offender -- by which we arrive at a "determination as to whether or not Mr. Blake is guilty as charged."

In a free society, the public decides for itself what it wants to buy and read and whether it wants to accuse, forgive or ignore.  This is normally understood to be a duty of adulthood, rather than a corporate prerogative or a decision for the mob.

12 RecommendShareFlag

Schneiderman commented April 22

S

Schneiderman

New York, New York

April 22

@mosenblum

This is primarily (but probably not exclusively) about Norton trying to protect its business.  In this day of Twitter and Facebook, when everyone has a direct line to most everyone else in this country, companies are extremely concerned that even a few individuals - and certainly the larger numbers of those who feel very strongly about the Me Too movement - can boycott all of its lines of business.  The potential of such a boycott  - and the resultant negative publicity and loss of business - is simply too great a risk for Norton to run.  Thus, the targeted business eats the losses on this Philip Roth title to maintain the much larger profits on the other books.

8 RecommendShareFlag

kathleen cairns commented April 22

K

kathleen cairns

San Luis Obispo Ca

April 22

@mosenblum Of course these allegations need to be thoroughly evaluated. On the other hand, why should the publisher keep selling the book during said investigation? What's wrong with holding back the book for a few weeks or months? The author already received a six-figure advance. And there are lots of other ways for the public to read about Roth, if they want to.

34 RecommendShareFlag

Ed commented April 22

E

Ed

Deep South

April 22

@mosenblum

"It is often difficult to separate an author's behavior from his/her work but imagine all of the great pieces of art, music and literature which would never have seen the light of day had they been banned due to  the misdeeds of their creators."

Like Caravaggio?  Lately I keep reading how great Caravaggio was followed by what a horrible person he was.  It's a tiresome trope.

I don’t like the politics of certain actors (e.g., Clint Eastwood) but I enjoy their art.  I separate the actor from their work — except for Mel Gibson)

8 RecommendShareFlag

Amskeptic commented April 22

Amskeptic

Amskeptic

All Around The Country

April 22

@mosenblum  Proof of guilt occurs after allegations are broached. That is the way it works. We are in the allegation phase. If he is proven innocent, we will at least be informed of that. Perhaps we will read of a damages paid to him for wrongful claims. Perhaps we won't. This is the risk of public life whose gifts he has certainly sampled. Welcome to the other side of public life. As a reader who understands that we are at the allegation phase, may I state that while I find them credible thus far, but I will hold my personal judgment in abeyance for the time being..

10 RecommendShareFlag

Rill commented April 22

R

Rill

Newton, Ma

April 22

@mosenblum

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard, not a community standard.  The historic community standard has been a reflexive disbelief of allegations of sexual assault.  That these allegations and a handful of others are believed over the accused's vehement denial does not even begin to swing the pendulum towards the middle.

17 RecommendShareFlag

Tom Wilde commented April 22

T

Tom Wilde

Santa Monica, CA

April 22

@mosenblum ~

At first glance, your take on what W.W. Norton is doing here is very important to consider (as shown by the fact that your comment currently sits atop the Reader Picks).

But of course everything you say here is all too clear (and then some) to the immensely powerful private global publishing corporation, W.W. Norton.

So, we have to ask ourselves: What is W.W. Norton really doing here?

My take is that W.W. Norton is doing this because its corporate CEOs are at least as smart as the rest of us, and they know that at this point in time, it's absolutely crucial for them to both co-opt the public's currently very active (and growing) protesting power—in particular, that of the women making up at least half this potentially massive power—and also use this case to show us all that it can and will use its own immense power to shape the lives and discourse (i.e., the speech) of the entire nation.

So, W.W. Norton is both taming the rabble and flexing its corporate power—which is absolutely cannot/will not do unless it knows it's fully backed by all the interlocking corporate behemoths that own and run the world's most powerful economy.

That is, what W.W. Norton is doing here is further reinforcing the bulwark of corporate power, and thereby reinforcing—and enforcing—its ownership of our livelihoods.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Ben commented April 22

B

Ben

Toronto

April 22

@Jake

Never heard of Boswell's Life of Johnson?

5 RecommendShareFlag

Laura Lord Belle commented April 22

L

Laura Lord Belle

Canada

April 22

@mosenblum " But in the meantime, the public deserves the opportunity to read what has promised to be a monumental biography of one of America's greatest writers." Priorities, priorities, priorities huh? Re-evaluate your ..values sir. Also, seems you doth protest too much.

11 RecommendShareFlag

Jessica commented April 22

J

Jessica

Brooklyn

April 22

I agree that we should not rush towards financial repercussions based on accusations.

But I take exception to the sentence - “imagine all the great works of art, music and literature which would never have seen the light of day had they been banned due to the misdeeds of their creators.”

Imagine all the great works of art, music, and literature, which were never created, because young women, early in their careers, ran into predatory teachers, “mentors,” and colleagues. Like Blake - or like Roth himself.

We have no idea how much great art and science we have lost to centuries of misogyny. In my opinion we should mourn for that, more than for already-celebrated writers facing some potentially very deserved criticism.

33 RecommendShareFlag

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@Ben No, but I have heard of “The Life of Samuel Johnson” (same guy, but this is the actual title), the critical consensus of which is that it is not really a biography but rather a collection of essays. I haven’t read it, but if we were to allow that this is a biography, in the sense I obviously meant, that is, and that it is great art (I’m dubious about both propositions, but then I haven’t read it), then I might suggest that this is the exception that proves the rule.

3 RecommendShareFlag

Andrew commented April 22

A

Andrew

Washington D.C.

April 22

@jrd In a free society, corporations should not be forced to publish the work of somebody whose reputation could hurt their bottom line.

Mr. Bailey is free to publish the book himself if he is released from his contract. Individuals can, as you say, read or ignore the book.

16 RecommendShareFlag

Karen commented April 22

K

Karen

California

April 22

@mosenblum Did you read the entire article?  The Times reviewed a couple of emails from Blake that appear to support at least one of the claims, where he apologized and asked for silence.

16 RecommendShareFlag

Cristin commented April 22

C

Cristin

Colorado

April 22

@mosenblum First: Norton didn't decree a prison sentence. They pulled distribution for his second printing. Welcome to the world of professional ethics, where many organizations need to make difficult decisions in the absence of formal criminal charges. They investigate the accusations to the best of their ability. These accusations were determined to be credible. Two rapes, and grooming of preteen girls. As far as I know, Roth isn't accused of being a serial rapist and pedophile.

Second: Artists are fallible human beings who exist in a historical context. Some can behave in abominable ways that are symptomatic of the unfortunate norms of their time, and some are extra special complicated dirtbags even according to the twisted morays of their era. One place to examine an artist's work in a balanced way, in the context of their personal life and their historical milieu, exploring the good along with the bad, might be oh I don't know A BIOGRAPHY. If it's written by someone who is at least attempting to be objective and circumspect. Roth fired those types of biographers and hired a sycophant who shared his moral failings, who even outdid them a bit in spite of existing in a new era where no one has an excuse not to know better. Norton has standards to uphold. Not only is Bailey a rapist, but that fact reveals him to lack the basic competencies to write any bio of someone who lived in a world where women exist, and especially a bio of a writer like Roth.

18 RecommendShareFlag

Tom Wilde commented April 22

T

Tom Wilde

Santa Monica, CA

April 22

@Jessica ~

Bingo!~ Jessica!~ Bingo!~ :)

. . . though I would make a small tweak and add a few more words to say that we cannot even begin to imagine all the great works of art, music and literature that never came into existence because these "mentors" and these "educators" grotesquely preyed on young minds and young bodies to feed their own gnawing voids of mind and spirit, as evidenced very clearly in Roth's work and multitudes of others' (most often men's) works.

And I would also say that misogyny is only half the story here (and therefore dangerously so); both men and women in positions of power & authority over young minds & spirits have actively quashed this (typically) youthful creativity in the arts and sciences because these men & woman were installed in these positions because they could be fully trusted to serve and perpetuate this immense power—today popularly known as immensely powerful private multinational corporations.

And regarding these "mentors" and "educators," Noam Chomsky said it best many decades ago: "The intellectual tradition is one of servility to power, and if I didn't betray it I would be ashamed of myself."

We all must therefore nurture their betrayal at a societal level so that these young women & young men know—and no longer remain silent—when their creative minds & lively spirits are being mutilated by abusive power and illegitimate authority.

7 RecommendShareFlag

A bookseller commented April 22

A bookseller

A bookseller

Chicago

April 22

@jrd The publisher is made up of individuals who made this choice.  That they may not want their name associated with a rapist is both a moral and financial choice they are within their rights to make.

14 RecommendShareFlag

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

@Ed

Picasso was a truly terrible human being. But the work!

2 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@mosenblum

I'm curious as to what kind of evidence would convince you of the truth of the allegations, because this is an argument I see regularly used by rape apologists. The women's own word; testimony of their contemporary confidantes; his description of his actions as "deplorable." If these aren't sufficient, what is? Should they all have had the wherewithal to have the assaults videotaped?

15 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@Cristin

Brava!

4 RecommendShareFlag

Virgil commented April 22

V

Virgil

Brooklyn

April 22

There are a depressingly high number of comments describing this as an example of cancel culture or implying he is being convicted in the court of public opinion on flimsy evidence. A closer read of the article makes clear this is based not upon a single accusation but rather the exposure of a multitude of unpleasant experiences ranging from creepy to overt assault, corroborated by multiple women, many of whom were shockingly young when they experienced his grooming.

Whether the publisher elects to withdraw the book is up to them. While it is understandably disappointing to those who looked forward to reading it, there will surely be ways to access it, and it is certainly not the only book we will have on Roth, who was always and will remain a combination of deeply flawed human and towering literary figure.

179 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

HKGuy commented April 22

H

HKGuy

Hell's Kitchen

April 22

@Virgil "There will surely be ways to access it." I wish you'd explain that because, other than the books sold and given to reviewers, it looks like a goner.

7 RecommendShareFlag

Virgil commented April 22

V

Virgil

Brooklyn

April 22

Perhaps I’m mistaken; I meant that once out in the world, which this is to a degree, it’s very hard to make it disappear completely, whether by someone reposting online or otherwise.

5 RecommendShareFlag

A bookseller commented April 22

A bookseller

A bookseller

Chicago

April 22

@HKGuy Since quite a few have been sold, and I am certain a large number of those are to libraries, not to mention the copies still in bookstores at this moment, it's not going to be that hard to find once the nine-day wonder of everyone trying to buy a copy to resell ends.

8 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@HKGuy

As of this moment, it's available for under $20 on Amazon, where it's also listed as a bestseller. Thus are the wages of sin.

5 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@HKGuy

As of this moment, it's available for under $20 on Amazon, where it's also listed as a bestseller. Thus are the wages of sin.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Fred commented April 22

F

Fred

Chicago

April 22

Well, interesting. One commenter here actually wrote that “publishers should not have control over content.”  Let that sink in.

I have enjoyed some of Roth’s work, but I actually couldn’t care less what happens to this biography.  Norton has a right to do whatever they want. I agree with a comment that they should release the work back to Bailey.  Yes, in today’s world this cancelling stuff is happening .  Also in today’s world Bailey would likely be able to resell his apparently incredibly inspiring prose in something south of a nanosecond.

No, I don’t understand why a woman wouldn’t scream like crazy when being assaulted in someone’s home, but there’s a lot I don’t understand, and her story needs to be respected.

I do feel incredibly sorry, though, for the poor souls despairing that one of their favorite writers is having a bad week. In fact, I’m sure I won’t sleep well tonight.

15 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

Survivor commented April 22

S

Survivor

US

April 22

@Fred having survived rape twice, all I can say is that the human body and mind do not react the same way when one is terrified, trapped, overpowered, and physically dominated as they do when one is just having a normal day. Trauma alters our chemistry, both in the moment of the trauma and afterwards. And sadly sometimes the brain thinks, “If I just keep quiet and don’t fight, this will be over faster, and I might live through it that way and not be killed for fighting.”

That’s why.

61 RecommendShareFlag

Luna commented April 22

L

Luna

Seattle

April 22

Thank you for this reply. As a child survivor myself I find the lack of disturbance by these allegations are alarming. Grooming is real, and the alleged victim was only 12! Is that not alarming to anyone but me?

6 RecommendShareFlag

Trianna commented April 22

T

Trianna

BFE

April 22

@Fred Few care about Roth personally.  Many care that a "publisher" is controlling content.  Book publishers are no more responsible for content of authors than is a newspaper responsible for the comment section.  I am very glad to see so many alternatives appearing for publishing things, be they 3-d printing diagrams, or "censored" books, because if this canceling keeps up, these alternatives will grow more used, so it will destroy the power of the publishing conglomerates to do much of anything.

RecommendShareFlag

Robert K commented April 22

R

Robert K

Chicago

April 22

If he committed a crime he should go to prison.  If the book is well-done, which apparently this one is, it should be available to readers.  Let the readers decide.  Enough of these “virtuous” companies imposing their own sanctions, particularly before the facts are fully known.  Even if the author is found guilty and sent to prison, the book should be available.  It stands on its own.

24 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Dan S. commented April 22

D

Dan S.

Maine

April 22

@Robert K Feel free to make Norton an offer to purchase the rights and publish it yourself.  I imagine they'd be happy to find a buyer at this point.  If you don't want to, why should they have to?

16 RecommendShareFlag

Anon commented April 22

A

Anon

NY

April 22

I kind of think we need to move past this new age of shunning. This is dangerous territory. At best, it is inconsistent. Even convicted murderers find publishers of their books. At worst, we are moving back to "burn the witches."

Don't get me wrong. This is horrific, and I tend to believe the allegations, but these allegations have not yet even been heard out in any impartial setting, let alone resulted in a conviction.

Meanwhile, the book has already been published and printed.

I feel we are living in an age where the sense of justice is altering, where due to social media, we now think that people need to be shunned and excommunicated, their effigies burned, and their existence erased, rather than hearing allegations out and letting both sides contest them fairly.

20 RecommendShareFlag

Hyman Roth commented April 22

H

Hyman Roth

East Quogue NY

April 22

I finished the Bailey bio of Philip Roth last week.

It is an outstanding piece of research and writing.

Accusations have been made against Bailey that have yet to be proven but stopping shipment of this magnificent book seems a little over the top.

Burn down his house? Is that the next step?

I dont have the right answer and maybe losing ones livilihood and career is necessary to let rapists know there is a price to be paid but none of this has been proven.   Sounds like we are headed towards a police state.

Let Bailey work out his issues legally and responsibly.

52 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@Hyman Roth

Besides all of the evidence presented in this article, how could any of these women prove his guilt to your satisfaction? Why does he receive all the benefit of the doubt, and they

receive none?

No one's house is burning. No one has lost a livelihood; this book is a bestseller and available for purchase right now. When would be a good time to do an accounting of what the women have lost. For instance, I have no trouble imagining a world where one woman did go forward, and whose career he summarily screwed up. We never heard of it, because she was crushed by a bigwig who went on to further transgress and she was left by the side of the road.

8 RecommendShareFlag

Jessamy commented April 22

J

Jessamy

New Jersey

April 22

Is it any surprise that a biographer who seems to take such voyeuristic delight in Roth’s own combination of the old term “womanizing” & misogyny is such a cad himself? I’m only saddened to learn that it extended all the way to rape and grooming of minors. Maybe we can all think twice about what it means when someone blusters at the idea that this behavior is wrong and does everything in their power to excuse it as some sort of corollary of genius. Meanwhile, I wonder which biographies and books were passed over by Norton while they had the Roth biography in their roster.

Cancel culture is a trendy way to act as if the only acceptable consequences for wrongdoing are those outlined in the criminal justice system (which itself acknowledges its limitations given the existence of civil court, family court, etc). These men were and have been gatekeepers. When they are held accountable, others whose voices were previously ignored are finally let through the gates. Many thanks to the brave women who have spoken out, at the expense of their own privacy and well being.

85 RecommendShareFlag

Sharon Simonson commented April 22

Sharon Simonson

Sharon Simonson

San Francisco Bay Area

April 22

Surprised to see people defending the author. Just a point of information: who is writing matters. Writing and reliable nonfiction writing in particular is about judgment. These allegations go to this man’s judgment about what is appropriate, what is legal, about respect for people who have allowed you in their home. At the least, his judgment is in question. That the subject of his book is someone who seems to share some of his misogynistic views is critical. It again goes to judgment: did the writer overlook any especially egregious behavior by Roth because the writer’s judgements about women, consent, sexual responsibility, children and sex are deeply flawed? Goes directly to the factuality of the biography.

118 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

Mark commented April 22

M

Mark

New York, NY

April 22

@Sharon Simonson:  I'm sure that Norton has a process by which they vet the journalistic and academic quality, including "factuality," of a manuscript.  If the process in this case is like what they have in the academic world, they send it out to one or more referees.  Presumably this book passed.  So it appears that Norton is giving this a second thought.  The question is whether it is praiseworthy (not whether it has the right) to do so.  Arguably, what has happened here is that material that on the merits met its standards is now being rejected because of allegations of a certain sort, where popular opinion rushes to condemnation on the basis of such allegations.

2 RecommendShareFlag

Cristin commented April 22

C

Cristin

Colorado

April 22

@Sharon Simonson Thank you. Norton has new information, which calls into question the credibility and caliber of the book itself. They did have some information before, which they mishandled badly. But the publication of the book itself brought forth further corroborating information, and they are doing the right thing by re-evaluating their decision to publish it, and hopefully re-evaluating whatever process by which they dismissed the prior accusation. I applaud them.

6 RecommendShareFlag

Mark commented April 22

M

Mark

New York, NY

April 22

@Cristin:  Specifically, how does this new information (or do these allegations) call into question the "credibility and caliber" of the book itself?  Mr. Bailey's research is what it is, and his interpretations are what they are.  What difference does it make what events have occurred in his personal life?  Are that research and those interpretations any less valid because of them?  Does a person have to be a saint in order to make important contributions to moral philosophy?

1 RecommendShareFlag

Fester commented April 22

F

Fester

Columbus

April 22

I think we need to stop lionizing Philip Roth.  There is a reason he and Bailey clicked.  Soon, Roth will be remembered for his contributions to literature in the same way Woody Allen is remembered for his contributions to film.

65 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

zarathustra commented April 22

Z

zarathustra

richmond

April 22

@Fester   Really inappropriate comparison. First of all Mr. Roth is a brilliant novelist not a literary hack like Bailey. Also Roth never raped anyone and he certainly didn't groom any high-school girls. The level of self-righteousness around these issues is amazing. We seem to be entering an age of sexual panic akin to the era of the Salem witch trials, except this time it is men on the stakes. Maybe balances the scales but what is it doing to the culture?

17 RecommendShareFlag

Mrs_I commented April 22

M

Mrs_I

Toronto, Canada

April 22

@zarathustra Good God read about his abuse to Claire Bloom during their marriage and think again. I cannot for the life of me understand why this man was/is revered.

6 RecommendShareFlag

Ms. Pea commented April 22

M

Ms. Pea

Seattle

April 22

This is ridiculous. The alleged behavior of the writer has no bearing on the quality of his writing. Should only "good" people be allowed to write books? Excellent novels and autobiographies have been written by men incarcerated for murder and other crimes. Those books were promoted by publishers and the books were available for sale in stores. By all means, deal with whatever crimes Mr. Bailey is alleged to have committed, but leave the work alone. He is an accomplished biographer, and I intend to buy and read his Roth book.

30 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@Ms. Pea

How do you know Roth never raped anyone? Given the intensity of his hatred for and revenge upon Claire Bloom, do you doubt he could successfully intimidate any accuser?

2 RecommendShareFlag

Jensetta commented April 22

J

Jensetta

NY

April 22

Why is this so hard for some people to understand that calling someone out for illegal and destructive behavior has nothing to do with 'cancel culture.'

I detest the way that some members of the liberal intelligencia have pulled this dishonest and morally incomprehensive concept from the trash bin of a reckless alt.right

I'm searching all these expressions of outrage for a clear idea about how responsible social institutions, such as  publishers, should respond to such serious allegations.

Dismiss them because they did happen recently? Dismiss them because the accused denies they happened?  Worse than anything: dismiss them because, well, that is sometimes the hidden cost of 'great art'?

Is the history of arts and letters rife with similar examples? Of course it is? Does this long history explain away such self-serving and ethically lazy behavior?  It shouldn't.

It seems that suddenly the message 'believe the women' is what's being canceled, because it is inconvenient in this instance. What if Norton's actions--to suspend, not 'cancel'--are, in fact, a form of justice seeking, as awkward and thorny as it may appear.

33 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

David G. commented April 22

D

David G.

Dallas

April 22

@Jensetta The capitalist's response--which I'm not necessarily endorsing--is that the publisher should make a market-based decision. Do they think this book will still sell? If so, publish it. Individuals, of course, can choose whether or not to buy it.

Anyway, I think that's the debate. In cases like this one, is it really Norton's role to get out ahead of the public response and decide to stop shipping this book.

1 RecommendShareFlag

Jensetta commented April 22

J

Jensetta

NY

April 22

@David G.

It is their role to behave as rational moral actors, and it always has been.

We've forgotten that, as the unrelenting wave of digital digital mass culture has washed over us.

Sometimes what matters most is not what's driven by consumer appetites.   Again, we used to know that, and can know it again.

1 RecommendShareFlag

David G. commented April 22

D

David G.

Dallas

April 22

To speak narrowly about what happened in New Orleans. I know people involved. But when I heard stories of Bailey grooming his eight grade students to later seduce them, I thought "later" meant sometime in the immediate following  years. I was horrified. When the story hit the papers, I learned that "later" meant half a decade or more, the rich experiences of high school intervening: waves of new teachers, new experiences, first boyfriends, driver's licenses, applications to college, etc.

Now, without a doubt, he took advantage of his experiences as their former teacher, as someone older and more experienced to seduce these young women. He's a creep. But to call what happened  "grooming" is to stretch the term, which may be good. Other terms have had their meaning expanded. For example, we understand that rape encompasses more sex under the explicit threat of violence.

But I think it's important to pause and take note of when the meanings of words shift, because what usually happens is they shift for some people and not for others, and disagreements ensue.

As for the accusations of coercion an rape against Baily, they should be treated as serious allegations, which is to say, as allegations, and as serious.

9 RecommendShareFlag

JB commented April 22

J

JB

Italy

April 22

This part was appalling: "Ms. Reidhead did not respond, Ms. Rice said. But a week after she sent it, Ms. Rice received an email from Mr. Bailey, who said that his publisher had forwarded her note." I'm sure it's a well-written book. I'm also sure that, given the sheer amount of talent and competition in the American literary world, there exists a certified non-rapist who could have written an equally good biography. There are plenty of brilliant writers who never get a real shot -- in part because we're all so busy debating whether people like poor old Blake Bailey should be allowed to (allegedly but probably*) rape women without suffering any consequences.

(*Personally, I found the multiple, corroborated accusations of rape; Facebook conversations about the sexual grooming; and emailed apologies to be extremely convincing evidence.)

Issues of talent aside, the vast majority of reported rapes and sexual assaults (81%) are never convicted. Given those odds, I can understand why these women wanted to try to move on with their lives. The alternative was subjecting themselves to an invasive, traumatic legal proceeding that had less than a 1 in 5 chance of succeeding.

64 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Dan S. commented April 22

D

Dan S.

Maine

April 22

@JB I was also appalled that Ms. Reidhead's idea of an appropriate investigation of a rape allegation against one of its authors was to ask him if it happened, accept his denial at face value with no further follow-up, then forward the victim's email to him so he could continue to harass her privately.  I suspect that part of Norton's decision to suspend publication was to take the spotlight off its own grossly negligent attempt to sweep this under the rug two years ago.

21 RecommendShareFlag

Space Needle commented April 22

S

Space Needle

Seattle

April 22

For the past few months we were deluged with praising reviews of Bailey’s book, and encomiums of Roth as if he were the second coming of Shakespeare, instead of a self-obsessed one trick pony.

I couldn’t pick up a New York-based publication without seeing an article about the purported genius of Philip Roth.

This latest development is high irony worthy of the bard, or buffo opera, and as a bystander I am loving it as an unpredicted plot twist in the story of an author trying to control his biography from the grave.

Roth was spared the fires and witch hunts of MeToo, but Bailey was not so lucky.

For the rest of us mere mortals, we shall have to attempt to carry on with only the vast troves of world literature to comfort us.

31 RecommendShareFlag

ET commented April 22

E

ET

Tennessee

April 22

As seems to be the case with everyone tied to the literary world, I have found this story riveting, and deeply troubling.

The accusations seem credible, and the e-mail record of Mr. Bailey's attempts to silence his accusers--particularly those who were his students as adolescents--amount to admissions of heinous (if not necessarily criminal) behavior. W.W. Norton's decision to "pull" the book after having all but ignored an assault allegation prior to the book's publication smacks of corporate damage control, not moral rectitude. The alleged victims are credible, and the accused has admitted regret and attempted to silence his accusers. His denials don't help his case. But there has been no due process, nor to my knowledge any formal legal complaint or charge filed; hence, Mr. Bailey and W.W. Norton seem destined only to be tried by the Court of Public Opinion, and the verdict is already in.

One can't help but note the irony: a narcissistic genius notorious for a history of inarguably hostile and exploitative treatment of many of the women in his life handpicks his biographer presumably because he trusted the writer to be sympathetic to the many grudges he appeared never to have relinquished against his former wives and lovers, only to pass away and watch helplessly from the afterlife as said biography is forever tainted by exposure of the writer's own inarguably hostile and exploitative treatment of women.

Sounds eerily like the plot of a Philip Roth novel, no?

43 RecommendShareFlag

Jon commented April 22

J

Jon

NC

April 22

Not surprising that a sex offender would write a biography uncritically defending a famous literary figure from charges of misogyny and serial philandering. Personally, I err on the side of allowing of allowing books to be published even if their authors are vile people - perhaps with a few caveats.

It does raise ethical quandaries when a heinous person publishes a book to profit from their infamy or taunt the victims (think OJ Simpson's ghostwritten "If I Did It"). Perhaps it might be better to distribute the 50,000 copies from the first printing, retain the ban on promotion/advertising, and donate all revenue to sexual assault victims.

10 RecommendShareFlag

Thomas commented April 22

T

Thomas

Lawrence

April 22

So, we are going to be denied access to what is purported to be an excellent work because of allegations against the author?  Even if the allegations are true, does that mean we erase scholarship?

18 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@Thomas

"Denied access"? Buy it right now on kindle.

1 RecommendShareFlag

Joe commented April 22

J

Joe

NYC

April 22

Isn’t it about time we set up a special commission to review the behavior of all men and line up those who have ever lusted for a woman he is not married to or not had her complete consent to ogle? I’m just wondering if “allegations “ are sufficient now, how soon before we get to “hints” or “suggestions”?

6 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Rill commented April 22

R

Rill

Newton, Ma

April 22

The guy twice admitted his guilt to his accuser, alleging he was mentally ill at the time - it’s all in the article.

10 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@Rill

Exactly. I'm not sure it's worth it to try and explain to a guy who thinks rape is equivalent to ogling.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Jay commented April 22

J

Jay

Exile

April 22

Time to listen to the April 11 version of The Daily podcast about Roth & Bailey (entitled “The Ghost Writer”) before it gets scrubbed. ￼￼

RecommendShareFlag

Molly commented April 22

Molly

Molly

Minneapolis

April 22

So much concern for the man and his reputation. This is why people don’t come forward after sexual assault.  They’re not believed.

76 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Dan S. commented April 22

D

Dan S.

Maine

April 22

@Molly Agreed, it's gross.  If anyone bothered to read the whole article, there is quite a bit of corroborating evidence that renders all of his very credible.  The level of vitriol directed at "cancel culture" and "me too" instead of, you know, the credibly accused serial rapist, is something I would expect to see in the comments on Fox News rather than the NYT.

33 RecommendShareFlag

JadeG commented April 22

JadeG

JadeG

NY

April 22

Many victims have emails from Bailey, acknowledging, though minimizing, his actions. He begs the women not to tell. In one email he blamed mental illness. So let's stop pretending there is no evidence.

208 RecommendShareFlag

Ed commented April 22

E

Ed

Detroit

April 22

Multiple allegations? This ship has sunk (and it's not coming back). Why hasn't 45 suffered a similar fate? How did 45 ever get elected? Maybe it's because his supporters don't read books and the publishing houses didn't give a fig. Yeah, his folks depend mostly on talk radio and FoxNews for their "information" about the world.

I really enjoyed Roth's The Human Stain. I look white yet am mixed race and enjoyed revisiting the contradictions and absurdities of life in America that Roth focused on. Too bad for his heritage and estate. However, this is certainly a Roth-like twist. Nothing is what it initially appears to be.

Police murders? Sexual assault? White supremacy bubbling over on the floor of Congress and its environs? A major political party led by ignorant yahoos completely unrestrained and unashamed in their sickening, opportunist embrace of racialist demagogy? Go along to get along? Was it always like this or is it getting worse? I keep looking for a light at the end of the tunnel and right now it's pretty dark. Someone, please, hand me a flashlight.

12 RecommendShareFlag

Mary commented April 22

M

Mary

Salt Lake City

April 22

This story scares me. On the one hand, it sounds like maybe Mr. Bailey should be in jail. But the fact that his accusers were partly motivated to come forward because of disagreement with his writing choices is cause for serious concern. And that Norton caved by pulling an apparently valuable contribution to the discussion of Roth's work is chilling.

7 RecommendShareFlag

Parsnip commented April 22

P

Parsnip

Washington, D.C.

April 22

And this on the day when LeBron James, with tens of millions of followers, is in very real trouble for publicly threatening a police officer without having even watched the bodycam footage of the event in question. But of course the Times is not covering that story, which is inconvenient to the moment's zeitgeist.

Due process is dead in this country, and no one is going to care until it is their day in the Court of Public Opinion, which apparently is now empowered as Judge, Jury, and Executioner.

I am trying very hard to remain liberal, and it is now a daily struggle.

11 RecommendShareFlag

Caroline commented April 22

C

Caroline

BK USA

April 22

Punish the artist if he's guilty. Publish the art if it adds to a body of knowledge. Donate the profits to charities supporting sexual assault survivors.

7 RecommendShareFlag

JenD commented April 22

J

JenD

NJ

April 22

"But a week after she sent it, Ms. Rice received an email from Mr. Bailey, who said that his publisher had forwarded her note." Instead of investigating this woman's claim further, or contacting her for more information, Ms. Reidhead or someone else in the organization forwarded it to Bailey? That was their first instinct? This was the absolute WRONG thing to do, and higher-ups at Norton know it. I suspect it has a lot to do with why they have stopped printing and promoting the book so suddenly. An attempt at virtue signalling, when they know they mishandled Ms. Rice's claim.

26 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Dan S. commented April 22

D

Dan S.

Maine

April 22

@JenD I made the same comment above.  This little nugget was quietly slipped into the article, but seems to be a big part of the story.  How on earth did anyone with half a brain think that was an appropriate way to respond to an allegation of forcible rape?

"Oh, he says he didn't do it, so let's just send him the accuser's email so they can hash it out themselves."

18 RecommendShareFlag

Pottree commented April 22

P

Pottree

Joshua Tree

April 22

For those who had not previously heard of this Roth bio - now they have.

If Norton has pulled back on promotion for a book already a best seller, one wonders: who owns the copyright?  Is the house in violation of a contract?  Whether or not the allegations against Bailey are true, what happens next?  Can he undo the past?  Reclaim his work and peddle it elsewhere?  Is this a publicity stunt?  Who publishes the work of other allegedly or factually lousy people?

2 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Michel Forest commented April 22

M

Michel Forest

Montréal

April 22

@Pottree

In answer to one of your question: the copyright is shared between Blake Bailey and the estate of Philip Roth.

As for Norton, if they pulled the book, it's because they can legally do so. It's also a big financial loss for them, because the book was doing very well.

RecommendShareFlag

EB commented April 22

E

EB

Bergen County, NJ

April 22

I was raped when I was 15 and even at that young age I had enough common sense to report it to the police. A man comes into her room and rapes her and she doesn’t scream loud enough for her hosts to hear?  Did she sit down and have breakfast with her rapist the next day?  Sorry but this whole story sounds like a bunch of malarkey to me.

16 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Survivor commented April 22

S

Survivor

US

April 22

@EB different people cope with trauma in different ways. Lets not just the victim here.

12 RecommendShareFlag

Dan S. commented April 22

D

Dan S.

Maine

April 22

@EB You're probably right.  Everyone knows 100% of women who report their rapes to the police are immediately believed and the accusers duly punished.  There can't possibly be any valid reason not to file a criminal report, so anyone who doesn't report to the police is clearly lying.  Let's just ignore all of the corroborating evidence cited in the article, like Bailey's sketchy email to one of the victims asking her not to talk about "the awfulness of that night 17 years ago," because that's a totally normal thing to say, right?

22 RecommendShareFlag

Midge commented April 22

M

Midge

NYC

April 22

Blake Bailey was hand-picked by Roth to be his official biographer. Now we know why

12 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Michel Forest commented April 22

M

Michel Forest

Montréal

April 22

@Midge

This is a shameful thing to write and sophistry of the worst kind. No one ever accused Philip Roth of rape or assault. Roth, in fact, had many women friends, including former lovers.

Just because Blake Bailey has been accused of

assaulting women is no reason to smear the reputation of Philip Roth as a person or an artist.

19 RecommendShareFlag

Ecdysiast commented April 22

E

Ecdysiast

NYC

April 22

@Michel Forest

Well I think he's guilty by association. Where there's smoke there's fire.

RecommendShareFlag

Literary Maven commented April 22

L

Literary Maven

Reading Across the U.S.

April 22

And, I quote...

"In an email reviewed by The Times, Mr. Bailey apologized to Ms. Peyton for his behavior days after the encounter, and asked her not to speak to others about it.

She last heard from him in the summer of 2020, when Mr. Bailey wrote her again, in a message also reviewed by The Times, in which he alluded to “the awfulness on that night 17 years ago” and said he was suffering from mental illness at the time."

Let's minimize "the awfulness" so cover up for me, will you?  By the way, I was suffering from "mental illness" at the time, I swear.  Help me sweep this under the rug, will you? Puleeze...

Utterly reprehensible on the part of the author -- but classic abuser behavior. Claiming it was all just an unfortunate misunderstanding.

Best move W.W. Norton could make at this point. Postpone any further plans to move forward with this author until all the parties get this "awfulness" straightened out...if ever that happens.

Kudos to the women who finally came forward. Takes guts for sure.

#EnoughIsEnough

104 RecommendShareFlag

whatever commented April 22

W

whatever

location

April 22

Meta-meta-meta.

The paper writes about a florid love life of a writer who writes about a florid love life of a writer who writes about florid love lives.

6 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Sandy McCroskey commented April 22

S

Sandy McCroskey

Brooklyn

April 22

@whatever   Gee, guess I missed the part that mentioned Blake's "love life." Coming from Blake's mouth and referring to Roth, the phrase "florid love life" sounds like a euphemism.

2 RecommendShareFlag

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@whatever

This is your idea of a love life? God that's depressing.

3 RecommendShareFlag

Carolyn commented April 22

C

Carolyn

Victoria

April 22

Every time yet another privileged white male gets outed as a serial rapist, we are subjected to the bleeting complaints of yet more privileged white men about due process, rule of law, "why didn't she fight back?", "why didn't she cry out?", "why didn't she call police", etc. To which the short answer is: look how well that has turned out for those who did. The long answer has to do with institutionalized misogyny, the lack of equality of the genders in the U.S. (which is one of the many reasons we are WAY down the list of safe and democratic countries), the physiological response to being attacked (fight, flight, freeze, or feign death), and the open hostility and death threats against women who DO attempt to bring their rapists to justice.

181 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

@Carolyn

Can't we just all agree that if a woman accuses a man of any untoward behavior he is automatically and unequivocally guilty?

1 RecommendShareFlag

Carolyn commented April 22

C

Carolyn

Victoria

April 22

@Sparky Thanks for proving my point.

24 RecommendShareFlag

Marilyn commented April 22

M

Marilyn

TN

April 22

Two perverted minds that think alike and lack the integrity to control themselves.  Already knew Roth was not worth the effort, now will add Bailey to my list of authors to stay away from.

16 RecommendShareFlag

Mixilplix commented April 22

M

Mixilplix

Delray Beach, Florida

April 22

Nerds Gone Wild.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Andrew commented April 22

A

Andrew

NY

April 22

Great. So now we punish authors, silence, and ruin them based upon completely unsubstantiated allegations against them? It’s amazing how much more seriously the NY Times takes these charges, and how much more speedily they rushed to cover it, than they did when far more plausible claims of sexual impropriety were raised against the current Democratic president during his election campaign.

Apparently, if you are accused - whether rightly or wrongly - of sexual assault, you should should not be allowed to write books about authors. But if you want to be president, as long as you’re a Democratic Party loyalist, by all means, grope away. The paper of record is here to defend you.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Julia commented April 22

J

Julia

NY,NY

April 22

He's never been arrested or convicted of a sexual crime why are the publishers doing this?  I was looking forward to reading the book.  What a sad country America has become.  Guilty, Guilty, Guilty.

10 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

raph101 commented April 22

R

raph101

sierra madre, california

April 22

@Julia

Go ahead and read it. No one is stopping you.

1 RecommendShareFlag

Maxb commented April 22

M

Maxb

California

April 22

This is absolutely stupid. To read yet another article about the power of allegations without proof is beyond belief. Why would this impact a book about Roth's life-who I have read and heard was quite the ladies man, it does not make any difference to content. Is this not about Roth's life, the author only put pen to paper, now we don't get to read about Roth through a non connection allegation to Roth because the author may or may not have, the purpose of a biography is to read about the subject, this is Just stupidity once again.

10 RecommendShareFlag

DJ commented April 22

DJ

DJ

Arizona

April 22

Pathetic-PC censorship,  gone mad.

6 RecommendShareFlag

Cryptome commented April 22

C

Cryptome

New York, NY

April 22

Misbehavior is ordained by sanctimony, so Mr. Bailey and Mr. Roth are perfectly wed for shocking the shoes dancing wildly at the rhythm and blues of no holds barred racy literature of imaginative desktop and bedtop deliquescence shameless braggard, prowess fictional of course, hardly genuine, Lady Chatterly rooting for the genre along with the bared chest romancer of the instantly available via cellphone.

Norton pretends televangelist regrets, sheds a crocodile, upticks the advances of fee and sales, awaits the band of multipliers to work their magic of verisimilitude and scandalous hot sheets, done at once to shove aside wasted columns on Mr. Floyd street riots and weeping hooters and flash-banging shooters and dwindling sales of tales if anonymous shot soldiers in Afghanistan for America's longest top-tilting of the pandemicky citizenry's unbalanced economy in favor of the few who pull the strings of unbelievably enticing shenanigans right there on the mesmerizing handheld very own arousals.

Roth with his liver-loving teen beginning three decades of randiness in print and ostensibly in person and publishers, with Mailer and Updike and Playboy and Hustlerand Screw and Society for Cutting Up Men and Germaine Greer, lastingly lubricious right up to Jeffrey Epstein and dear hapless Ghislaine Maxwell in the filthy ever-bright pokey like a formulaic victim in The Graduate or best, Midnight Cowboy, aiming at Naked Cowboy of Times Square (no pun on the grey lady's unprintables).

1 RecommendShareFlag

Uli commented April 22

U

Uli

Mexico

April 22

Looks like censorship...

8 RecommendShareFlag

Peter Silverman commented April 22

P

Peter Silverman

Portland, OR

April 22

Allegations should be investigated before they become front page news.

7 RecommendShareFlag

Sally Sebastian commented April 22

S

Sally Sebastian

Atlanta

April 22

Norton is practicing censorship, pure and simple.

7 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Survivor commented April 22

S

Survivor

US

April 22

@Sally Sebastian Censorship is law/government sanctioned. This is not censorship, this is the free market in action.

11 RecommendShareFlag

Sally Sebastian commented April 22

S

Sally Sebastian

Atlanta

April 22

I disagree. It is censorship, akin to some schools or teachers banning books. We can agree to disagree. Peace.

1 RecommendShareFlag

Steve Griffith commented April 22

S

Steve Griffith

Oakland, CA

April 22

Which begs the question, how does a publisher reconcile distancing itself from a biographer whose past behavior may not have been any “worse” than the subject of his biography? In other words, how did W.W. Norton justify publishing a biography of Philip Roth that largely excuses and dismisses his misogyny?

209 RecommendShareFlag

6 REPLIES

Mark Cavanaugh commented April 22

M

Mark Cavanaugh

Fort Lauderdale

April 22

It “raises”, but does not “beg”, the question. Two different concepts.

14 RecommendShareFlag

jrd commented April 22

J

jrd

ny

April 22

@Steve Griffith

Maybe the answer is, it's not for the publisher to justify either if it pretends to be anything other than a moral scold and a judge and jury.

The public can sometimes be trusted to make its own decisions.

11 RecommendShareFlag

Amskeptic commented April 22

Amskeptic

Amskeptic

All Around The Country

April 22

@Steve Griffith  Mark Twain would have never gotten Huckleberry Finn out the door in your perfect world.

22 RecommendShareFlag

jrd commented April 22

J

jrd

ny

April 22

@Steve Griffith

So your position is, the unproven charges against Bailey "may" be no worse in your estimation than unproven charges against Roth, therefore both should be cancelled?

Or it's a given that Roth is a misogynist and that no  misogynists should be published?

6 RecommendShareFlag

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@Steve Griffith Let’s hope that both the publisher and the biographer know that “begging the question” does not mean “provoking” or “”suggesting” “a question”. It refers, rather, to a particular logical fallacy, also called petitio princippii, assuming as an a priori premise of your argument the very thing thing your argument tries to establish, a form of circular reasoning.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Portlanders commented April 22

P

Portlanders

Portland, OR

April 22

Great point!

RecommendShareFlag

jrd commented April 22

J

jrd

ny

April 22

@Steve Griffith

So your position is, the unproven charges against Bailey "may" be no worse in your estimation than unproven charges against Roth, therefore both should be cancelled?

Or it's a given that Roth is a misogynist and that no  misogynists should be published?

6 RecommendShareFlag

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@Steve Griffith Let’s hope that both the publisher and the biographer know that “begging the question” does not mean “provoking” or “”suggesting” “a question”. It refers, rather, to a particular logical fallacy, also called petitio princippii, assuming as an a priori premise of your argument the very thing thing your argument tries to establish, a form of circular reasoning.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Portlanders commented April 22

P

Portlanders

Portland, OR

April 22

Great point!

RecommendShareFlag

jrd commented April 22

J

jrd

ny

April 22

You don't have to be forgiving of the behavior described here to wonder:  where does it end?  "The Taming of the Shrew" is sufficient to cancel Shakespeare, some would love to cancel Roth himself for Claire Bloom and Alexander Portnoy and the other examples, from Catullus to Dante to Wagner, small horrors to large, are too numerous to even contemplate.

Are we all administrators, that we can't or won't distinguish the work from the man/woman?

Or maybe we should just ban the arts altogether, as promoting depravity?

204 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Andrew commented April 22

A

Andrew

Washington D.C.

April 22

@jrd A corporation wants to stop doing business with a man accused of sexual assault by multiple people. Just because Bailey created "art" should not force businesses to expend their resources publishing and promoting it.

This isn't about whether people should read long-dead authors because of problematic opinions they held. This is an active business relationship in which the publisher is acting in their monetary self-interest.

23 RecommendShareFlag

jrd commented April 22

J

jrd

ny

April 22

@Andrew

"Monetary self-interest"?  That's not how W.W. Norton, an employee-owned firm, regards and advertises itself.

It's a keeper of the flame and claims to be acting on principle.  And there's no more justification for ceasing publication of all contemporary work  than curtailing the distribution of the classics.

You're either in the book publishing or the book burning business.  Mass-market publishing is our public square.

3 RecommendShareFlag

Hubert Nash commented April 22

H

Hubert Nash

VA Beach VA

April 22

I suggest that anyone interested in this sad situation should read the new and excellent novel “The Dark Vanessa.” Another example, I think, of life imitating art.

10 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Andre commented April 22

A

Andre

Quebec Canada

April 22

My Dark Vanessa

6 RecommendShareFlag

Uptowner commented April 22

U

Uptowner

NYC

April 22

I personally had an unpleasant encounter with the subject - although nothing on a level with the charges described. I have not read the book and don’t relish seeing Mr. Bailey make the rounds.

However, I strongly disagree with Norton’s decision - concerning a biography, yet - which seems to set a dangerous and arbitrary precedent. Stop promotion, by all means; consider it when handing out awards; but readers should be given the opportunity to make their own choice. This is an important authorized biography. (Besides everything else, I find it unlikely that the scope of this notoriously messy behavior came as a shock to the agent and publisher)!

168 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

DJ commented April 22

DJ

DJ

Arizona

April 22

@Uptowner- Bravo!

6 RecommendShareFlag

John Corey commented April 22

J

John Corey

Paris

April 22

@Uptowner

The allegations are numerous and very serious, and are still coming to light. Mr. Bailey also attempted to use his agent to intimidate a critic. I doubt that either the publisher or the agent anticipated this at all.

http://www.edrants.com/the-dark-manipulative-life-of-blake-bailey/

http://www.edrants.com/blake-bailey-casual-misogynist-and-eager-rube/

6 RecommendShareFlag

Uptowner commented April 22

U

Uptowner

NYC

April 22

@John Corey Thanks for the response, John. The allegations are serious, just as you say. But there is a difference between censuring (or prosecuting) an author and suppressing his or her books.

3 RecommendShareFlag

Keef In cucamonga commented April 22

K

Keef In cucamonga

Claremont CA

April 22

Wow. This was really bad until the part at Dwight Garner’s (!) house then it turns from really bad to far beyond that. Wow.

53 RecommendShareFlag

justgimmesometruth commented April 22

J

justgimmesometruth

New York

April 22

This is an undeserved windfall for Mr. Bailey. With Norton backing out, the author can certainly put his book directly on Kindle Direct Publishing, which is the Amazon company that publishes ebooks and paperbacks. Normally, the drawback of KDP is that the book isn't publicized and often languishes, but Mr. Bailey's book is already in demand. Royalties from KDP are much higher than one would get from a standard publisher. So, no need to feel sorry for Mr Bailey, he stands to make a fortune.

Is Norton justified in its action? Sure. They're a private enterprise. They can pull the book if they choose... but I hope they have a contract with Mr. Bailey that permits this. Let's remember that Mr. Bailey has been accused but not convicted. With a good lawyer, Mr. Bailey stands to make another fortune.

Do I think that this is an overreach of political correctness and cancel culture? I think it is, but others will disagree. I can imagine Mr. Roth turning the whole incident into a terrific work of fiction (including the alleged crimes). Mr. Roth himself was a great advocate for the freedom of authors.

Publishers can do what they want, but great art isn't always produced by the most moral of people. Perhaps quite the opposite...

40 RecommendShareFlag

9 REPLIES

A. Mark commented April 22

A

A. Mark

Brooklyn

April 22

@justgimmesometruth I'm sure Norton's contracts allow for this. Most publishing contracts these days have a "Reputational Incident" clause, where the publisher's allowed to pull the book if there are, say, multiple credible rape allegations against the author.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Lindsay commented April 22

L

Lindsay

Brooklyn

April 22

@justgimmesometruth One more person who thinks only of the poor, poor man and not of his victims!

18 RecommendShareFlag

Michel Forest commented April 22

M

Michel Forest

Montréal

April 22

@justgimmesometruth

One thing that is not mentioned anywhere, except in the book: the copyright of this book is shared between Blake Bailey and the estate of Philip Roth. So I don't think Bailey can simply do whatever he wants with it.

5 RecommendShareFlag

kathleen cairns commented April 22

K

kathleen cairns

San Luis Obispo Ca

April 22

@justgimmesometruth Roth may have made "great art," at least to some people. A biographer normally isn't a great artist, he/she is writing about one.

3 RecommendShareFlag

justgimmesometruth commented April 22

J

justgimmesometruth

New York

April 22

@Lindsay: In my comment I say: "Do I think that this is an overreach of political correctness and cancel culture? I think it is, but others will disagree."

You are one of those who disagree.

An accusation is not grounds for preventing an author from publishing a book. If Bailey is found guilty in criminal court, he will be punished. If he is found liable in civil court, the victims will be able to claim the money that he made on the book.

I'm not thinking of the 'poor, poor man' as you suggest. I'm thinking of the author who has a right to publish his books. Fortunately, there are other channels by which he can publish. In America, those convicted of crimes are free to publish books, although the income from those books may, in some cases, go to victims.

But, your point is correct. Count me among those which think that Gaugin should not be cancelled for sex with underage girls in Polynesia, something that was culturally acceptable there.

And I just heard Cher on Colbert telling the story of her relationship with Sonny when she was 16 and he was 26. It didn't sound like rape when she and Stephen were laughing about it.

I certainly understand 'me too' but I also don't like 'culture police'. Sometimes there are shades of gray.

6 RecommendShareFlag

justgimmesometruth commented April 22

J

justgimmesometruth

New York

April 22

@A. Mark: Yes, I'm sure you're right about the clause... but what is a 'credible allegation'. That seems up for litigation.

But, doesn't matter, self-publishing is a goldmine for a book that's sure to sell.

RecommendShareFlag

Michel Forest commented April 22

M

Michel Forest

Montréal

April 22

@kathleen cairns

I beg to differ. Read any book by Robert Caro, biographer of Robert Moses and LBJ, and you'll see that he's a terrific writer. His prose is a delight and worthy of any novelist.

1 RecommendShareFlag

justgimmesometruth commented April 22

J

justgimmesometruth

New York

April 22

@kathleen cairns: That's a very narrow view of art. I'd say that non-fiction is as much art as fiction. The 'art' lies in the artistry of the writer, not in the subject. I'd certainly say that a book like The Emperor of All Maladies is more art than Fifty Shades of Gray. Just my opinion, of course.

2 RecommendShareFlag

justgimmesometruth commented April 22

J

justgimmesometruth

New York

April 22

@Michel Forest: Didn't know that. It's interesting and it makes sense. Hard to imagine that the Roth estate wouldn't want to find a channel to publish the book.

2 RecommendShareFlag

kathleen cairns commented April 22

K

kathleen cairns

San Luis Obispo Ca

April 22

@justgimmesometruth Roth may have made "great art," at least to some people. A biographer normally isn't a great artist, he/she is writing about one.

3 RecommendShareFlag

justgimmesometruth commented April 22

J

justgimmesometruth

New York

April 22

@Lindsay: In my comment I say: "Do I think that this is an overreach of political correctness and cancel culture? I think it is, but others will disagree."

You are one of those who disagree.

An accusation is not grounds for preventing an author from publishing a book. If Bailey is found guilty in criminal court, he will be punished. If he is found liable in civil court, the victims will be able to claim the money that he made on the book.

I'm not thinking of the 'poor, poor man' as you suggest. I'm thinking of the author who has a right to publish his books. Fortunately, there are other channels by which he can publish. In America, those convicted of crimes are free to publish books, although the income from those books may, in some cases, go to victims.

But, your point is correct. Count me among those which think that Gaugin should not be cancelled for sex with underage girls in Polynesia, something that was culturally acceptable there.

And I just heard Cher on Colbert telling the story of her relationship with Sonny when she was 16 and he was 26. It didn't sound like rape when she and Stephen were laughing about it.

I certainly understand 'me too' but I also don't like 'culture police'. Sometimes there are shades of gray.

6 RecommendShareFlag

justgimmesometruth commented April 22

J

justgimmesometruth

New York

April 22

@A. Mark: Yes, I'm sure you're right about the clause... but what is a 'credible allegation'. That seems up for litigation.

But, doesn't matter, self-publishing is a goldmine for a book that's sure to sell.

RecommendShareFlag

Michel Forest commented April 22

M

Michel Forest

Montréal

April 22

@kathleen cairns

I beg to differ. Read any book by Robert Caro, biographer of Robert Moses and LBJ, and you'll see that he's a terrific writer. His prose is a delight and worthy of any novelist.

1 RecommendShareFlag

justgimmesometruth commented April 22

J

justgimmesometruth

New York

April 22

@kathleen cairns: That's a very narrow view of art. I'd say that non-fiction is as much art as fiction. The 'art' lies in the artistry of the writer, not in the subject. I'd certainly say that a book like The Emperor of All Maladies is more art than Fifty Shades of Gray. Just my opinion, of course.

2 RecommendShareFlag

justgimmesometruth commented April 22

J

justgimmesometruth

New York

April 22

@Michel Forest: Didn't know that. It's interesting and it makes sense. Hard to imagine that the Roth estate wouldn't want to find a channel to publish the book.

2 RecommendShareFlag

Steve commented April 22

S

Steve

Boston, MA

April 22

Bravo to the woman for speaking out, better late than never, and for the publisher for pausing support. Perhaps after legal fees and taxes, the advance will net closer to four figures.

104 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

@Steve

Does the author have the right to defend himself? He furiously denies the allegations. Or is it better to cancel him now and see if there's any truth to the accusations down the road?

5 RecommendShareFlag

cbarber commented April 22

C

cbarber

San Pedro

April 22

What ever happened to due process? The guys been ruined before he even gets his day in court.

61 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

Larry Imboden commented April 22

L

Larry Imboden

Union

April 22

@cbarber My thoughts exactly. Slander is horrible - it causes permanent damage to a person's reputation and often times destroys their career and ability to earn a living.

9 RecommendShareFlag

KR commented April 22

KR

KR

CA

April 22

@cbarber

Due process only applies to court. Not the 'court' of public opinion.

18 RecommendShareFlag

Larry Imboden commented April 22

L

Larry Imboden

Union

April 22

@KR Please forgive me - I was unaware that these allegations were made in a court of law.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Missy commented April 22

M

Missy

New Orleans

April 22

@cbarber I imagine not all the victims want to press charges, or maybe they don't have the money to do so. And perhaps the allegations serve to expose him for who he really is, before he can do this to others? With his role in academia, he would have the opportunity to do this to others. the ladies speaking out are trying to prevent that.

2 RecommendShareFlag

Brock Landers commented April 22

B

Brock Landers

Van Nuys, CA

April 22

It is surreal to see publishers declining to publish books because of their authors’ immorality (or even just accusations thereof).  So many great authors from the past whose works remain revered did awful things.  And publishers used to fight government censorship to publish their works anyway.  Now publishers act as informal moral censors themselves.

83 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Theresa Clarke commented April 22

T

Theresa Clarke

Wilton, CT

April 22

@Brock Landers     Andre Gide Nobel Prize for Literature in 1947.  A pedophile - read ‘The Immoralist’ - which somehow none of us questioned at NYU in the late 1970s.  Gide and Oscar Wilde scouring North Africa/Morocco for boys under the age of 16 - Wilde led Gide there.  Oscar Wilde did not belong in prison for his homosexuality - but he did belong in prison for this.

2 RecommendShareFlag

orionoir commented April 22

orionoir

orionoir

connecticut

April 22

let us now praise famous men: a phrase from a more innocent time.  at times it seems that, when it comes to men, acclaim is what moves the rock underneath of which has been hiding all sorts of creepy-crawlies.

still, always the question: so what now?  if we rule out the death penalty, even for credible allegations of rape, then how do we rehabilitate all these damaged stars?

4 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Jonathan commented April 22

J

Jonathan

Brooklyn, NY

April 22

@orionoir why would we want to? surely we can have stars who don't rape women and groom young girls for later abuse?

14 RecommendShareFlag

Trianna commented April 22

T

Trianna

BFE

April 22

@Jonathan Once they reach the age of consent, and then do so, it's not "abuse".

1 RecommendShareFlag

Rick Morris commented April 22

R

Rick Morris

Montreal

April 22

'The controversy that has engulfed Mr. Bailey erupted in part because of the publicity he has received for his Roth biography, which led some of the women accusing him of misconduct to come forward.'

No surprise there. No matter how truthful these allegations are, the rape(s), the 'grooming' - why do they become serious only when the accused is in the public eye? How come they weren't reported on earlier? Why only now? Weren't they serious enough then? It is sexual assault, after all. After all these years, are these reports credible? Can they even be proved? Doubtful.

In any event, Bailey's publisher should let the work appear on bookstands, not cave to the current media morality, and let these accusations be settled in or out of a court of law - where it should have been long ago, commiserate to the time these events supposedly occurred.

46 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

Pedro Shaio commented April 22

P

Pedro Shaio

Bogotá

April 22

@Rick Morris Commensurate, not commiserate.

6 RecommendShareFlag

Rick Morris commented April 22

R

Rick Morris

Montreal

April 22

@Pedro Shaio

You are absolutely right. Those two words often swap places in my mind, as they have here.

4 RecommendShareFlag

Celia commented April 22

C

Celia

California

April 22

Happy to answer this one. It is extremely difficult to get a rape conviction in America, and woman who try are treated extremely insensitively during the process, which makes woman back off from pressing charges (which dare I say is EXACTLY the point). So they live on with their PTSD and their trauma and their counselling and make do with their lives being forever altered. Then, the person who so victimised them gets attention and is all over the news. He is praised and that makes it hard for survivors of assault, who have to watch a violent destructive monster be praised. So they speak up. The great irony is that society doesn’t really allow women to seek justice through the courts, but now, with me too, they can get it through the courts of public opinion. By and large, no raping equals no potentially life destructive shaming.

40 RecommendShareFlag

kelleher commented April 22

K

kelleher

vermont

April 22

perhaps I can assist. A victim is justly outraged to see their abuser not only, get away with it, but also flourish. All the while, the victim's life has been corrupted and destroyed.

15 RecommendShareFlag

kelleher commented April 22

K

kelleher

vermont

April 22

perhaps I can assist. A victim is justly outraged to see their abuser not only, get away with it, but also flourish. All the while, the victim's life has been corrupted and destroyed.

15 RecommendShareFlag

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

These are some very serious allegations against Mr. Bailey.

But why is he instantly cancelled by his publisher when he furiously denies they have any basis in truth? It is now commonplace that an accusation is tantamount to a conviction.  How did we descend into McCarthyism so easily?

Additionally, Mr. Roth is arguably the preeminent literary figure of the late 20th century. This is his definitive biography. Is there a scholarly interest that also needs to be considered?

143 RecommendShareFlag

9 REPLIES

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@Sparky I like many of Roth’s novels, of which I’ve read nearly all, some repeatedly, but it would never occur to me to label him the “pre-eminent literary figure of the late twentieth-century”. He was no better a writer than, say, John Updike or John Le Carre, which is fine, but nowhere near, say, Saul Bellow or Milan Kundera or James Dickey. In any case, consider the sequence of events: An anonymous accusation is forwarded to the biographer and then he replies directly to the accuser. Doesn’t this strongly suggest self-admitted guilt? If the accusation had been fabricated, how would the biographer have known to whom to reply? Thus I would call this more than an allegation.

13 RecommendShareFlag

Fred commented April 22

F

Fred

Chicago

April 22

@Sparky  “McCarthyism” was government persecution of innocent people because of their past political beliefs. This was a private sector publisher making a business decision.

As far as “scholarly interest,” that’s determined by the market, not one single publisher in a huge world of options.  With the attendant publicity, this book may now sell well beyond its original Roth, and apparently Bailey, fan base.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Lin D. commented April 22

L

Lin D.

Boston, MA

April 22

@Sparky

But is it Roth’s “definitive biography” if a large part of his fairly well known misogynistic behavior is so minimized? I wonder.

11 RecommendShareFlag

KathleenI commented April 22

K

KathleenI

Oakland

April 22

Offenders seriously defend themselves even when guilty.

3 RecommendShareFlag

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

@Fred

Mr. Bailey was given extraordinary access to Mr. Roth. And it will be quite difficult for the books to sell well when they refuse to print more copies.

RecommendShareFlag

DC commented April 22

D

DC

Maine

April 22

@Sparky

It's not McCarthyism when the vast majority of women are telling the truth. But leery of policemen, fearful of damage to career (in male-dominated fields), they tell their close friends. The truth comes out later either when it appears they have no choice or because they feel emboldened to do so by others. Then they are looked at askance because they haven't been more "forthright." Society has already shown women what happens to being forthright, so women being also human, do what they can to preserve their lives. Sadly, in the majority of cases, they bury an assault and attempt to go on with their lives.

Make no mistake, Bailey is a serial abuser. His "serious" biography should be sidelined until the man has answered for his crimes. Period. So I agree with Norton. No author is above the law.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

@Jake

I meant to say preeminent American literary figure.

And while these things are certainly debatable, I suspect more scholars and critics would say Roth was the most important American writer of the late 20th century than any other. I don't even think it would be particularly close.

3 RecommendShareFlag

Jake commented April 22

J

Jake

Wisconsin

April 22

@Sparky Re: "Additionally, Mr. Roth is arguably the preeminent literary figure of the late 20th century. This is his definitive biography. Is there a scholarly interest that also needs to be considered?" My earlier comment tells you that I disagree with the major premise of this apparent attempt at a syllogism (someone else above disagrees with the minor premise), but putting that consideration (or these considerations) aside, your conclusion reminds me of when, many decades ago, I went searching my college library for the one Hemingway novel I hadn't yet read. I couldn't find it because a disproportionately huge infestation of Hemingway biographies had been indiscriminately mixed on the shelf with the relatively few books actually authored by Hemingway.  Vexed, I sought out the city library, which turned out to have a much more balanced perspective on the matter. So is there "a scholarly interested that also needs to be considered"? I'm sure there is at least a pseudo-scholarly interest, but I'm dubious about the extent it needs to be indulged.

2 RecommendShareFlag

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

@Lin D.

Then let other biographers or scholars take issue with it and produce their own books and articles. Isn't that how scholarly debate works?

1 RecommendShareFlag

just another guy in commented April 22

J

just another guy in

Ohio

April 22

I read the book. It was very well written. Roth seems to have had a bit of what could be described as a sex addiction. Adultery can be the result of giving in to sexual desires that are beyond what a marriage might be fulfilling. Or perhaps some people who commit adultery are simply horrible persons who are keeping dark secrets? Bailey was given access to a woman who had been Roth's long-time lover. She told him about her long affair with Roth. Then, according to this biography, when Roth and Claire Bloom divorced, his lover thought that he would want to marry her. She thought that after she divorced her husband then Roth would want to be with her. But he didn't. He apparently lusted for the dangers and risks of adultery. Once she was available for an "honest" relationship he lost interest. It was the adultery that turned him on it would seem.

Blake Bailey seems to have also been willing to take risks, too according to these allegations. And now that these accusations are being made public he's getting dropped faster than Al Franken, Charlie Rose, and others of that ilk. His agent dropped him. His publisher stopped printing his book which has been a best-seller. Yesterday Bailey deleted his Twitter account. Of course at this point these are only allegations but it would appear to be crystal clear that a book which once seemed destined to win major literary prizes could possibly suffer the ignominy of being allowed to go out of print as Blake Bailey fades into obscurity. Sad.

19 RecommendShareFlag

Beth commented April 22

B

Beth

Boston

April 22

I'm happy to not read this "brilliant" book.   Thank you, W.W. Norton.  Enough!

77 RecommendShareFlag

5 REPLIES

David commented April 22

D

David

Virginia

April 22

@Beth But suppose you were deeply interested in Philip Roth, and the book was unavailable, pulled from the library, etc. all because of judgment about the morality of the writer of the book. How would you feel then?

Suppose the book in question was a bestseller about climate change?

Or, given the moral judgment of author's lives, how would you feel if Saudi Arabia pulled the sale of works by Oscar Wilde based on his life?

15 RecommendShareFlag

Andrew commented April 22

A

Andrew

NY

April 22

@Beth right on, sister! Down with the free press! Down with free speech! Let’s only allow good, wholesome people with whom we agree, and who have preferably been vetted by NPR, to publish books. Enough is right! I am so tired of all of these books coming out that other people may think they have the right to read. Frankly, people simply  thinking that they have the right to read a book before I decide whether it is acceptable for them is terribly troubling to me. Eat. Pray. Drink. Live. Repeat.

22 RecommendShareFlag

Sparky commented April 22

S

Sparky

NYC

April 22

@Beth

Of course you're free not to read this book or any other.

But does it bother you that a major publisher cancels the book about a hugely influential literary figure on the basis  of mere allegations?

12 RecommendShareFlag

DD commented April 22

D

DD

Baltimore

April 22

@Beth Yes, but I *do* want to read it. And yes, I'm a woman who is, if the charges are true, appalled by Blake Bailey's behavior. But I also don't want WW Norton telling me what I can and cannot read--or deciding arbitrarily that anyone accused of anything without a full hearing will not be published. That's terrifying.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Kyoto commented April 22

K

Kyoto

Planet earth

April 22

@David

Oscar Wilde's books aren't sold in Saudi. :)

Why would you need to buy books in Saudi??

1 RecommendShareFlag

DD commented April 22

D

DD

Baltimore

April 22

@Beth Yes, but I *do* want to read it. And yes, I'm a woman who is, if the charges are true, appalled by Blake Bailey's behavior. But I also don't want WW Norton telling me what I can and cannot read--or deciding arbitrarily that anyone accused of anything without a full hearing will not be published. That's terrifying.

9 RecommendShareFlag

Kyoto commented April 22

K

Kyoto

Planet earth

April 22

@David

Oscar Wilde's books aren't sold in Saudi. :)

Why would you need to buy books in Saudi??

1 RecommendShareFlag

zarathustra commented April 22

Z

zarathustra

richmond

April 22

This sounds like it might be the plot of one of Mr. Roth's own novels. Nathan Zuckerman gets a frantic call from his 'authorized' biographer saying that the book has been pulled by the publisher for sexual deviance reasons. At first Zuckerman goes on the offense to defend his biographer because he desperately wants the book published only to be whacked by women from his own past who accuse him of even worse things. Ah Philip! Hope you are up there hard at work.

32 RecommendShareFlag

Socrates commented April 22

Socrates

Socrates

Downtown Verona, NJ

April 22

"The controversy that has engulfed Mr. Bailey erupted in part because of the publicity he has received for his Roth biography, which led some of the women accusing him of misconduct to come forward.

Some of them have noted that they were bothered not only by the praise lavished on Mr. Bailey, but by the way, in his Roth biography, that he seemed to excuse the writer’s misogyny. Several literary critics seized on the fact that in the biography, Mr. Bailey brushed off Mr. Roth’s mistreatment of women."

-------

Another Icarus flies too close to the sun and falls into the sea.

53 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

A. Mark commented April 22

A

A. Mark

Brooklyn

April 22

@Socrates I don't remember Icarus engaging in a pattern of sexual assault, but sure

11 RecommendShareFlag

ds7771 commented April 22

D

ds7771

MA

April 22

This is an example of unmitigated cancel culture, failure to separate the despicable man from his professional output.  Seems a shame to punish Philip Roth and his collective admirers/critics from access to the only Roth hand-picked and sanctioned biography.  No one else will ever get to see the underlying papers that the Roth Estate continues to guard as closely held state secrets.

How about a different approach: WW Norton should continue to publish, but pledge to donate the proceeds to causes that champion victims of sexual assault? Obviously they should also tear up their contract with Bailey (Im sure it has a morals clause) and stop spending on marketing/relations.  They have all the free marketing they need now.

31 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Anna commented April 22

A

Anna

new york

April 22

@ds7771 ... I feel like not publishing an alleged (but pretty likely based on the corroborated accounts) rapist is not cancel culture? Feels more like respecting the victims of this creep. For something to be considered "cancel culture" it needs to be unsubstantiated. This, unfortunately, is not.

3 RecommendShareFlag

FNA commented April 22

F

FNA

Providence, RI

April 22

Norton's actions are unjustified. Why should promoting a book hinge on approving of the author's moral character and behavior? Should Ezra Pound's books be withdrawn because he was a fascist? Moreover, whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

29 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Celia commented April 22

C

Celia

California

April 22

What happened to not raping woman and girls?

14 RecommendShareFlag

FNA commented April 22

F

FNA

Providence, RI

April 22

@Celia

Again, what happened to innocent until proven guilty? And what happened to separating the literary merit of a book from the moral worth of its author?

2 RecommendShareFlag

I have had it commented April 22

I

I have had it

observing

April 22

I wonder if non famous people get called out for their behavior?  Either way I better order the book before they are burned. Yes I can read his book without endorsing his behavior. Stop thinking for me.

191 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Rick Morris commented April 22

R

Rick Morris

Montreal

April 22

@I have had it

If they're burned there might be replacements. I'm tempted to think Arcade Publishing might want to take a look at it - that's who published Woody Allen's latest tome, when that was also ceremoniously dropped.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Andrew commented April 22

A

Andrew

Washington D.C.

April 22

@I have had it "I wonder if non famous people get called out for their behavior?" Last time I checked, prisons were not full of only famous people.

Also, there is a difference between the government burning a book and a company deciding not to use their resources to publish it.

12 RecommendShareFlag

PS commented April 22

P

PS

Massachusetts

April 22

I heard an interview with Bailey the other day and he was asked about Roth's choice to write about family and friends in terrible ways.  Bailey said something along the lines of, "If you aren't willing to expose/write about the others in your life, then you can't call yourself a writer".  It was an obnoxious comment, imo, a stilted and limited idea of what writers bring to the world.  Any interest in Roth's bio was stilled there, since such a character is not my cup of tea.  With so little time and so many books, why that?  Now, reading this, the irony of Bailey's situation is a bit precious.

But...that said...as complex as it might be...innocent until proven guilty, always.  Cancel culture is dangerous business.

17 RecommendShareFlag

Lunifer commented April 22

L

Lunifer

New York, NY

April 22

Good for Norton! These "entitled", narcissistic and sexist men must be stopped; there are too many of them and of course they always deny, deny, deny. Time to face the consequences.

123 RecommendShareFlag

Trianna commented April 22

T

Trianna

BFE

April 22

Publishers, shippers, etc should not have control over content in any way - especially based only on "accusations".

I am getting pretty tired of this stupidity.  Just put the books out there and let them flop or not as the market dictates.

37 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

A. Mark commented April 22

A

A. Mark

Brooklyn

April 22

@Trianna But we're talking about private enterprise here. A company, like W.W. Norton, has the right to refuse to engage in a practice that they believe will damage their reputation (like, say, publishing a book by an author who has multiple assault allegations against him.)

13 RecommendShareFlag

Bridget Watts commented April 22

B

Bridget Watts

ROCHESTER

April 22

@Trianna Whatever the truth of this situation may be, having "control over content" is exactly what being a publisher means. A publisher is an entity (an individual or corporation or whatever) that invests money to find content, edit it, put it in a form suitable for sharing with the public, and market and distribute it.

Publishers are constantly deciding which content they will publish and what not.

16 RecommendShareFlag

Anna commented April 22

A

Anna

new york

April 22

@Trianna They are private entities and have the right to do whatever they please. Obviously they know more about this situation than we do. They have no obligation to share any information they may possess with us. With the people that they actively defend, their pulling of the book is quite telling.

2 RecommendShareFlag

HK commented April 22

H

HK

Hastings on Hudson, NY

April 22

Replace this photo! It's a serious editorial mistake.

It's the biographer who is accused of sexual assault. Not Philip Roth.

74 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

Joe commented April 22

J

Joe

NYC

April 22

@HK it's the cover of the book. seems apt to me.

5 RecommendShareFlag

HKGuy commented April 22

H

HKGuy

Hell's Kitchen

April 22

@HK The article is about the book. So the book cover is the art accompanying the article.

1 RecommendShareFlag

mja commented April 22

M

mja

LA, Calif

April 22

@HK

Or re-issue the book with the author's picture on the cover - then ban it!

RecommendShareFlag

B. commented April 22

B

B.

Washington D.C.

April 22

Norton *forwarded* an email from a woman claiming Bailey raped her *to Bailey*?? And then the victim was contacted directly by Bailey to refute it, claiming he was too "adored" to endure such allegations? Absolute shame on Norton and Ms. Reidhead.

252 RecommendShareFlag

Khalil commented April 22

K

Khalil

New Orleans

April 22

Creeps writing about creeps! What a world!

186 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Trawna commented April 22

T

Trawna

NYC

April 22

@Khalil That my stbx’s first gift to me was the Complete Philip Roth should have been my first clue to stbx’s deep misogyny. Layer upon layer of creep! Shudder.

5 RecommendShareFlag

Michel Forest commented April 22

M

Michel Forest

Montréal

April 22

I am currently at page 500 of Blake Bailey's fascinating biography of Philip Roth. I was looking forward to continue reading it this afternoon.

This feels like stepping into an empty elevator shaft...

9 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Ben commented April 22

B

Ben

NY

April 22

And that's just from being unable to finish a book! Wonder how the alleged victims feel for the presumed grooming, and rapes.

7 RecommendShareFlag

Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

nytimes.com/subscription

Site Index

Site Information Navigation

© 2021 The New York Times Company

NYTCoContact UsAccessibilityWork with usAdvertiseT Brand StudioYour Ad ChoicesPrivacy PolicyTerms of ServiceTerms of SaleSite MapHelpSubscriptions

You’ve reached your limit of free articles.

Get unlimited access for €0.50 a week.

Limited time offer.

€2.00 €0.50/week

Billed as €8.00 €2.00 every 4 weeks for one year

SUBSCRIBE NOW

You can cancel anytime.