How does /lit/ feel about Naipaul? I just read pic related and

>>10016894
Brilliant is overstating it, but I'm hard to please and I do think it's a good novel. On the other hand, some other novels by Naipaul are just extremely dull to me.

File: Unbenannt.png (169KB, 389x559px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 389x559px

one of Goethe's bitches

>>10016894
I've got to read this. A Bend in the River was absolutely fantastic.

>>10017450
>A Bend in the River was absolutely fantastic.
I can't imagine why and how, but I'd be interested to know.

>>10017464
Why is that hard to believe? It deals with an African country post colonial trying to find their way and the careful observers that are seeing chaos come to fruition.

Why is that so hard to believe?

>>10016894
This is the only Naipaul novel I've read and it was great. I'm biased towards books like this because I grew up in shitty area where people were strongly discouraged from deviating from traditional culture, even if it meant material or spiritual improvement.

You should read this essay he wrote about the 1984 Republican convention. It's an interesting take on American Republicans from a classic Tory.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1984/10/25/among-the-republicans/

>>10017568
I found it all-around plodding so I was curious about your enthusiasm. I didn't mean to imply it was horrible, just nothing I can imagine enthusing about.

In my opinion, Naipaul in general tends to be OK by all metrics but outstanding by none. A case of damning with faint praise, I suppose, but so it goes.

>>10017691
Sorry, didn't mean to repeat myself. I enjoyed it mostly because my mum lived in Nigeria during the time of their independence and her stories were very reminiscent to that of which Naipul wrote in River.

>>10017777
>didn't mean to repeat myself
>gets quads