The world lost one of the greatest contemporary English-language writers last Saturday (11th) when VS Naipaul passed away at 85 in his home in London. The Nobel Literature laureate and Booker Prize-winner was a formidable and fearless writer who pulled no punches in his writing, which included both novels and non-fiction that mostly focused on the developing world. Africa, India, and the Caribbean, including his native Trinidad, were all harshly criticized by him in various books, which struck some people as racist and an apologist for colonialism. Naipaul was also open about the racism he experienced in England, where he went to university at 18 after graduating from high school in Trinidad on a scholarship and lived from then on. As great a writer as he was, as a person, he had some serious flaws such as a strong sense of arrogance, and cruelty towards his first wife and his mistress.
For me, it was his non-fiction books on India (India: A Million Mutinies Now) and the Islamic world that were the most memorable. Besides the scope of his books, it was the bluntness and validity of Naipaul’s critiques of those countries that struck me. Maybe partly because of the fact he was not white and was from a developing country himself, but Naipaul wrote things about the developing world that hardly any other Western writer would dare to. That he wrote a trilogy of non-fiction books about India, where his ancestors came from, that were unsympathetic and unsparing in their criticism of poverty, squalor, and disorder, was a testament to his fearlessness and lack of fear in expressing his thoughts and opinions. Besides the Caribbean, Africa, and India, Naipaul also wrote about the Islamic world in his non-fiction book Beyond Belief, visiting countries like Indonesia, Iran and Pakistan, which he was, not surprisingly, critical of. While some people saw this as mocking and contemptuous of the third world, I feel that Naipaul’s blunt opinions were driven not by arrogance or a superiority complex, but a sense of disappointment and a desire for the developing world to improve.
As someone who is also from Trinidad, I know that Naipaul was not very well liked by many locals because they felt that he was out of hand in his criticisms. But I think he was right in a lot of his criticisms, such as how as a society Trinidad has failed to progress, and I think deep down, many of his critics probably agree with Naipaul.
Naipaul was involved in a few public feuds, including one with the poet Derek Walcott, another Caribbean literary giant and Nobel Literary Prize laureate that saw the latter write a very malicious poem about Naipaul. Another was with American writer Paul Theroux, who was wounded enough when Naipaul suddenly ended their decades-long friendship to write an entire book about his friendship and falling out with Naipaul called Sir Vidia’s Shadow.
A lot of testimonies have been written about Naipaul and none fail to mention both his greatness and his conflicting legacy. Whatever one thinks of his personality or work, it can’t be denied that there might never be another like Va Naipaul.