The Painful Sum of Things

On V. S. Naipaul

Suh Se Ok, Person. 1998, ink on mulberry paper. 24.3 × 35.8". Courtesy of the artist and Lehmann Maupin, New York and Hong Kong.

The writer V. S. Naipaul died on August 11, 2018, at the age of 85. The correspondence below took place over the following week.

Dear Pankaj,

I saw the news about Naipaul. I was expecting it: I had heard he was seriously ailing as far back as 2015, and since then I have returned intermittently to his books, rereading several, with a strange uneasiness or sense of preparation.

Now that he has died, the preparation feels insufficient: the uneasiness remains. I suspect you feel it as well: how to speak about a writer whose work has been meaningfulin my case, profoundly so; I could not imagine my life without itas well as a source of frustration or real pain. I have admired Naipaul as much as I have found him difficult to admire, a murky admixture that I find difficult to explain or clarify, and which I find with no other writer to anything like the same degree. (Edward Said referred to his “pain and admiration,” and dissonant phrases of that kind are scattered through appreciations of his work.) I know, too, that you knew him, which I did not. I don’t know if that makes him more or less difficult to appraise.

Perhaps it would have been better for me to work all this out before he died, but since it gives an occasion like no other, I thought I’d write you.

Yours,

Nikil


Dear Nikil,

Yes, I thought several times in recent years while hearing news of his ill health: I should write something, put together a more complex record of my debt to him, and also of the ways in which his vision was constricted and constricting. For many aspiring writers from modest backgrounds, in the West as well as in Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean, he was the first writer who made us think that we, too, had something to say, and that we, too, had an intellectual claim upon the world. He was a great enabler in this sense, starting the underconfident and less resourceful among us on long journeys. In societies and cultures where the idea of a whole life devoted to writing and thinking is confined to the privileged members of the population, Naipaul’s examplethat of a man making himself a writer through sheer effortwas a great boost. His novelistic gifts were so great, endowing even very minor characters in A House for Mr. Biswas and A Bend in the River with dignity. His harsh critiques of India, in particular, and postcolonial societies, in general, came

More from Issue 33

Issue 33 Overtime

The question of who gets to live, and how, has always been the realm of politics.

Issue 33 Overtime
The Korean Peace Process
Issue 33 Overtime

He behaves like a man who believes that history is not over, even if established ways of picturing historical change on the…

Issue 33 Overtime
Rededication
Issue 33 Overtime
Everybody Knows
Issue 33 Overtime

An American who leaves for war never leaves America. The war that is America, rather, comes to the American.

Issue 33 Overtime
Conversations with Bongjun
Issue 33 Overtime

Children are malleable and must be cultivated carefully and deliberately, like plants.

Issue 33 Overtime
What Good Is Love?
Issue 33 Overtime

Zimbabwe is a place whose writing cannot but be both global and ambivalent about globalization.

Issue 33 Overtime
We Can Still Think Our Own Thoughts
Issue 33 Overtime

Maybe this is how Great Men read books: like boys.

Issue 33 Overtime

More by this Author

Issue 21 Throwback

Unionization had been rare in the industry because it cultivated “an aura of gentility which leads to self-deception.”

March 9, 2015
Issue 10 Self-Improvement

The crack-up of the country’s wealthiest, most populous state has been long in the making.

Issue 15 Amnesty
The Long Eighties
July 27, 2016
The Turning of Backs
January 13, 2008

Haynes is drowning in his film school education, just as his audience is drowning in allusions.