NAIPAUL'S INDIA AND MINE

Author(s): Nissim Ezekiel

Source: Journal of South Asian Literature, Vol. 11, No. 3/4, NISSIM EZEKIEL ISSUE (Spring,
Summer 1976), pp. 193-205
Published by: Asian Studies Center, Michigan State University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40873471 .
Accessed: 16/06/2014 17:35

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Asian Studies Center, Michigan State University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Journal of South Asian Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NissimEzekiel

INDIAANDMINE*
NAIPAUL'S

To beginat the beginning for thosewhodo not know: Mr.V, S. Naipaul

published a book a few monthsago entitledAnAreaof Darkness[AndréDeutsch,
1964], withthe explanatory sub-heading "AnExperience of India.11 It describes
a year's stay in this country. Aftera dramaticopeningchapter,whichnarrates
howthe authorwas harassedbythe Bombay customsofficials, he tells us some
important things about himselfin relation to India. It was the backgroundof
his childhood,the countryfrom whichhis grandfather hadmigrated,to settle
downas an indentured labourerin Trinidad. ThefamilybecameWestIndian
but retainedsomeof its Indiancustomsandwaysof thinking,retainedin
particularobjects broughtfromIndia. Thesewere"cherishedbecausethey
camefromIndia" but theywereallowedto disintegratewithoutregret.
This kindof sterile continuityMr.Naipaulrecognizesas typicallyIndian,
a continuity withoutcultivation. Evenat this early stage in the bookwe
recognizeMr.Naipaul's special gift for the telling detail andthe penetrating
observationbased on it. Wesee the pointof his mentioning the grimy,tattered
string-bed,the strawmat,the brass vessels, the wooden printingblocks, the
coarse, oily books,the ruinedharmonium, the brightlycolouredpicturesof
deities, the images,the stick of sandalwood.
ForMr.Naipaulas a child, the India of suchartifacts andof the
personsrelated to them,a fewof whom he portrays,was "featureless." It
was an area of darkness. Afterhis journeyhe foundthat "something of dark-
ness remains,in thoseattitudes, thosewaysof thinkingand seeing, whichare
no longermine." His darknessis peopled,packedwitha kindof life whichis
death,a negation,distortionanddegradationfromwhichhe is glad finally to
escape. He says at the endof the bookthat he is sorryto havehad the
experience,that it has brokenhis life in two. Eventhe menialsof Beirut,
first stop of his returnflight, seemto him"whole"compared to the caricature
andmockery of all that is humanwhichhe observedin India.
Thegrandfather, characteristicallyIndian, "carriedhis village with
from
hin]11 UttarPradesh to Trinidad,joining otherslike himin re-creating
his ageless environmentin anothersetting. Thegenerationsthat followed
couldnot do the same. Theyacceptedthe WestIndies but continuedfor long
as Indiansin a multi-racialsociety, givingthe matterno furtherthought.
Mr.Naipauloutlines preciselywhatit meantto live in that state of innocence,
relying"on the old, Indiandivisions, meaningless thoughthese had become."
Thefamilywas HinduBrahmin, the outsideworldwas not. Thefirst experiences
of boyhood involvedsavouringthe differencewithoutquestioningit.

*FromImprint(1965) andNewWritingin India* a Penguinanthologyedited by

AdidJussawalla(1974). Reprinted
by permission of the authorand the editors.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 194 -

Butevenbeforethe questioningbegan,a temperamental advantagewas

alreadysecure* Mr.Naipaul"wasbornan unbeliever"and in addition"remained
almosttotally ignorantof Hinduism."Examining himselfwiththat peculiar
honestyof his, he writesthatwhatsurvivedof Hinduism in himwas a "sense
of the differenceof people . , . a vaguersense of caste, and a horrorof the
unclean."
Turningthese Hinduweaponsagainst Hindus,he winshis spectacular
victories, metaphoricallyspeaking,against the Hinduwayof life. He speaks
withthe virulentsharpnessof one whohas "contracted out." Theattenuation
of his childhoodculturebeganin the familywhenhe was six or seven,was
complete whenhe was fourteen0 A fewambivalent attitudesof courseremained,
andMr«, them
Naipaulacknowledges freely0 But essentially the older, Hindu-
traditional,Brahmin side of himwas dead or existed in a newway» Thenewer
andtruerside of his naturekickedagainstwhathe noticedin India, a multitude
of evils flowingfrom"the smugness . . . the imperviousness to criticism,the
refusalto see, the double-talkanddouble-think „. . "
Thatwas the monstrous reality compared to the India whichwas an area of
his imagination, compared again to the India of the newspapers andbooks,the
political speeches and the cultural exchanges„ The apprenticeship for reject-
ing this Monstrous India, as it be
may called, was long and radical. If the
Indiancommunity in the WestIndies seemedself-defeatingly static, the Gujarati
andSindhimerchants whocameout to settle thereappeared"foreign." From Mr.
Naipaul, the word does not soundchauvinisticbecausehis cultural base is
not nationalbut humanist, not a territoryor evena culturebut a complex of
values whichcuts across all historical divisionSo Of the Gujaratisand
Sindhis,he writes, "Theylived enclosedlives of a narrowness whichI
consideredasphyxiating*Theyweredevotedto their work,the making of money;
theyseldomwentout; their pallid women weresecluded; andall daytheir
housesscreechedwithmorbidIndianfilmsongs0 Theycontributed nothingto
the society, nothingevento the Indiancommunity« They were reputed among us
to be sharpbusinessmeno " Moreover, maintained their static relationswith
they
India, built up nonewiththeir newenvironment
Thepicutreis a clear one and its justice cannotbe denied,exceptthat
it wouldbe equally true of mostotherIndiancommunities.Considered as a
whole,and allowingalwaysfor individualexceptions(a small percentage,but
runninginto hugenumbers*) the communalwayof life in India is hide-
bound,inimicalto personaldevelopment, fantasticallyignorantand prejudiced
aboutthe worldoutsidethe community, and hopelesslyuncreativein every
conceivablearea of lifeo
MyquarrelwithMr«Naipaul,whichI hopeto conductin a waythatwill
be understandable to him,is not becauseof these condemnatory of
judgements
his, so fiercely, so blazinglyexpressed«,Myquarrel is that Mr0Naipaulis
so oftenuninvolved andunconcerned= Hewritesexclusivelyfromthe pointof
viewof his owndilemma, alienation fromhis mixedback-
his temperamental
ground, his choice and his escape. Thattemperamentis not universal,not even

*"In a countrylike India, so vast andso populous,the individualswhoform

the exceptionsmaywell runinto millions," Nirad C* Chaudhuri,TheAuto-
biographyof an UnknownIndiarlo

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 195 -

widelydistributed,that choice is not opento all, the escape for mostis not
fromthe community but into it. To forgetthis is to be whollysubjective,
whollyself-righteous,to thinkfirst and last of one1s ownexpectations,
one's extremediscomfort.If onlyMr.Naipaulcould haverealized howutterly
unreasonablethis attitude is! It nearlyundermines the validity of his
arguments.
"To be in Bombaywas to be exhausted. Themoistheat sappedenergyand
will ..." Fromthat startingpoint, nothingcan be done; the evidenceof
Indianbureaucraticstupiditybecomessuspect. In A Passage to India, which
Mr.Naipaulquotesfromadmiringly, Adelaaccuses Aziz of havingtried to rape
her. Later, she confessesthat her behaviourwas like that of certainwomen
whohonestlybelieve that theyhavereceivedoffersof marriagewhennonewere
intended. Forstertoo makesmuch,and rightly,of the heat and the exhaustion,
but his bookis a novel. He has to makethe situation plausible, bothpsycho-
logically and circumstantially.Mr. Naipaul's is a travel book,thoughan
unorthodox one. Dealingwiththe samematerial,he wouldprobablyrelate how
an IndiantooktwoEnglishladies to see somecaves and tried to rape one of
themthere. It wouldnot be an impossiblestory,onlyan appallingone.
Mr.Naipaulsuggestsover and over again that appallingstories don't
appal Indians. He keepsrunning into obtuse,unsympathetic Indians,bland,
silly and of
incapable understanding his simplestproblems. It maybe true,
but somehow one feels that Mr.Naipaul's aloof, sullen, aggressivemanner
contributed to his difficulties, accentuatedthem. Whatis to be thought of
a manwhowrites, "I stood in the shadeof Churchgate Stationand debated
whether I had it in meto cross the exposedstreet to the TouristOffice?"
Mr.Naipaulwill no doubtbe bitterlyscornfulif it is hintedthat some
of his experiencesseemself-flagellatory. Hewill take it as furtherevidence
of the Indianunwillingness to see. But I amnot in fact doubtinghis veracity,
onlyhis approachtowardsthe discoveryof the truth. He makesthe truth
aboutIndia seemsimple« I don't believe it is simple. Honestlyand frankly,
he exposeshis state of mind. I cannotbelieve that in sucha state of mind,
truthcan be discovered. ThetruthaboutMr.Naipaul,certainly,but not the
wholetruthaboutIndia. He asserts loudlythat in India for the first time
in his life he was one of the crowd,and that it upsethimto be so»
What,in God's name,is thereto be upsetaboutthat, unless one has
abandoned humilityaltogether? "Therewas nothingin myappearanceor dress
to distinguishmefromthe crowdeternallyhurrying into ChurchgateStation."
Why should there be? In what way is it reassuring to be differentin dress
andappearance?"In Trinidadto be an Indianwas to be distinctive . . .
To be an Indianin Englandwas distinctive . . . Nowin Bombay I entereda
shop or a restaurantand awaited a of
special quality response." Is this
so much as intelligent, is it fair! "Andtherewas nothing. It was like
beingdeniedpart of myreality. Againandagain I was caught. I was face-
less. I mightsink withouta trace into that Indiancrowd« I hadbeenmade
byTrinidadand England;recognitionof mydifferencewas necessaryto me. I
felt the needto imposemyself,and didn't know how."

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 196 -

This fear, this anxiety,this feverishinsistenceon beingdifferent,

this frequentassertionof whatandwherehe hadbeen"made,"this irrational
urgeto "impose11 and the rage at beingunableto do so, this constitutesthe
mirrorMr.Naipaulholds up to India. This is the sourceof his curses, the
cause of his ravingand ranting. I hastento add that it does not, for meat
least, decreasethe impactof his criticism. Perhapsit is evenincreased.
Mr.Naipaul's bookhas the moralauthorityof hysteria,the interestandvalue
of a sufferingimpotence."I was too tired to go back, to talk in voice whose
absurdityI felt whenever I openedmymouth.11
A patheticratherthana tragic situation. UnfortunateMr.Naipaul.
Unfortunate I
India. Thatmuch feel. Butnow: Howright Mr. Naipaul. How
wrongIndia. Andthat is what,no doubt,he expectsthe readerto feel. It
is a pity. For I sharemostof his ideas and problems.But I see India in
myownway,a wayI wouldlike to take this opportunity of clarifyingand
developingby contrastingit withMr.Naipaul's.
Notthat mywayof seeing India is important, least of all to Mr,
Naipaul. He is a brilliant andsuccessfulnovelistwhosewritingI greatly
enjoyand admire» I know himpersonally,too, a little. A friendintroduced
himto mesoonafter his arrival in India. Hewas friendlyandopenbut said
nothingabouthis first painfulencounters withIndianlife, whichhe describes
in his book. Thenhe wroteto mefromSrinagarto ask if I knewanyonein
Bombay willing to adopta straydog (or was it a cat?) he has rescuedfromill-
treatment andstarvation. When I methima secondtime,at a partyin Bombay,
he freelyexpressedhis revulsionagainst certainaspects of Indianbehaviour
Since thoseaspects are revolting,I hadno difficultyin agreeingwithhim.
Thethirdmeeting wasmorethana year later, in London,again at a
party. He left early. Theotherspresenttalkedaboutthe distinguished
writer's conversationalperformance.I was struckby the fact that he had
arousedtheir maliceo It was not the first timeI hadoccasionto reflect
that a hypersensitivepersonis quite capable of trampling
on the sensitivities
of otherpeople.
So, in Naipaul's India, "the clearkwill not bringyoua glass of water
evenif youfaint." In myIndia, a clerk will do virtuallyanything foryou
if he is treatedhumanely.I know thoseclerks, their their
background,
problems, their conditionsof work,their income,howtheyare transported
to andfromtheir places of work,their educationaland cultural limitations,
their sense of dignityandworth,their humanity, in short. Mr.Naipaulis
bothrightandwrong aboutthemas he is on many otherpointsin his book.
I admitthat for Indianreadersthe core of rightnessin his complaint oughtto
be takenseriously. It is morevaluable thanhis recklessgeneralization,his
grotesqueexaggeration, his nagging,irritable manner.Onthe otherhand,why
shouldhe be allowedto get awaywithall that? It wouldonlyconfirm and
deepenhis contempt for the "spiritual humility"of Indians- the innerquotes
of "spiritual" are his.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 197 -

Mr.Naipaulshowslittle humility,spiritual or other. His responsewhen

he meetsan American lady duringhis pilgrimageto Amarnathis, "Sheattracted
me. But I had grown tired of meetingyoungAmericans in unlikelyplaces . . .
thereweretoo many of them," The"Easternhospitality"theyreceive outrages
his sense of propriety. He accuses themof "exactinga personalrepayment for
a nationalgenerosity,"whichis the mostcaddishanti-American sentiment I
haveever read.
Theladywas of an unbalanced,disagreeablyfoolish kind. Mr,Naipaul
couldnot havemetanyotherkindof American lady in India. If he had, he
wouldnot havewrittenabouther. This piece of femalefantasysuits his pen
ideally. She is blind to the squalor of India, anda "seeker,"attracted
to Hinduphilosophy.Observing that "herbreastsweregoodand full" he
remarks that she wouldnot "remaina seekerfor long." It turnedout that he
was right,but he does not realize that it was not worthbeingrightc The
unavoidableimplicationthat she representsthe typical American woman in India
does no credit to Mr.Naipaul. Thatlong storyabouther is amusing in itself,
but in a bookpurporting to exploreIndia, it is worthlesSe
Similarly,thereis a long storyaboutRamnath, clerk in a government
department, whois happyuntil Malhotrajoins it. Malhotrais an Indianfrom
East Africa.,"educatedat an Englishuniversity." Hedictates a letter to
Ramnath whichthe latter takes downin shorthand but does not typeout. In
Mr.Naipaul's story,thereis also Hiralal, the typist. Ramnath passes on the
shorthand notesto Hiralal whois too busyto typefromthemthat day. Malhotra
ordersRamnath to typeall letters dictated to him. Ramnath says it is not his
job, he is a steno, not a typist. Malhotrainsists. Ramnath keepssilent,
takes moredictation, passes on the notes to Hiralal. Malhotra,furious,
dictates anotherletter to Ramnath, after making no impression on the headof
the department.This letter is to requestthat Ramnath be sackedfor insubordin-
ation and insolence.
Ramnath was defeated. He typedall Malhotra8s letters that day. He also
"droppedto the floor and Malhotra's
touched polishedshoeswithhis clasped
palms." Then he sobbed,"embracingthe shoes, polishingthemwithhis palms."
Thatis the kindof thinkthat happensin Naipaul's India«, In myIndia,
typeout the letters dictated to them.
stenographers
Is the story,then,a fabrication? Unlikely, Thereare so many questions
I wouldlike to ask aboutit. WasRamnath, perhaps,the onlysteno in the
department? From howmany personsdid he take dictation? Couldhe havetyped
all the letters dicated to him? Hadhe beeninstructedto makehimselfavail-
able onlyfor dictation? I don't know. Since the headof the department was
and
pusillanimous evasive, was he concealingsomething aboutthe termson which
Ramnath hadbeenhired, a mancapable of takingdownfast dictationfromone
whohas been"educatedat an Englishuniversity?"

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 198 -

Therewas undoubtedly somemisunderstanding«, A youngEnglishmanof my

in
acquaintance Bombay used to speakbitterly to me abouthis Indianoffice
assistants, claimingthat theyinvariablymisinterpreted his simplest
instructions,,I couldbarelyfollowthe generaltenorof his argument, to
of
say nothing grasping the details so clipped and jerkywas his mannerof
speech,so pronounced his Oxfordaccent. Needlessto say, based on his
experience,this gentleman tendedto doubtthe intelligenceof all the
unfortunate Indianswhoworked underhim.
In the office of a weeklyfor whichI worked,I once heardthe Irish
editor thundering at a sub-editor,concluding
withthe words,"Youhaven't
the intelligenceof a rabbit." Thesub cameup to mesadly and said, "What
information does the editorwantmeto obtainaboutrabbits?" It is often
the arroganceof the whitesin India, andof those "educatedan an English
university"that makesmedespair, not the intelligenceof clerks, sténos
andsubs.
Mr,Malhotrainterestsme. It seemsthat earningonlyRs 600/-a month
"his place was thereforewith600-rupee-a-monthmen." This somehow makes
himan outsider,andat his level "therewereno outsiders,no one who,like
Malhotra,had rejected the badgesof foodand caste and dress." (The
referenceto dress indicateshowcareless Mr.Naipaulis aboutthe unquestion-
ably narrow and closed compartments
in whichmostof Indianlife is lived.
Evenwhentheypreservethe restrictionsof foodand caste, urbanIndians
dress as theyplease, in the Westernor Easternstyles, oftenin a curious
compromise between the two.) Mr.Malhotrawishesto marry and, notwithstand-
ing his Englisheducation,applies for advertisedbrideswhoseparentsor
brotherswanta highersalaried man. "Nomarriage,then,for him." Mr.
Naipaulis '/erysorryfor Malhotra.
Thatis the kindof thingthat characterizesMr.Naipaul's India. In
my India, the Malhotrasmarryby the million, andnot alwaysbyanswering
advertisements in the matrimonial
columns. Theymoverapidlyfrom600 a month
to twicethat sumandmore;evenon the startingsalary their friendships
are not confinedto thosewiththe sameor similar salaries. Withhis English
universitybackground, Malhotraneednot havehad anyinhibitions«,
Does this meanthat Mr.Naipaulhas inventedMalhotra?Notnecessarily«
He has swallowed Malhotra's storyas he swallowedmanyothers. Thesestories
enabledhimto believe whathe wantedto believe. PerhapsMalhotraexpected
a higherstartingsalary0 Thatwas his fault. He does not seemto havemuch
confidence in his ability to rise0 His applyingfor brides suggeststhat his
educationhaddonehimlittle good* "Nomarriage,then,for him;and the
yearsweregoingby, and his parentswerebreakingtheir hearts." Rubbish,
Mr.Naipaul.
AfterMalhotra,Malik. He is an engineerreturnedfromScandinavia,
earingRs 1200/-amonth.European engineersless qualified thanhe earned
thriceas much. This is true, alas, and shameful»As an Indian, I am

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 199 -

ashamed.ButMalik's storytoo is suspectin myeyes. He claims, andMr.

Naipaulbelieves him,that he is not giventhe superiorjobs for whichhe
applies becausehe has no car. "Doyouowna car?11Malikdidn't« Theprob-
ing was abandoned;no one was eveninterestedin his parentage."
Thatin Mr.Naipaul's India. In myIndia, engineerstrainedabroad,
providedtheyhavewhatit takes, advancerapidly,buya car beforetheycan
affordit becauseadvancementis certain, land superiorjobs evenif theydon't
havea car andare givenone by the firm,withan allowancefor maintenance.
Malikfailed to get a biggerjob becausehis personalityand abilities did
notmeasureup to his qualifications. Indiansdo tendto thinkthat qualifica-
tions are enough,particularlyif theyare foreign. Theyexplain their failures
in many ways. Malikbelieves it is becausehe has no car, thoughhe could
easily buyone and sail over the alleged obstacle. He has "a well-appointed
flat in one of the finerareas of Bombay" andon the bookshelvesthereis Ibsen
in the original. Mili k is stuck andMr.Naipaulis sorryfor him. At every
interview,"Doyouowna car?" Malikdidn't. "Theprobingwas abandoned."
Rubbish,Mr.Naipaul.
It is myturnnowto tell a story,a true one whichdoes not cast any
darkreflectionson much-maligned India. Theovertonesare purelyhuman.We
werefive executivesin a businessfirm. Oneof us neversucceededin getting
a woman to go out withhim. Weteased himaboutit. "Amodern Indianwoman,"
he said, "will not go out witha manunless he has a car." Welaughedheartily.
Noneof us hada car at that time-- andwe hadno problems in that delicate
area whereour colleaguewas unsuccessful . Hewas merelyunattractiveto
women, andstill is, sevenyears later. He has had a car for a long time. But
he is alwaysalone in it.
I wouldlike to meetMalik, though,and discuss Ibsenwithhim.
If true-bloodedIndianmoresmakeMr*Naipaulsneer, Westernized Indians
makehimsnarl. Theirnicknames annoyhimand he quotestheir "datedslang."
If the slang had beenup-to-date,he wouldn'thaveliked it either. He laughs
at the Indianarmyofficerbecausehe is "at a first meetinga completeEnglish
army officer." If he had beena completeIndianarmyofficer, he wouldhave
laughedevenmoreloudly. IndianAnglo-Indiais of coursevulnerable. What
is destestableis Mr.Naipaul's refusal to see it in human
and historic terms.
Bunty,the uneasymixtureof Westand East is condemned merelyby description,
so to speak. His grandfatherconducted his businessovera hookah,reclining
on bolsters. Bunty"discussesbusinessover drinksat the club or on the golf
course." If he returnedto hookahandbolsters, Mr.Naipaulwouldn'tapprove
either.
In Bunty'
s home,a JaminiRoypaintingis hungbeside a Picasso, whichis,
of course, infuriating. If he had onlyJaminiRoyhe wouldhavebeenprovincial,
if onlyPicasso, a snob. Buntycan't win, thoughhe "sees himselfas every
man'sequal andmostmen'ssuperior." He speaksEnglishfluently,which
maddens Mr.Naipaul. If he had spokenit badly,Mr.Naipaulwouldhavedespised
him.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 200 -

Mr.Naipaulsawa bannerin Bombay on his first daythere,advertising

the Oxfordand Cambridge Players' production of TheImportance of BeingEarnest.
He findsit funny, an exampleof confusedvalues. Wilde'swittycomedy to be
produced in Bombay,city of slums,hutment dwellers,pavement sleepers and
beggars,appearsto himabsurd,fantastic, part of the mimicry of Englishlife.
Thefact itself I don't findabsurd;anypretensionattachedto it is» Mr,
Naipauldoesn't makethe distinction. Theveryannouncement of the production
he thinkssymptomatic of a profound cultural disease. It is actually a symptom
of a naturaland inevitabledivision in Indiansociety as a result of British
rule. Englishwasmadethe national languageof India by the British, andthe
medium of education. Forobviousreasonsit could not be immediately and
entirely removed« If it had been, there would be no bannerin Bombay advertis-
ing in Englishto upsetMr,Naipaul. Hewouldthenhavecommented, no doubt,
on the disappearanceof all that intellectual activity in Englishwhichwas the
naturalaccompaniment of Englisheducationin India.
To understand the situation, one does not haveto be for or against the
continuanceof English. It was, is andwill remainpart of the Indianscene
for many years to come. Thereis an "Indianwithdrawal anddenial," thereis
a "confusionof IndianAnglo-India"but Mr.Naipaulis too subjectiveto
analyseit meaningfully.He arguestoo exclusivelyfromrevulsionandangerto
see (his favouriteword)the problem in the round.
In the chapterentitled "TheColonial," Mr.Naipauluses Gandhiin an
originalwayto reinforcehis attackon Indianculture. He quotesGandhi
againstthe kindof "misplacedcharity"whichconsists in organizingfree
mealsfor beggarsor givingthemmoney.He thensays that Gandhi"of course
in this matterof beggary. . . failed." If beggingcontinuesin India only
becauseof misplacedcharity,Mr.Naipaulwouldbe right. Nodoubtthere
are beggarsin India capable of earninga living but whobeg becauseit is easy
and pays. Butsurelythe overwhelming majoritybegs becausethereis no
alternative. Beggarswill disappearin India not whenIndiansheedGandhi
andotherreformers butwheneconomic progressmakesbeggingunnecessary for
anybody.
Mr.Naipaulcalls Gandhi"the least Indianof Indianleaders" becauseof
his attitudeto sanitation, physicallabour, service, inefficiencyand
untouchability.In thesemattershis attitudewas indeeddifferentfromthe
ordinaryrunof Indianleaders«, Nevertheless it can withequal truthbe said
that he was moreIndianthanmostin his attitudeto sex, his advocacyof
prohibition,his asceticism,his foodfads, his oppositionto modernism in
every field. His ideal societywas of self-contained villages, an economy
basedon the spinningwheel(the use of which,he claimed,would"cool one's
lust"), altogethera pre-medieval society of holypovertyandother-worldly
absorption. I think Mro Naipaul not interestedin the truthaboutGandhi,
is
onewayor another. He cites himmerelyto criticize "thewholediseased
society"whichGandhicriticized, exceptthat the phraseis not Gandhi's,but
Naipaul's. This does not seemto meparticularlyhonest,since Gandhimaybe
andhas beencriticized for innumerable characteristicallyIndianvices,
including double-think.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 201 -

Let mepause to explain again that I see India in mostwaysas Naipaul

see her. All that he says against the grossnessand squalor of Indianlife,
the routineritualism,the lip-service to highideals, the petrifiedand
distortedsense of cleanliness, and a thousand otherthings,all this is true.
Mydissatisfactionis withhis modeof argument, his falsifyingexamples.
Thetop bunkin a railwaysleeper is avoidedin India, Mr.Naipaulwrites,
becauseit "involvesphysicaleffort,and physicaleffortis to be avoided
as a degradation.11Well, I avoid the top bunkbecauseit bringsmetoo close
to the fanwhichis attachedto the ceiling. Turning the fan awaycauses
the bunkto be ratherairless; in the heat of India this makesit veryuncom-
fortable. In Europeandelsewhere,as Mr.Naipaulpointsout, the favoured
bunkis the top bunk. It is cool. It offersgreaterprivacy. Thetop bunk
in Indianrailwaysoftenhas no ladderleadingup to it. Onehas to swing
up, placingthe feet on the arm-restof the lowerbunk. So I havesometimes
givenup myreservedlowerbunkto a lady or an elderly person»
As for the Indianunwillingnessor reluctanceto do physicallabour, the
is
charge justified. Nevertheless, all mytrain journeys,I haveseen
in
peopleroll out their beddingon the bunk,thenroll it off againc This
jos is not doneby porters. TheincidentMr. Naipauldescribes, in which
he changedhis lowerbunkwitha passengerand foundhimselfdoing"the porter's
job" withoutassistance fromthe personhe had obliged, mademeraise myeye-
brows. I quote:
"His beddinghad beenspreadfor himon the top bunkby
the porter,andhe waswaitinguntil we got to the next
station, twohoursdistance, so that he mightget a porter
to take it downfor him.. I wishedto settle down. I
beganto do the porter's job. He smiledbut offeredno
help. I lost mytemper. His face acquiredthat Indian
expressionlesswhichindicates that communicationhas
ceased and that the Indianhas withdrawnfroma situation
he cannotunderstand.Labouris a degradation;onlya
foreignerwouldsee otherwise,"
Hereis truthtold in sucha waythat it becomesfalsehood. I do not
say that all or eventhe greaterpart of Mr.Naipaul's argument is vitiated
in this way. A greatdeal is, far too muchis, and giventhe unrelenting
irritability, this is not surprising. Thepublisher'sblurbon the dust
jacket of AnAreaof Darknessrefers, startlingly,to Mr.Naipaul's "vision
distortedby indignationof fear," I can onlyconcur. Theblurbgoes on to
praise the honesty withwhichMr.Naipaulrecordshis indignationand fear.
Evenif I concuragain, that distortedvision does not dissatisfymeless.
Mostof the personsMr.Naipaulmetin India weregrotesques,contemptible
or patheticcreatures. Hewritesaboutthemat great lengthas thoughtheyare
importantillustrations of his argument.Mrs.Mahindra of NewDelhi, whois
"craze for foreign,"sprawlsover several pages. M. S. Butt,proprietorof

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 202 -

Hotel Liwardin Srinagar,andhis assistant Aziz, the boyfromBombay whocomes

to stay in HotelLiward,are othersof the samekind. Mr.Naipaultreatedthem
witha mixture and condescension,
of impertinence convertinghimselfinto a
grotesque in the process. Abandoning his cultureand his manners,he seemsto
act out of pure,unreasoned hostility and recordsit all withhis usual
"honesty."
Theuttertriviality of someencountersdoesn't botherhim. "I had loathed
the boyfromBombay on sight." Vest, Naipaulloathedhim. Theboyis listening
to RadioCeylon. Mr.Naipaul"randownstairs,"turnsthe set to RadioKashmir
becausehe wantsto listen to the news. Afterthe news,the boyswitchesit
backto RadioCeylon. Nowordsare exchanged."Andso nowit wenton, morning
andevening."It is the boywhoeventuallycalls on Mr.Naipaul,whohas fallen
ill. "Thereaftercourtesywas imposed on bothof us. I offeredhimRadio
Ceylon;he offeredmeRadioKashmir."Oursympathies are supposedto be with
Mr.Naipaul! He is a sensitive man. TheboyfromBombay, in his eyes, is set
"againsta backgroundof swarming Bombayslum."
Thereaderdoes, in fact, sympathize withMr.Naipaulwhenhe describeswhat
he sees, the scenes of callousness, coarsenessand suffering,the e'/eryday
degradation of the human imagenot onlyamong the poorestof the poorbut among
the middleclass and in Indiansociety as a whole. All or almostall that he
writesaboutthe effectsof Britishrule in India is subtle and suggestive.
Thecomparison withthe colonial consequences in the WestIndies is illuminat-
ing. The fact that the Britishhad possessed the countryso completely, that
the Indiansubjectionwas so thorough and her resistanceso puny,is related to
the age-old "Indianability to retreat, the ability genuinely not to see what
wasobvious." It was not merely,as withothers,a "foundation of neurosis"
but part of "a greaterphilosophy of despair, leadingto passivity,detachment,
acceptance."
FewIndiansare willing to believe that the roots of their failure go deep
into history. Theybelieve in their highideals, attributefailure to not
living up to these0 Thatthe ideals are false and stultifyingis neverclearly
perceivedoHencethe contradiction between wordsand behaviourwhichis
virtuallyuniversalin India, the insensitivecontradiction between belief
andwayof 1i fe o Thestoryof the village politician, austerelydressed,
laudingGandhipubliclyand havingseventeenpeoplemurdered duringan election
contest,maybe exaggeratedbutbasically it is quite plausible«
Mr.Naipaulhas onlyto describecertain Indianphenomena to makethem
suspect. Someof themare easy targetsbut needto be hit overandover again,
until theyare eliminated. Thepious familyof wealthyIndianmerchants from
East Africaand their adoptionof a holymanin Delhi providesoccasionfor a
sharplook at the mostpopularand influentialkindof saintliness in India»
It is seen to be simplicityof a primitivekind,"cookingon stones, eating
off leaves, fetchingwaterfromthe spring." Gandhibelieved in that too,

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 203 -

though he was opposedto the casualnessand disorderwhichoftenand typically

accompany Indianholiness. Thebelchingandspitting, the unaestheticdress,
the ritualistic andarrogantcleanliness coexistingwithdirt, the decadent
veneration-- all are indicatedmerelythrough the accumulation
of concrete
detail. Howmuch betterthis is thanthe self-chosensituations of extreme
anguish,compelling confessionsof "that deepangerwhichunhinges judgement
andalmostphysicallylimits vision!"
A recurringthemein AnAreaof Darknessis public defecationin India,
withthe wasteleft exposedon the surfaceof the earth. Gandhiis quoted~
his wordsdeserveconstantreiteration- "Leavingnight-soil, cleansingthe nose,
or spittingon the road is a sin against Godas well as humanity,
and betrays
a sad wantof considerationfor others. Themanwhodoes not coverhis waste
deservesa heavypenaltyevenif he lives in a forest." It is someconsolation
that the educated,on the whole,and thoseabovethe lowesteconomic life-time
cease to be guiltyof these loathsome evenso, their
practices. Unfortunately,
sanitaryhabits remaincareless. Indianstendto spurnit as an unpleasant
subject.
A distressingepisode in AnAreaof DarknessconcernsMr.Naipaul's
involvement withan alienated, violent-minded
and ferociouslyprejudicedSikh.
Theyare in a third-classair-conditionedcompartment of a train travelling
south. Thecompartment is full of SouthIndians,whosewayof eating their
liquidized foodis picturedwithmorethanmalice. But, humour is humour.
TheSikhis a differentproposition,an uncultured communalist whostrikes a
manfor staringat him. Mr.Naipauladmitshis mistakein beingfriendlywith
the Sikh, but the mistakeis significant. Whentheyfall out, the Sikhcalls
Mr.Naipaul"a dirtySouthIndianswine." Earlier, he refersto the South
Indiansin the train as "punks,"and "blackies." Did Mr.Naipaulreally meet
no decentIndians? He fell once too ofteninto the trap of his owngeneral
revulsion.
In the India whichI havepresumed to call mine,I acknowledge without
hesitationthe existenceof all the darknessMr.Naipauldiscovered. I am
not a Hinduandmybackground makesmea naturaloutsider: circumstances and
decisionsrelate meto India. In othercountriesI ama foreigner. In India
I aman Indian. When I was eighteen,a friendaskedmewhatmyambitionwas,
I said withthe naive modesty of youth,"To do somethingfor India." My
friendwhowas a Muslim andwantedIndia divided (he left for Karachisoon
after Pakistanwas created) laughed,thoughnot unsympathetically, as I
remember.
India is simplymyenvironment. A mancan do something
for and in his
environmentbybeingfully whathe is, bynot withdrawing
fromit. I have
notwithdrawn fromIndia.
In one of the rare positive moments
in AnAreaof Darkness,Mr.Naipaul
writes, "Anger,compassionand contempt
wereaspects of the sameemotions;
theywerewithoutvalue becausetheycould not endure. Achievementcould begin
onlywithacceptance«" As always,Mr.Naipauloverstatesthe case. I believe

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 204 -

in anger,compassion andcontempt.Theyare notwithoutvalue. I believe

all three,makesuse of them. I amincurably
in acceptancethat incorporates
critical andsceptical. Thatis whatI amin relation to India also. Andto
of love. In this sense only,
myself. I findit does not preventthe growth
I love India. I expectnothingin returnbecausecritical, sceptical love
does not begetlove. It performsanother,moreobjective function.
In a verysmall, evennegligibleway,this objective functionmaybring
results whichhaveeludedthe prophetsand reformers of India, or so it suits
my sardonic conceit to think. Micemaygnawthrough the ropesof bondage
wherethe roaringof lions makesno impression. It is at least an experiment
worthtrying.
NotbeingHindu,I cannotidentifymyselfwithIndia's past as a compre-
hensiveheritageor reject it as if it weremineto reject. I can identify
myselfonlywithmodern India, a place withmorethingsin it thanare dreamt
of in Mr. Naipaul's philosophy. I amneitherproudnorashamed of beingan
Indian. I an neitherproudnorashamed of beingWesternized.Historyis behind
me. I live on the frontiersof the futurethat is slowlyrecedingbeforeme.
Contempt for background impressesmeas little as pride in background.Both
are distorting. Tormented, self-regarding resolutionsof cultural conflict
create new,tormenting problems.Poise, a sense of proportion and that irony
whichMr.Naipaulfindslackingin Indians,mustbe maintained if one wants
to help. Otherwise, criticismis self-indulgence. It mustattack, even
denounce, but it mustnot denyhuman beingstheir humanity.
In AnAreaof DarknessMr.Naipaulcomesdangerously close to doingthat.
TheSouthIndianwayof eating he mocks,but he does not seemto havemetthese
peoplewhoeat so coarsely. I don't knowif he is serious or merelyguilt-
riddenwhen,surprisingly,he writesnear the endof the book,"Nowhere were
so
people heightened, roundedand individualistic; did
nowhere they offer
themselvesso fully andwithsuchassurance. To knowIndianswas to take a
delightin peopleas people; eyeryencounter was an adventure.11I distrust
that "nowhere."Excessivemoralizingon the incongruitiesof Indianlife has
betrayedhiminto an excess here. Hewhoexaggeratesblamewill exaggerate
praise.
MyconcernwithMr.Naipaul's criticismof India has beento analysethe
way job is done. I havemadeit clear that it is an unsatisfactory
the way,
from mypointof view,andheavilyflawedin detail. All the same,I amon
the side of the criticismagainst the myriadIndianand foreignevadersof
Indianreality. Culturedoesn't consist onlyof literature, and philosophy
andart, and it is certainlynot acquiredbyadheringto the beliefs of the
past andconforming to its institutionaldemands.Its living presenceis
indicated behaviour,by rich and pooralike, and thereare universalhuman
in
standardsbywhichit maybe judged. Mr.Naipaulis rightto see us as we
are in the streets, in buses andtrains, in our kitchensand lavatories.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 - 205 -

Mr.Naipaul's conclusionis negative. "Shivahas ceased to dance.11

It wouldbe too facile to say that Hemaydanceagain.
Certainly,that is the hopeand the endeavour.Thereis someendeavour
too, in modern India, whichneedhardlybe mentioned as evidencefor hope.
It is at least as obviousas the povertyand the squalor, physical,social
andmoral. A bookcould be writtenaboutit whichwouldnot haveto falsify
or exaggerateanything. It mightwell pointthe wayout of the present
Indianconfusion.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions