you can't go home again, even if it was just your imagined home. ( )

Having never been to India, I feel bad criticizing a travel writer about their perceptions of the country. Unfortunately, I found V.S. Naipaul's An Area of Darkness: A Discovery of India to be disparaging, hypercritical, and persnickety.

I had previously read Naipaul's A House for Mr. Biswas and Miguel Street, two books I enjoyed despite having some of the same criticisms. I had also read several criticisms that point out Naipaul's pro-British, pro-colonialist attitudes. Those attitudes were on full display in this treatment of India. Every person he meets is portrayed as a one-dimensional beggar who is stuck in their misguided, antiquated ways.

In the book, Naipaul acts like a man staring out a window, casting judgments on the world around him. Reading his negative quibbles was quite a chore. Naipaul is a gifted writer and his prose can be lovely, but this wasn't enough to save the book from his constant grumbling about the uneducated people around him.

In this book, it is easy to see why many critics have found disfavor with Naipaul. The racism he shows here is less apparent than in A Bend in the River or in some of his essays, but his colonialist attitudes are on full display. ( )

I found this one of the more enjoyable Naipaul books with his searing description of India and the Indians, and the poetic writing. There were many memorable phrases eg. 'sensationally unwashed people'. This phrase alone is indicative of Naipaul's brutal description of India, some of which seem funny and comical but is in reality, a harsh indictment of the country. He explains how the caste system leads to India's lack of progress. Enlightening for a foreigner like me, but understandably distasteful for a citizen of the country. There were some difficult chapters. In the end, India remains an area of darkness to him, and to us. ( )

'An Area of Darkness' is a masterpiece of travel writing and personal memoir. Although it dates back as far as the 1960s, it is still an enormously valuable book that serves as a model for anything and everything travel-related since. ( )

If one can imagine the difficulties Naipaul suffers now in a period in which the principle of 'free speech' is being eroded by nice white people to 'you can say what you like as long as we agree with it', it speaks buckets for this book that he experienced the 'censorship of the offended' the very moment it appeared. Banned in India and still banned over fifty years later.

This sits badly with me, not only because of the issue of free speech, but also because he didn't look at all at the side of India which is truly dark. He could so easily have talked of the violence and exploitation, but he left it unsaid. He spoke only of what he saw and how he felt. A travelogue filled with angst, not only towards the India which so upset him, but also towards himself. No doubt one learns a lot about one's own inadequacies in such a situation and Naipaul doesn't shrink from them one bit. I don't really understand why people who see this as only a personal critique of India, don't understand this. Neither writer nor subject come off well in this encounter. There are only losers, but why should it be any other way?

For the rest, please go here: https://alittleteaalittlechat.wordpress.com/2016/04/05/an-area-of-darkness-by-vs... ( )