I finished the book and it left a sort of bitter taste in my mouth. I am interested in two things, the speed of the novel and how it blossoms (sorry to use this word, maybe "expands"...) and Naipaul’s clever portrayal of Salim (manipulative grasp on readers conception). I respected Salim very much at the beginning of the novel, I think I wrote something to that effect on the blog- but I was conflating the writer with the narrator. At the end of the book I think Salim is despicable, human, but penned in, not so wise and I dislike the sexual depictions throughout the book (because of their violent cast), but I am curious about Naipaul and who he imagines his readers to be. I was very intrigued by his style, his ideas and his wit, but I must say after finishing the book I feel a bit distanced, like someone had perhaps spit on me. This is, I imagine actually the benefit of effective writing, but I keep stumbling across "shocking" writing and it has started to make me wonder about its values, what the leading forces are behind it. I don’t know what to make of it until I read another Naipaul.
No comments:
Post a Comment