What do you think?
Rate this book
Reading & Writing: A Personal Account
I was eleven, no more, when the wish came to me to be a writer; and then very soon it was a settled ambition. But for the young V. S. Naipaul, there was a great distance between the wish and its fulfillment. To become a writer, he would have to find ways of understanding three very different his family's half-remembered Indian homeland, the West Indian colonial society in which he grew up, and the wholly foreign world of the English novels he read.
In this essay of literary autobiography, V. S. Naipaul sifts through memories of his childhood in Trinidad, his university days in England, and his earliest attempts at writing, seeking the experiences of life and reading that shaped his imagination and his growth as a writer. He pays particular attention to the traumas of India under its various conquerors and the painful sense of dereliction and loss that shadows writers' attempts to capture the country and its people in prose.
Naipaul's profound reflections on the relations between personal or historical experience and literary form, between the novel and the world, reveal how he came to discover both his voice and the subjects of his writing, and how he learned to turn sometimes to fiction, sometimes to the travel narrative, to portray them truthfully. Along the way he offers insights into the novel's prodigious development as a form for depicting and interpreting society in the nineteenth century and its diminishing capacity to do the same in the twentiethÑa task that, in his view, passed to the creative energies of the early cinema.
As a child trying to read, I had felt that two worlds separated me from the books that were offered to me at school and in the the childhood world of our remembered India, and the more colonial world of our city. ... What I didn't know, even after I had written my early books of fiction ... was that those two spheres of darkness had become my subject. Fiction, working its mysteries, by indirections finding directions out, had led me to my subject. But it couldn't take me all the way. -V.S. Naipaul, from Reading & Writing
In this essay of literary autobiography, V. S. Naipaul sifts through memories of his childhood in Trinidad, his university days in England, and his earliest attempts at writing, seeking the experiences of life and reading that shaped his imagination and his growth as a writer. He pays particular attention to the traumas of India under its various conquerors and the painful sense of dereliction and loss that shadows writers' attempts to capture the country and its people in prose.
Naipaul's profound reflections on the relations between personal or historical experience and literary form, between the novel and the world, reveal how he came to discover both his voice and the subjects of his writing, and how he learned to turn sometimes to fiction, sometimes to the travel narrative, to portray them truthfully. Along the way he offers insights into the novel's prodigious development as a form for depicting and interpreting society in the nineteenth century and its diminishing capacity to do the same in the twentiethÑa task that, in his view, passed to the creative energies of the early cinema.
As a child trying to read, I had felt that two worlds separated me from the books that were offered to me at school and in the the childhood world of our remembered India, and the more colonial world of our city. ... What I didn't know, even after I had written my early books of fiction ... was that those two spheres of darkness had become my subject. Fiction, working its mysteries, by indirections finding directions out, had led me to my subject. But it couldn't take me all the way. -V.S. Naipaul, from Reading & Writing
64 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1968
7 people are currently reading
275 people want to read
About the author
V.S. Naipaul
191 books1,761 followersV. S. Naipaul was a British writer of Indo-Trinidadian descent known for his sharp, often controversial explorations of postcolonial societies, identity, and displacement. His works, which include both fiction and nonfiction, often depict themes of exile, cultural alienation, and the lingering effects of colonialism.
He gained early recognition with A House for Mr Biswas, a novel inspired by his father’s struggles in Trinidad. His later works, such as The Mimic Men, In a Free State, and A Bend in the River, cemented his reputation as a masterful and incisive writer. Beyond fiction, his travelogues and essays, including Among the Believers and India: A Million Mutinies Now, reflected his critical perspective on societies in transition.
Naipaul received numerous accolades throughout his career, including the Nobel Prize in Literature, awarded for his ability to blend deep observation with literary artistry. While praised for his prose, his often unsparing portrayals of postcolonial nations and controversial statements sparked both admiration and criticism.
He gained early recognition with A House for Mr Biswas, a novel inspired by his father’s struggles in Trinidad. His later works, such as The Mimic Men, In a Free State, and A Bend in the River, cemented his reputation as a masterful and incisive writer. Beyond fiction, his travelogues and essays, including Among the Believers and India: A Million Mutinies Now, reflected his critical perspective on societies in transition.
Naipaul received numerous accolades throughout his career, including the Nobel Prize in Literature, awarded for his ability to blend deep observation with literary artistry. While praised for his prose, his often unsparing portrayals of postcolonial nations and controversial statements sparked both admiration and criticism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews
April 25, 2021
This is a personal account of how a person inclines to accept getting into the game of reading and writing. But when the same person gets a Nobel in the same game, it's worthy enough to have a glance at the process!
At one place he talks about the blankness in him about which way to go. He was on his hard-earned scholarship at Oxford. The idea of fiction or a novel puzzled him. He says that the idea of a novel is something that is made up, that is precisely its definition. At the same time, it is expected to be true. It is expected to be drawn from life. How? later he finds an answer through Evelyn Waugh,
"Later when I had begun to identify my material and had begun to be a writer, working more or less intuitively this ambiguity ceased to worry me. In 1955 the year of this breakthrough, I was able to understand Evelyn Waugh's definition of fiction (in the dedication to "Officers and Gentlemen" published that year) as "experience totally transformed". I wouldn't have understood or believed the words the year before."
Naipaul has a whole gamut of his Non-fictional work, he talks about the reasons,
"Fiction had taken me as far as I could go. There were certain things it couldn't deal with. It couldn't deal with my ears in England. There was a social depth to the experience it seemed more a matter of autobiography, and it could not deal with my growing knowledge of the wider world. Fiction, by its nature, functioning best within certain fixed social boundaries seems to be pushing me back to worlds- like the island word or the world of my childhood- smaller than the one I inhabited. fiction which had once liberated me and enlightened me now seemed to be pushing me towards being simpler than I really was. for some years three perhaps four I did not know how to move. I was quite lost."
It was interesting to know Naipaul's take on R.K. Narayan and his characters of small people, talking big and doing small things,
"Narayan's world is not after all as rooted and complete as it appears. His small people dream simply of what they think has gone before, but they are without personal ancestry. There is a great blank in their past."
Literature, like all living arts, is always on the move and it should constantly change, thinks Naipaul. Tho it was a simple yet circumstantial account, if you do not know much about the author's take on his writing and reading, It will give you an idea of his progression and how he gained ground in the game!
At one place he talks about the blankness in him about which way to go. He was on his hard-earned scholarship at Oxford. The idea of fiction or a novel puzzled him. He says that the idea of a novel is something that is made up, that is precisely its definition. At the same time, it is expected to be true. It is expected to be drawn from life. How? later he finds an answer through Evelyn Waugh,
"Later when I had begun to identify my material and had begun to be a writer, working more or less intuitively this ambiguity ceased to worry me. In 1955 the year of this breakthrough, I was able to understand Evelyn Waugh's definition of fiction (in the dedication to "Officers and Gentlemen" published that year) as "experience totally transformed". I wouldn't have understood or believed the words the year before."
Naipaul has a whole gamut of his Non-fictional work, he talks about the reasons,
"Fiction had taken me as far as I could go. There were certain things it couldn't deal with. It couldn't deal with my ears in England. There was a social depth to the experience it seemed more a matter of autobiography, and it could not deal with my growing knowledge of the wider world. Fiction, by its nature, functioning best within certain fixed social boundaries seems to be pushing me back to worlds- like the island word or the world of my childhood- smaller than the one I inhabited. fiction which had once liberated me and enlightened me now seemed to be pushing me towards being simpler than I really was. for some years three perhaps four I did not know how to move. I was quite lost."
It was interesting to know Naipaul's take on R.K. Narayan and his characters of small people, talking big and doing small things,
"Narayan's world is not after all as rooted and complete as it appears. His small people dream simply of what they think has gone before, but they are without personal ancestry. There is a great blank in their past."
Literature, like all living arts, is always on the move and it should constantly change, thinks Naipaul. Tho it was a simple yet circumstantial account, if you do not know much about the author's take on his writing and reading, It will give you an idea of his progression and how he gained ground in the game!
April 28, 2024
বি ওয়ার্ডসওয়ার্থ নামে একটা গল্প পড়ার মাধ্যমে ভি এস নাইপলের সাথে পরিচয়। পড়ে দারুণ আনন্দ পেয়েছিলাম। এরপরে আর কিছুই পড়া হয় নি। বাতিঘরে খুঁজতে খুঁজতে এই ছোট বইখানা হাতে আসলো। এক বসায় পড়ে ফেললাম।
ছোটবেলা থেকেই লেখক হবার বাসনা পোষণ , অতঃপর লেখার তীব্র ইচ্ছা দ্বারা তাড়িত হতে হতে একসময় লেখার ছন্দ পেয়ে যাওয়া, বইটাকে নাইপল জীবনে সেই সময়টাকে স্মৃতিচারণা বলা যায়। সেই যে শূন্যতার মাঝেও এক লেখালেখির ছন্দ আবিষ্কার করলেন, তারপরে আর থামাথামি নেই।
ভারত নিয়ে তার বিশেষ পর্যবেক্ষণ নজরে পড়ে। গুডরিডসে রিভিউ সেকশনে দেখলাম এক বাঙালি ভদ্রলোক ওই অংশটার জন্যে নাইপলকে 'সাম্প্রদায়িক', 'অসুস্থ প্রাণী' ট্যাগ লাগায়ে দিয়েছেন। এতবড় ট্যাগ পাওয়ার মতো কিছু লেখা হয়েছে বলে মনে হলো না। সেই ব্রিটিশ থেকে শুরু করে তুর্কী মুসলমানেরা বহিরাগতই ছিলেন , তাদের আগমনে ভারতের নিজস্ব সভ্যতা ব্যাপকভাবে ধ্বংস হয়েছে, এটা তো অস্বীকার করার উপায় নাই। যাক গে, সাম্প্রদায়িক ট্যাগ খাওয়ার আগেই অফ যাই।
লেখকের লেখার অভিজ্ঞতা, তার নিজস্ব লেখকসত্ত্বাকে আবিষ্কারের অভিজ্ঞতা শুনতে বরাবরই দারুণ লাগে। এবারও তাই হলো।
ছোটবেলা থেকেই লেখক হবার বাসনা পোষণ , অতঃপর লেখার তীব্র ইচ্ছা দ্বারা তাড়িত হতে হতে একসময় লেখার ছন্দ পেয়ে যাওয়া, বইটাকে নাইপল জীবনে সেই সময়টাকে স্মৃতিচারণা বলা যায়। সেই যে শূন্যতার মাঝেও এক লেখালেখির ছন্দ আবিষ্কার করলেন, তারপরে আর থামাথামি নেই।
ভারত নিয়ে তার বিশেষ পর্যবেক্ষণ নজরে পড়ে। গুডরিডসে রিভিউ সেকশনে দেখলাম এক বাঙালি ভদ্রলোক ওই অংশটার জন্যে নাইপলকে 'সাম্প্রদায়িক', 'অসুস্থ প্রাণী' ট্যাগ লাগায়ে দিয়েছেন। এতবড় ট্যাগ পাওয়ার মতো কিছু লেখা হয়েছে বলে মনে হলো না। সেই ব্রিটিশ থেকে শুরু করে তুর্কী মুসলমানেরা বহিরাগতই ছিলেন , তাদের আগমনে ভারতের নিজস্ব সভ্যতা ব্যাপকভাবে ধ্বংস হয়েছে, এটা তো অস্বীকার করার উপায় নাই। যাক গে, সাম্প্রদায়িক ট্যাগ খাওয়ার আগেই অফ যাই।
লেখকের লেখার অভিজ্ঞতা, তার নিজস্ব লেখকসত্ত্বাকে আবিষ্কারের অভিজ্ঞতা শুনতে বরাবরই দারুণ লাগে। এবারও তাই হলো।
October 31, 2022
ভারতীয় বংশোদ্ভূত নোবেলজয়ী কথাসাহিত্যিক বিদ্যাধর সূর্যপ্রসাদ নাইপল। তিনি জন্মেছেন ক্যারিবিয়ান দ্বীপপুঞ্জের সাবেক ব্রিটিশ উপনিবেশ ত্রিনিদাদে। এই ছোট্ট বইটি লেখক হয়ে ওঠার ইতিবৃত্তের পাশাপাশি শোনাবে পিতৃপুরুষের দেশ ভারতের কথা এবং বুঝিয়ে দেবে ভি এস নাইপলের চরম সাম্প্রদায়িক অসুস্থ মানসিকতা।
মাত্র এগারো বছর বয়সেই নাইপল ঠিক করেছিলেন তিনি লিখবেন, হবেন লেখক। কিন্তু, ঠিক কেমনকরে লেখক হওয়া যায় তার তরিকা নাইপলের অজানা। তখন বই পড়তে শুরু করলেন। ঈশপের কাহিনি, আ্যন্ডারসনের রূপকথা, জুলভার্নের লেখা পড়তে পড়তে নাইপলের পাঠক হয়ে ওঠার সফর শুরু হয়েছিল৷ জোসেফ কনরাডের লেখাও রসদের যোগান দিচ্ছিল আগামীর কথাসাহিত্যিক নাইপলকে।
পেশায় সংবাদকর্মী লেখকের বাবা স্বশিক্ষিত মানুষ ছিলেন। পাঁড় পাঠক নাইপলের সাংবাদিকতা পিতাকে বলা যাবে না। তবে, বিচিত্র ভঙ্গিতে বই পড়তেন তিনি। একসাথে অনেকগুলো বই ধরতেন। শেষ করতেন না কোনোটিই। বইগুলোর কিছু কিছু পৃষ্ঠা পড়ে যেতেন। ধরতে চাইতেন লেখকের রচনাশৈলী। পিতার এই অন্যরকম পাঠাভ্যাস নাইপলের লেখক হওয়ার পেছনে গভীর প্রভাব রেখেছিল।
ত্রিনিদাদ আ্যন্ড টোবাগো তখনও বিলাতের উপনিবেশ। সেখানকার সংস্কৃতি ও শিক্ষাব্যবস্থায় ব্রিটেনের ছাপ প্রবল৷ এসব কথা নাইপল স্মরণ করেছেন।
ভালো শিক্ষার্থী হওয়ার দরুন তিনি পান অক্সফোর্ড পড়ার সুযোগ। আর, এটিকে লেখক হওয়ার পথকে আরও সুগম করবে - এই প্রত্যাশা নিয়েই নাইপলের বিলেতে আগমন। অক্সফোর্ডে তিনি টিকতে পারেননি। লিখবেন বলে ছেড়ে দেন অক্সফোর্ড। এক ভাইয়ের বাসায় আশ্রয় নিয়ে লেখালিখির প্রাথমিক কাজ আরম্ভ করেন। অথচ প্লট ঘাটতির জন্য কী লিখবেন তা নিয়ে তিনি ছিলেন সন্দিহান। ঠিক তখনই বুঝতে পারলেন ত্রিনিদাদের অতীত নিয়ে আগ্রহ কাজ করে তার। ফিরে গেলেন স্বদেশে। ঘাঁটতে শুরু করলেন দলিলপত্র। ব্যস! আর ফিরে তাকাতে হয়নি ভিএস নাইপলকে। কারণ তখন প্লট সংকট তিনি পুরোপুরি কাটিয়ে উঠেছেন।
নাইপলের পূর্বজের শেকড় ভারতে প্রোথিত। তাই তিনি ভারতে এসেছেন। লিখেছেন ভারত নিয়ে। লিখতে গিয়েই সৃষ্টি করেন বিরাট বিপত্তি। প্রচণ্ড সাম্প্রদায়িক মানুষ নাইপল। মুসলমানবিদ্বেষে তিনি চ্যাম্পিয়ন লোক। এহেন অসুস্থ প্রাণী কীভাবে লেখালিখি করেন তা-ও জগতের এক বিস্ময় বটে!
মাত্র এগারো বছর বয়সেই নাইপল ঠিক করেছিলেন তিনি লিখবেন, হবেন লেখক। কিন্তু, ঠিক কেমনকরে লেখক হওয়া যায় তার তরিকা নাইপলের অজানা। তখন বই পড়তে শুরু করলেন। ঈশপের কাহিনি, আ্যন্ডারসনের রূপকথা, জুলভার্নের লেখা পড়তে পড়তে নাইপলের পাঠক হয়ে ওঠার সফর শুরু হয়েছিল৷ জোসেফ কনরাডের লেখাও রসদের যোগান দিচ্ছিল আগামীর কথাসাহিত্যিক নাইপলকে।
পেশায় সংবাদকর্মী লেখকের বাবা স্বশিক্ষিত মানুষ ছিলেন। পাঁড় পাঠক নাইপলের সাংবাদিকতা পিতাকে বলা যাবে না। তবে, বিচিত্র ভঙ্গিতে বই পড়তেন তিনি। একসাথে অনেকগুলো বই ধরতেন। শেষ করতেন না কোনোটিই। বইগুলোর কিছু কিছু পৃষ্ঠা পড়ে যেতেন। ধরতে চাইতেন লেখকের রচনাশৈলী। পিতার এই অন্যরকম পাঠাভ্যাস নাইপলের লেখক হওয়ার পেছনে গভীর প্রভাব রেখেছিল।
ত্রিনিদাদ আ্যন্ড টোবাগো তখনও বিলাতের উপনিবেশ। সেখানকার সংস্কৃতি ও শিক্ষাব্যবস্থায় ব্রিটেনের ছাপ প্রবল৷ এসব কথা নাইপল স্মরণ করেছেন।
ভালো শিক্ষার্থী হওয়ার দরুন তিনি পান অক্সফোর্ড পড়ার সুযোগ। আর, এটিকে লেখক হওয়ার পথকে আরও সুগম করবে - এই প্রত্যাশা নিয়েই নাইপলের বিলেতে আগমন। অক্সফোর্ডে তিনি টিকতে পারেননি। লিখবেন বলে ছেড়ে দেন অক্সফোর্ড। এক ভাইয়ের বাসায় আশ্রয় নিয়ে লেখালিখির প্রাথমিক কাজ আরম্ভ করেন। অথচ প্লট ঘাটতির জন্য কী লিখবেন তা নিয়ে তিনি ছিলেন সন্দিহান। ঠিক তখনই বুঝতে পারলেন ত্রিনিদাদের অতীত নিয়ে আগ্রহ কাজ করে তার। ফিরে গেলেন স্বদেশে। ঘাঁটতে শুরু করলেন দলিলপত্র। ব্যস! আর ফিরে তাকাতে হয়নি ভিএস নাইপলকে। কারণ তখন প্লট সংকট তিনি পুরোপুরি কাটিয়ে উঠেছেন।
নাইপলের পূর্বজের শেকড় ভারতে প্রোথিত। তাই তিনি ভারতে এসেছেন। লিখেছেন ভারত নিয়ে। লিখতে গিয়েই সৃষ্টি করেন বিরাট বিপত্তি। প্রচণ্ড সাম্প্রদায়িক মানুষ নাইপল। মুসলমানবিদ্বেষে তিনি চ্যাম্পিয়ন লোক। এহেন অসুস্থ প্রাণী কীভাবে লেখালিখি করেন তা-ও জগতের এক বিস্ময় বটে!
November 24, 2015
A writer who does not boast about his life - I liked it. What I especially liked was his speech for getting the Nobel Prize for Literature, although he picked up the same topics he already referred to in his essays forming the autobiography.
V.S.Naipaul has a writing style that I think many people can identify with. Enjoy it - and don't hesitate to read it if you have no idea who Naipaul is. He'll tell you in here.
V.S.Naipaul has a writing style that I think many people can identify with. Enjoy it - and don't hesitate to read it if you have no idea who Naipaul is. He'll tell you in here.
July 6, 2017
I have wanted to read Naipaul's work for far too long, and came across Reading & Writing: A Personal Account when wandering around my University library. I wasn't aware that he had actually written any non-fiction (apparently he's written lots. My mistake). This short work of autobiography, which consists of two essays entitled 'Reading and Writing', and 'The Writer in India', has been beautifully printed by NYRB, although unfortunately my University's copy was sans its dust jacket.
Published in 2000, Reading & Writing takes one on a foray into Naipaul's literary history. He is a prolific author with many works of fiction and non-fiction under his belt. Perhaps his most famous work is A House for Mr Biswas, and his choice of subjects for his non-fiction works range from mutinies in India to a book about Eva Peron, the second wife of an Argentinian President.
'Reading and Writing' begins: 'I was eleven, no more, when the wish came to me to be a writer; and then very soon it was a settled ambition'. His child self, which he goes on to evoke, is rather charming: 'With me, though, the ambition to be a writer was for many years a kind of sham. I liked to be given a fountain pen and a bottle of Waterman ink and new ruled exercise books (with margins), but I had no wish or need to write anything; and didn't write anything, not even letters; there was no one to write them to.' This inherent need to become a writer was fuelled not at his competitive school, but by his father, and the books which he would choose to read to his son: 'Sometimes he would call me to listen to two or three or four pages, seldom more, of writing he particularly enjoyed. He read and explained with zest and it was easy for me to like what he liked. In this unlikely way - considering the background: the racially mixed colonial school, the Asian inwardness at home - I had begun to put together an English literary anthology of my own.'
One gets the sense that Naipaul is rather an honest author, from passages like the following: 'I didn't feel competent as a reader until I was twenty-five. I had by that time spent seven years in England, four of them at Oxford, and I had a little of the social knowledge that was necessary for an understanding of English and European fiction. I had also made myself a writer, and was able, therefore, to see writing from the other side. Until then I had read blindly, without judgment, not really knowing how made-up stories were to be assessed.' He speaks rather candidly at times of problems encountered in the face of writing, and also discusses his inspiration for making himself a more well-rounded author.
'The Writer in India' is composed largely of Indian historical moments, but the scope is too wide for the shortness of the essay. Many fascinating occurrences are mentioned, but are then either moved on from or glossed over, which was a real shame. Had this essay been lengthened, or fewer things mentioned in more depth, it would provide a far more comprehensive look into the society in which Naipaul grew up, and explain to the reader more of his influences.
This particular tome runs to just 64 pages of rather large print; whilst it does offer Naipaul's experiences with schooling, childhood reading, writing, and education, it feels perhaps a little too slight to have a great deal of substance. He does, however, talk about a great deal of subjects: theatre, cinema, Indian 'epics', fables and fairytales, schooling, moving to England in order to study at Oxford University, and the effects of colonial rule, amongst others. Some of the paragraphs are insightful; others not so much. Regardless, throughout, Naipaul's writing is fluid and intelligent.
Published in 2000, Reading & Writing takes one on a foray into Naipaul's literary history. He is a prolific author with many works of fiction and non-fiction under his belt. Perhaps his most famous work is A House for Mr Biswas, and his choice of subjects for his non-fiction works range from mutinies in India to a book about Eva Peron, the second wife of an Argentinian President.
'Reading and Writing' begins: 'I was eleven, no more, when the wish came to me to be a writer; and then very soon it was a settled ambition'. His child self, which he goes on to evoke, is rather charming: 'With me, though, the ambition to be a writer was for many years a kind of sham. I liked to be given a fountain pen and a bottle of Waterman ink and new ruled exercise books (with margins), but I had no wish or need to write anything; and didn't write anything, not even letters; there was no one to write them to.' This inherent need to become a writer was fuelled not at his competitive school, but by his father, and the books which he would choose to read to his son: 'Sometimes he would call me to listen to two or three or four pages, seldom more, of writing he particularly enjoyed. He read and explained with zest and it was easy for me to like what he liked. In this unlikely way - considering the background: the racially mixed colonial school, the Asian inwardness at home - I had begun to put together an English literary anthology of my own.'
One gets the sense that Naipaul is rather an honest author, from passages like the following: 'I didn't feel competent as a reader until I was twenty-five. I had by that time spent seven years in England, four of them at Oxford, and I had a little of the social knowledge that was necessary for an understanding of English and European fiction. I had also made myself a writer, and was able, therefore, to see writing from the other side. Until then I had read blindly, without judgment, not really knowing how made-up stories were to be assessed.' He speaks rather candidly at times of problems encountered in the face of writing, and also discusses his inspiration for making himself a more well-rounded author.
'The Writer in India' is composed largely of Indian historical moments, but the scope is too wide for the shortness of the essay. Many fascinating occurrences are mentioned, but are then either moved on from or glossed over, which was a real shame. Had this essay been lengthened, or fewer things mentioned in more depth, it would provide a far more comprehensive look into the society in which Naipaul grew up, and explain to the reader more of his influences.
This particular tome runs to just 64 pages of rather large print; whilst it does offer Naipaul's experiences with schooling, childhood reading, writing, and education, it feels perhaps a little too slight to have a great deal of substance. He does, however, talk about a great deal of subjects: theatre, cinema, Indian 'epics', fables and fairytales, schooling, moving to England in order to study at Oxford University, and the effects of colonial rule, amongst others. Some of the paragraphs are insightful; others not so much. Regardless, throughout, Naipaul's writing is fluid and intelligent.
April 2, 2019
Debo confesar una vez más mi incultura literaria. No conocía a este autor ganador de premio Nobel y que falleció el año pasado.
La elección del autor era parte de un reto y una vez más se confirma que el participar en ellos, hace que salgamos de nuestra zona de confort, ampliemos horizontes y descubramos lecturas y autores maravillosos. Este ha sido el caso.
Aunque la obra que reseña es de mínima extensión, creo que es de máxima emotividad y calidad.
La primera parte nos muestra cómo el autor desde niño supo que era escritor (no que quisiera ser, él sabía que ya era) y su proceso de lectura y desarrollo hasta lograr encontrarse cómodo con la profesión que anhelaba.
La segunda parte es el dicurso que dio cuando le fue otorgado el Nobel, y realmente me ha parecido muy emotivo.
Un hombre que claramente no se conformó con vivir entre dos mundos, que quiso salir más allá y que se solidarizó hasta con los aborígenes que habían sido dueños de las tierras donde él nació. Un hombre que era adorador desde niño de "El lazarillo de Tormes" hasta el punto de en sus ratos de ocio haber ido traduciendolo al inglés (años después, Penguin le rechazaría publicarlo por invendible).
Cualquier cosa que os pueda intentar transmitir se quedará corta en impresiones y larga en extensión (más que el propio libro) así que os animo a leer este ensayo y el posterior discurso para disfrutar, como yo, de tantas frases e ideas certeras
La elección del autor era parte de un reto y una vez más se confirma que el participar en ellos, hace que salgamos de nuestra zona de confort, ampliemos horizontes y descubramos lecturas y autores maravillosos. Este ha sido el caso.
Aunque la obra que reseña es de mínima extensión, creo que es de máxima emotividad y calidad.
La primera parte nos muestra cómo el autor desde niño supo que era escritor (no que quisiera ser, él sabía que ya era) y su proceso de lectura y desarrollo hasta lograr encontrarse cómodo con la profesión que anhelaba.
La segunda parte es el dicurso que dio cuando le fue otorgado el Nobel, y realmente me ha parecido muy emotivo.
Un hombre que claramente no se conformó con vivir entre dos mundos, que quiso salir más allá y que se solidarizó hasta con los aborígenes que habían sido dueños de las tierras donde él nació. Un hombre que era adorador desde niño de "El lazarillo de Tormes" hasta el punto de en sus ratos de ocio haber ido traduciendolo al inglés (años después, Penguin le rechazaría publicarlo por invendible).
Cualquier cosa que os pueda intentar transmitir se quedará corta en impresiones y larga en extensión (más que el propio libro) así que os animo a leer este ensayo y el posterior discurso para disfrutar, como yo, de tantas frases e ideas certeras
August 15, 2020
En dos breves escritos, uno para cuando recibe el premio Nobel de 2001, Naipaul rememora su tiempos de niñez y juventud, cuándo sólo sintió el deseo de escribir, sin más saber qué significaba eso. Escuchando los fragmentos que su padre le leía, que sus maestros le obligan a leer y escuchar sin poder formarse una idea clara en su cabeza. Buscando tema tras tema, para poder hacer lo que quería: escribir. Hasta que habiendo ya estudiado, leído demasiado al azar, hace esta reflexión sobre sus lecturas: (…) “Hasta entonces había leído ciegamente, sin criterio, sin saber realmente cómo valorar las historias inventadas.” (…); y creo que es la mejor invitación que se puede leer en este librito pequeño: leamos sin criterio, en algún momento lo recuperaremos. Excelente lectura para siempre recibir un subidón de ánimo lector.
November 13, 2022
Short and sweet. Naipaul writes about his coming to terms with writing as a craft. I am not sure that he is correct about the novel as a form which he states is only aimed toward a metropolitan audience. It cannot express the inner life of those outside of the cities because those people mostly do not have a voice at all. But in my mind there are a lot of writers who write about their experiences outside the system (I am thinking mainly of Gorky here).
August 16, 2019
ইংরেজ সাহিত্যিক ভি এস নাইপলের বেড়ে উঠা, শৈশব এবং পড়ালেখা সংক্রান্ত কাহিনী নিয়ে এ বই।
লেখক এবং ভারত অংশে, মুসলমানদের সম্পার্কে উনি যা বলেছেন তা মোটেও সত্য না। আমি ওনার কথার প্রতিবাদ জানাচ্ছি। মুসলমানরা মোটেও যুদ্ধবাজ/দাঙ্গাবাজ জাতি না।
লেখক এবং ভারত অংশে, মুসলমানদের সম্পার্কে উনি যা বলেছেন তা মোটেও সত্য না। আমি ওনার কথার প্রতিবাদ জানাচ্ছি। মুসলমানরা মোটেও যুদ্ধবাজ/দাঙ্গাবাজ জাতি না।
Read
December 28, 2018Muy interesante relato autobiográfico del escritor británico de origen indio, nacio en Trinidad y Tobago, V. S. Naipaul, premio Nobel de Literatura 2001. Una refrescante mirada al tema de la literatura desde un punto de vista diferente, la infancia aislada en su propia comunidad inmigrante, con sus costumbres ancestrales hasta sus estudios en Londres y la búsqueda de su origen en la India y el regreso a Trinidad. Se complementa con el discurso de recepción del Nobel. Recomendable y suficientemente corta para leer de una sentada.
April 3, 2017
A brief, but delightful insight into the mind of Naipaul -- a genealogy of ideas and influence.
August 31, 2021
Nettes Buchlein über den Autors literarischen Lebensweg und seine Ursprünge in Trinidad
February 8, 2020
V.S. Naipaul nato a Trinidad nel 1932 da genitori indiani, lo scrittore ricevette il premio nobel per la letteratura nel 2001, è considerato fra i più grandi scrittori contemporanei.
In questo piccolo volume l’autore racconta di come da piccolo amasse gli oggetti della scrittura e della lettura: penne, fogli pregiati, libri; ma non ne facesse uso. Non inventava storie, non leggeva molto ed a scuola non era così bravo. Un libro però gli faceva spesso compagnia: le favole di Esopo, comprato con dei risparmi. Ricorda di come a 12 anni, il prof. Worm ci tenesse a proporre “Ventimila leghe sotto i mari” nell’ora di ricreazione, ma il piccolo Vidiadhar avrebbe preferito trascorrere la ricreazione in pace!
Il padre leggeva moltissimo ma non terminava mai i libri, gli piaceva studiare lo stile, le pause, la tempra dello scrittore e non era tanto interessato alla storia in sé. Così il padre gli leggeva dei brani tratti dal “Giulio Cesare; pagine scelte dei capitoli iniziali di Oliver Twist, Nicholas Nickleby e David Copperfield; la storia di Perseo tratta da Eroi della mitologia greca di Charles Kingsley; alcune pagine del Mulino sulla Floss; un romantico racconto malese di amore, fuga e morte di Joseph Conrad; un paio dei Racconti da Shakespeare di Lamb; qualche novella di O. Henry e di Maupassant; un paio di pagine ciniche sul Gange e su una festa religiosa tratte da Tutto il mondo è paese di Aldous Huxley; qualcosa nello stesso spirito tratto da Una vacanza indù di J.R. Ackerley; alcune pagine di Somerset Maugham.” A 12 anni scrisse un ‘antologia con i brani che suo padre gli leggeva ad alta voce. I libri indicati dal padre, al di fuori dei brani che conosceva già, non erano di così semplice lettura. L’antologia fu il suo primo approccio personale con la scrittura. La cultura e le tradizioni indiane erano ancora radicate in lui, c’era qualcosa di arcaico che lo legava ancora all’India indissolubilmente. Quando, per esempio, nell’isola Caraibica la comunità indiana rappresentava: “l Ramlila, lo spettacolo all’aperto in costume basato sul Ramayana, il poema epico sull’esilio e il successivo trionfo di Rama, il dio eroe indù ”, sebbene non capisse bene la lingua, era affascinato da quel poema epico, impressionato, il suo cuore palpitava di emozioni più di quando andava al cinema. Dal paesino multietnico si trasferì in città, dove le cose si fecero più difficili, soprattutto a scuola, era ancora faticoso seguire il professor Worm. Ma verso la fine delle medie, quelle che per noi sono le medie, una professoressa gli fece conoscere :” tre esperienze letterarie significative: Tartufo, che era come una fiaba terrificante, Cyrano de Bergerac, capace di risvegliare le emozioni più profonde, e il Lazarillo de Tormes, il romanzo picaresco spagnolo della metà del Cinquecento, il primo del suo genere, frizzante e ironico, che mi portarono in un mondo simile a quello che conoscevo. “ Poté così aggiungere alla sua antologia questi tre romanzi. Non componeva ancora, ma di una cosa era convinto sin da quando collezionava materiale scolastico, voleva diventare uno scrittore, aveva la malattia ma non i sintomi, quelli sarebbero arrivati dopo. Gli esigui guadagni del padre come giornalista non permettevano loro una vita tranquilla economicamente, Naipaul si vergognava del proprio stato sociale e sgobbava come un matto per riuscire a prendere una borsa di studio dalla Madre delle colonie,Il Regno Unito. Dall’isola britannica arrivavano medicinali, libri, cibo scadente ed una borsa di studio per Oxford era riservata ai migliori studenti. Naipaul la vinse sudando sangue, voleva vedere se studiando in un grande college avrebbe potuto costruire la sua carriera da scrittore, in effetti negli anni inglesi iniziò a buttar giù qualcosa di suo. Era deciso a diventare uno scrittore pur essendo sul lastrico, o riusciva nel suo intento o sarebbe dovuto ritornare nell’isola caraibica. Doveva riuscire ad inventar storie” fin dove poteva spingersi l’invenzione (ciò che Conrad aveva chiamato «fatti fortuiti»)? Qual era la logica e quale il valore? Continuavo a infilarmi in stradine secondarie. La mia personalità di scrittore mi pareva qualcosa di grottescamente fluido. Non mi dava nessuna gioia starmene seduto a tavolino fingendo di scrivere; mi sentivo a disagio e falso.” Si trasferì a Londra e mentre lavorava in una fabbrica di sigarette pian piano riuscì a trovare il sapore che doveva avere il suo linguaggio, doveva tornare indietro nel tempo, ai racconti di suo padre, alla campagna, all’isola, alle feste indiane, ecco, era questa la strada, come Tolstoj che racconta l’assedio di Sebastopoli. Cominciava a scrivere, significava riempire una lavagna con centinaia di pensieri sovrapposti e confusi e poi fare tabula rasa con il cancellino. Finalmente 4 anni più tardi arrivò una commissione: un libro di viaggio che parlasse delle Antille, tornava nelle colonie, tornava fra i derelitti a scrivere di gente che gli somigliava. Cosa avevano scritto delle colonie: Huxley, Lawrence e Waugh, gli scrittori imperiali della madre patria che tanto amava? Ma loro erano inglesi che si relazionavano con degli indigeni dall’alto del loro white savior; e lui era caraibico indiano, lui avrebbe avuto un approccio diverso, un simile che parla di simili. Presto scopre che la campagna , l’isola il territorio coloniale era l’ultima diapositiva scattata dopo tante altre, aveva scoperto che il colonialismo aveva prima decimato gli indigeni e poi aveva insediato una cultura nuova, soprapposta, forse non genuina o congrua. Ora capiva qual era il territorio tenebroso in cui non riusciva ad addentrarsi. Presto avrebbe scoperto un suo modo di raccontare la storia partendo da un nucleo polifonico” Quand’ero un bambino attratto dalla lettura, avevo la sensazione che due mondi mi separassero dai libri che mi venivano proposti a scuola e in biblioteca: il mondo della fanciullezza, di un’India viva soltanto nel ricordo, e il mondo più coloniale della nostra città. Pensavo che le difficoltà fossero dovute ai turbamenti sociali ed emotivi della mia infanzia – la sensazione di essere entrato quando il film era cominciato da un pezzo – e che, una volta diventato grande, sarebbero svanite. Quel che non sapevo, nemmeno dopo aver scritto i miei primi libri di narrativa – interessato com’ero unicamente alla trama e alle persone e a come arrivare in fondo e a allestire bene le battute –, era che quelle due sfere di tenebra erano diventate il mio tema. La finzione letteraria, con i suoi misteri, con la possibilità di trovare la retta via grazie a un percorso tortuoso, mi aveva portato al mio tema. Ma non poteva condurmi oltre “.
L’India
Questo capitolo diventa di stridente attualità se pensiamo all’India odierna di Modi, nazionalista, dittatoriale, induista. L’autore racconta di come ebbe modo di studiare l’India dell’anno mille occupata dai Mogul musulmani, dalla loro ricchezza, dalle loro munificenza ma anche dalla loro ferocia nell’infliggere le pene; mentre fuori dalla reggia regnava la povertà. I cronisti inglesi hanno sempre pensato all?india come un uncum: l’India induista e l’India Musulmana, i coloni inglesi sembrano aver cancellato il concetto che quest’unità nonc’è mai stata, ed è incredibile come dopo molti secoli gli indiani musulmani e gli indiani induisti si sentano ancora, ed ancora oggi nel 2020, si sentano ancora due stati in uno stato. Paragona l’India occupata dal Medio Evo dai Mogul all’America latina occupata dai coloni europei dopo il 1492. Così ripensa a quando era bambino all’epopea del Ramayana che parlava di un ‘unità religiosa in un unico stato, un’unità che non c’era. “Non era un’India sulla quale fosse possibile leggere qualcosa. Non era l’India di Kipling o di E.M. Forster o di Somerset Maugham, ed era lontana dall’India alquanto raffinata di Nehru e Tagore. (C’era uno scrittore indiano, Premchand, 1880-1936, le cui storie in hindi e in urdu avrebbero reso reale il passato del villaggio indiano, ma noi non lo conoscevamo; non eravamo quel genere di lettori). “
Da commentatrice ricordo come le caste siano state inventate dagli induisti e non dai musulmani, e le gerarchie sociali in India ci sono ancora, ci sono sempre state e sempre ci saranno. Modi, il nuovo presidente, ha riacceso le divisioni, cavalcando l’ondata nazionalistica che sta coinvolgendo molte nazioni del mondo, Italia compresa. Quindi non riesco a leggere questo capitolo che con molta criticità, da pensatrice liberale ( non liberista), antirazzista e progressista quale sono.
Cita lo scrittore angli indiano R.K. Narayan e come egli avesse uno stile personale proprio nel lessico e nella sintassi inglese usati, come apparisse genuino e non un epigono dei grandi scrittori inglesi ma era un raccontare colmo di astrazioni ed ellissi.“ Il suo mondo Narayan lo possedeva interamente. Era completo e sempre pronto ad attenderlo; inoltre era abbastanza lontano dal centro delle cose perché i perturbamenti esterni si attenuassero prima di raggiungerlo. Persino il movimento indipendentista, negli infocati anni Trenta e Quaranta, era lontano, e la presenza britannica si manifestava soprattutto nei nomi degli edifici e dei luoghi. Era un’India che pareva farsi beffe della vanagloria e che continuava imperterrita per la sua strada.” E ancora su di lui: “I «colpi dell’invasore» sono delle astrazioni. Non c’è vera sofferenza, e la rinascita è quasi magica. La gente alla buona dei libri di Narayan, che si guadagna da vivere modestamente grazie a lavori modesti, confortata e governata dai riti, dà la sensazione di essere stranamente isolata dalla storia. […]ha una visione semplice del passato indiano, che si presenta in tableaux semplici. Il primo è del Ramayana (circa 1000 a.C.); nel secondo c’è il Buddha, una scena del sesto secolo a.C.; nel terzo c’è un filosofo dell’Ottocento, Shankaracharya; nel quarto si assiste all’arrivo degli inglesi, mille anni dopo, e si finisce con Mr. Shilling, il direttore della banca locale. Nei tableaux non compaiono i secoli delle invasioni musulmane e del dominio musulmano”
Continua a parlare degli scrittori imperiali e pone il paragone fra uno scritto quasi giovanile di Dickens “Nicholas Nickleby” del 1838 pieno di naturalezza e “Storia di due città” del 1859 già investito di un certo manierismo descrittivo. Questo paragone lo lega alla fluidità della letteratura, altro argomento molto contemporaneo. Se gli scrittori ottocenteschi potevano viaggiare in una griglia di argomenti e di stili certa, pacata e sicura, oggi questo genere non può essere riproposto. Parla ancora delle migrazioni, incroci innumerevoli di flussi, come nell’Impero Romano, l’immigrazione è un argomento dirimente per lui.
Così mentre lui, uomo contemporaneo ,nato nel ’32, uomo del ‘900, ha sempre avuto un atteggiamento di distacco verso la letteratura inglese ottocentesca, suo padre non lo ebbe, anzi fu grazie a quella che potette alimentare la sua velleità di scrittore e le passò al figlio. Ma se il padre scriveva grazie ad una letteratura che descriveva vite vissute per procura, il figlio aveva bisogno di autenticità. Il cinema colmò la sua idiosincrasia verso la letteratura negli bui, il linguaggio del cinema è la prima vera novità letteraria del ‘900.
DUE MONDI
Discorso per il Premio Nobel. Questo discorso è stato pronunciato quando ormai era vecchio, qui la sua visione del mondo è molto meno netta dei saggi precedenti, non vi è traccia di nazionalismo ma di una curiosità che globalmente scava ogni civiltà per arrivare a stracci di verità. Inizia col dire che tutto ciò che ha scritto è un libro unico, gli ultimi libri hanno senso se si considerano i libri precedenti in una somma che arriva quindi al presente. Uno dei motori che lo hanno spronato a scrivere è stato l’intuito, l’intuito visto come parte di un talento genuino. Ricorda come abbia saccheggiato biblioteche e archivi di stato per scoprire di più sui suoi tre territori che lo hanno formato: l’india delle origini, lo stato di Trinidad dove è vissuto fino a 16 anni circa e il Regno Unito. Nel villaggio viveva in una casa bianca con terrazzo al primo piano, locale per le preghiere ed un piccolo ponte che la legava ad un’altra abitazione. L’arredo della casa conteneva insolite inserzioni di arte indiana: colonne, colori variegati. Le case degli indiani nei Caraibi erano considerate esotismi. I contadini al termine della loro vita lavorativa potevano acquisire il terreno coltivato, questo finché l’India fu colonia inglese, dopo l’indipendenza questa concessione finì, così come i rimpatri sicuri. Continua con le sue scoperte archivistiche: come la lettera del re di Spagna al governatore di Trinidad, datata 12 ottobre 1625, per decimare tutti gli indios Chaguanes, una delle tante pagine vergognose della storia coloniale. Conclude con un pensiero di Proust, che spero io stessa di conservare nel cuore: “«Le belle cose che scriveremo se abbiamo talento» dice Proust «sono dentro di noi, indistinte, come il ricordo di un’aria che ci delizia senza che riusciamo a ritrovarne i contorni … Chi è ossessionato da questo ricordo confuso di verità che non ha mai conosciuto ha un dono … Il talento è una sorta di ricordo che gli permetterà di avvicinare a sé questa musica confusa, di sentirla chiaramente, di annotarla…».
Il «talento», dice Proust. Io direi la fortuna, e molta fatica.”
In questo piccolo volume l’autore racconta di come da piccolo amasse gli oggetti della scrittura e della lettura: penne, fogli pregiati, libri; ma non ne facesse uso. Non inventava storie, non leggeva molto ed a scuola non era così bravo. Un libro però gli faceva spesso compagnia: le favole di Esopo, comprato con dei risparmi. Ricorda di come a 12 anni, il prof. Worm ci tenesse a proporre “Ventimila leghe sotto i mari” nell’ora di ricreazione, ma il piccolo Vidiadhar avrebbe preferito trascorrere la ricreazione in pace!
Il padre leggeva moltissimo ma non terminava mai i libri, gli piaceva studiare lo stile, le pause, la tempra dello scrittore e non era tanto interessato alla storia in sé. Così il padre gli leggeva dei brani tratti dal “Giulio Cesare; pagine scelte dei capitoli iniziali di Oliver Twist, Nicholas Nickleby e David Copperfield; la storia di Perseo tratta da Eroi della mitologia greca di Charles Kingsley; alcune pagine del Mulino sulla Floss; un romantico racconto malese di amore, fuga e morte di Joseph Conrad; un paio dei Racconti da Shakespeare di Lamb; qualche novella di O. Henry e di Maupassant; un paio di pagine ciniche sul Gange e su una festa religiosa tratte da Tutto il mondo è paese di Aldous Huxley; qualcosa nello stesso spirito tratto da Una vacanza indù di J.R. Ackerley; alcune pagine di Somerset Maugham.” A 12 anni scrisse un ‘antologia con i brani che suo padre gli leggeva ad alta voce. I libri indicati dal padre, al di fuori dei brani che conosceva già, non erano di così semplice lettura. L’antologia fu il suo primo approccio personale con la scrittura. La cultura e le tradizioni indiane erano ancora radicate in lui, c’era qualcosa di arcaico che lo legava ancora all’India indissolubilmente. Quando, per esempio, nell’isola Caraibica la comunità indiana rappresentava: “l Ramlila, lo spettacolo all’aperto in costume basato sul Ramayana, il poema epico sull’esilio e il successivo trionfo di Rama, il dio eroe indù ”, sebbene non capisse bene la lingua, era affascinato da quel poema epico, impressionato, il suo cuore palpitava di emozioni più di quando andava al cinema. Dal paesino multietnico si trasferì in città, dove le cose si fecero più difficili, soprattutto a scuola, era ancora faticoso seguire il professor Worm. Ma verso la fine delle medie, quelle che per noi sono le medie, una professoressa gli fece conoscere :” tre esperienze letterarie significative: Tartufo, che era come una fiaba terrificante, Cyrano de Bergerac, capace di risvegliare le emozioni più profonde, e il Lazarillo de Tormes, il romanzo picaresco spagnolo della metà del Cinquecento, il primo del suo genere, frizzante e ironico, che mi portarono in un mondo simile a quello che conoscevo. “ Poté così aggiungere alla sua antologia questi tre romanzi. Non componeva ancora, ma di una cosa era convinto sin da quando collezionava materiale scolastico, voleva diventare uno scrittore, aveva la malattia ma non i sintomi, quelli sarebbero arrivati dopo. Gli esigui guadagni del padre come giornalista non permettevano loro una vita tranquilla economicamente, Naipaul si vergognava del proprio stato sociale e sgobbava come un matto per riuscire a prendere una borsa di studio dalla Madre delle colonie,Il Regno Unito. Dall’isola britannica arrivavano medicinali, libri, cibo scadente ed una borsa di studio per Oxford era riservata ai migliori studenti. Naipaul la vinse sudando sangue, voleva vedere se studiando in un grande college avrebbe potuto costruire la sua carriera da scrittore, in effetti negli anni inglesi iniziò a buttar giù qualcosa di suo. Era deciso a diventare uno scrittore pur essendo sul lastrico, o riusciva nel suo intento o sarebbe dovuto ritornare nell’isola caraibica. Doveva riuscire ad inventar storie” fin dove poteva spingersi l’invenzione (ciò che Conrad aveva chiamato «fatti fortuiti»)? Qual era la logica e quale il valore? Continuavo a infilarmi in stradine secondarie. La mia personalità di scrittore mi pareva qualcosa di grottescamente fluido. Non mi dava nessuna gioia starmene seduto a tavolino fingendo di scrivere; mi sentivo a disagio e falso.” Si trasferì a Londra e mentre lavorava in una fabbrica di sigarette pian piano riuscì a trovare il sapore che doveva avere il suo linguaggio, doveva tornare indietro nel tempo, ai racconti di suo padre, alla campagna, all’isola, alle feste indiane, ecco, era questa la strada, come Tolstoj che racconta l’assedio di Sebastopoli. Cominciava a scrivere, significava riempire una lavagna con centinaia di pensieri sovrapposti e confusi e poi fare tabula rasa con il cancellino. Finalmente 4 anni più tardi arrivò una commissione: un libro di viaggio che parlasse delle Antille, tornava nelle colonie, tornava fra i derelitti a scrivere di gente che gli somigliava. Cosa avevano scritto delle colonie: Huxley, Lawrence e Waugh, gli scrittori imperiali della madre patria che tanto amava? Ma loro erano inglesi che si relazionavano con degli indigeni dall’alto del loro white savior; e lui era caraibico indiano, lui avrebbe avuto un approccio diverso, un simile che parla di simili. Presto scopre che la campagna , l’isola il territorio coloniale era l’ultima diapositiva scattata dopo tante altre, aveva scoperto che il colonialismo aveva prima decimato gli indigeni e poi aveva insediato una cultura nuova, soprapposta, forse non genuina o congrua. Ora capiva qual era il territorio tenebroso in cui non riusciva ad addentrarsi. Presto avrebbe scoperto un suo modo di raccontare la storia partendo da un nucleo polifonico” Quand’ero un bambino attratto dalla lettura, avevo la sensazione che due mondi mi separassero dai libri che mi venivano proposti a scuola e in biblioteca: il mondo della fanciullezza, di un’India viva soltanto nel ricordo, e il mondo più coloniale della nostra città. Pensavo che le difficoltà fossero dovute ai turbamenti sociali ed emotivi della mia infanzia – la sensazione di essere entrato quando il film era cominciato da un pezzo – e che, una volta diventato grande, sarebbero svanite. Quel che non sapevo, nemmeno dopo aver scritto i miei primi libri di narrativa – interessato com’ero unicamente alla trama e alle persone e a come arrivare in fondo e a allestire bene le battute –, era che quelle due sfere di tenebra erano diventate il mio tema. La finzione letteraria, con i suoi misteri, con la possibilità di trovare la retta via grazie a un percorso tortuoso, mi aveva portato al mio tema. Ma non poteva condurmi oltre “.
L’India
Questo capitolo diventa di stridente attualità se pensiamo all’India odierna di Modi, nazionalista, dittatoriale, induista. L’autore racconta di come ebbe modo di studiare l’India dell’anno mille occupata dai Mogul musulmani, dalla loro ricchezza, dalle loro munificenza ma anche dalla loro ferocia nell’infliggere le pene; mentre fuori dalla reggia regnava la povertà. I cronisti inglesi hanno sempre pensato all?india come un uncum: l’India induista e l’India Musulmana, i coloni inglesi sembrano aver cancellato il concetto che quest’unità nonc’è mai stata, ed è incredibile come dopo molti secoli gli indiani musulmani e gli indiani induisti si sentano ancora, ed ancora oggi nel 2020, si sentano ancora due stati in uno stato. Paragona l’India occupata dal Medio Evo dai Mogul all’America latina occupata dai coloni europei dopo il 1492. Così ripensa a quando era bambino all’epopea del Ramayana che parlava di un ‘unità religiosa in un unico stato, un’unità che non c’era. “Non era un’India sulla quale fosse possibile leggere qualcosa. Non era l’India di Kipling o di E.M. Forster o di Somerset Maugham, ed era lontana dall’India alquanto raffinata di Nehru e Tagore. (C’era uno scrittore indiano, Premchand, 1880-1936, le cui storie in hindi e in urdu avrebbero reso reale il passato del villaggio indiano, ma noi non lo conoscevamo; non eravamo quel genere di lettori). “
Da commentatrice ricordo come le caste siano state inventate dagli induisti e non dai musulmani, e le gerarchie sociali in India ci sono ancora, ci sono sempre state e sempre ci saranno. Modi, il nuovo presidente, ha riacceso le divisioni, cavalcando l’ondata nazionalistica che sta coinvolgendo molte nazioni del mondo, Italia compresa. Quindi non riesco a leggere questo capitolo che con molta criticità, da pensatrice liberale ( non liberista), antirazzista e progressista quale sono.
Cita lo scrittore angli indiano R.K. Narayan e come egli avesse uno stile personale proprio nel lessico e nella sintassi inglese usati, come apparisse genuino e non un epigono dei grandi scrittori inglesi ma era un raccontare colmo di astrazioni ed ellissi.“ Il suo mondo Narayan lo possedeva interamente. Era completo e sempre pronto ad attenderlo; inoltre era abbastanza lontano dal centro delle cose perché i perturbamenti esterni si attenuassero prima di raggiungerlo. Persino il movimento indipendentista, negli infocati anni Trenta e Quaranta, era lontano, e la presenza britannica si manifestava soprattutto nei nomi degli edifici e dei luoghi. Era un’India che pareva farsi beffe della vanagloria e che continuava imperterrita per la sua strada.” E ancora su di lui: “I «colpi dell’invasore» sono delle astrazioni. Non c’è vera sofferenza, e la rinascita è quasi magica. La gente alla buona dei libri di Narayan, che si guadagna da vivere modestamente grazie a lavori modesti, confortata e governata dai riti, dà la sensazione di essere stranamente isolata dalla storia. […]ha una visione semplice del passato indiano, che si presenta in tableaux semplici. Il primo è del Ramayana (circa 1000 a.C.); nel secondo c’è il Buddha, una scena del sesto secolo a.C.; nel terzo c’è un filosofo dell’Ottocento, Shankaracharya; nel quarto si assiste all’arrivo degli inglesi, mille anni dopo, e si finisce con Mr. Shilling, il direttore della banca locale. Nei tableaux non compaiono i secoli delle invasioni musulmane e del dominio musulmano”
Continua a parlare degli scrittori imperiali e pone il paragone fra uno scritto quasi giovanile di Dickens “Nicholas Nickleby” del 1838 pieno di naturalezza e “Storia di due città” del 1859 già investito di un certo manierismo descrittivo. Questo paragone lo lega alla fluidità della letteratura, altro argomento molto contemporaneo. Se gli scrittori ottocenteschi potevano viaggiare in una griglia di argomenti e di stili certa, pacata e sicura, oggi questo genere non può essere riproposto. Parla ancora delle migrazioni, incroci innumerevoli di flussi, come nell’Impero Romano, l’immigrazione è un argomento dirimente per lui.
Così mentre lui, uomo contemporaneo ,nato nel ’32, uomo del ‘900, ha sempre avuto un atteggiamento di distacco verso la letteratura inglese ottocentesca, suo padre non lo ebbe, anzi fu grazie a quella che potette alimentare la sua velleità di scrittore e le passò al figlio. Ma se il padre scriveva grazie ad una letteratura che descriveva vite vissute per procura, il figlio aveva bisogno di autenticità. Il cinema colmò la sua idiosincrasia verso la letteratura negli bui, il linguaggio del cinema è la prima vera novità letteraria del ‘900.
DUE MONDI
Discorso per il Premio Nobel. Questo discorso è stato pronunciato quando ormai era vecchio, qui la sua visione del mondo è molto meno netta dei saggi precedenti, non vi è traccia di nazionalismo ma di una curiosità che globalmente scava ogni civiltà per arrivare a stracci di verità. Inizia col dire che tutto ciò che ha scritto è un libro unico, gli ultimi libri hanno senso se si considerano i libri precedenti in una somma che arriva quindi al presente. Uno dei motori che lo hanno spronato a scrivere è stato l’intuito, l’intuito visto come parte di un talento genuino. Ricorda come abbia saccheggiato biblioteche e archivi di stato per scoprire di più sui suoi tre territori che lo hanno formato: l’india delle origini, lo stato di Trinidad dove è vissuto fino a 16 anni circa e il Regno Unito. Nel villaggio viveva in una casa bianca con terrazzo al primo piano, locale per le preghiere ed un piccolo ponte che la legava ad un’altra abitazione. L’arredo della casa conteneva insolite inserzioni di arte indiana: colonne, colori variegati. Le case degli indiani nei Caraibi erano considerate esotismi. I contadini al termine della loro vita lavorativa potevano acquisire il terreno coltivato, questo finché l’India fu colonia inglese, dopo l’indipendenza questa concessione finì, così come i rimpatri sicuri. Continua con le sue scoperte archivistiche: come la lettera del re di Spagna al governatore di Trinidad, datata 12 ottobre 1625, per decimare tutti gli indios Chaguanes, una delle tante pagine vergognose della storia coloniale. Conclude con un pensiero di Proust, che spero io stessa di conservare nel cuore: “«Le belle cose che scriveremo se abbiamo talento» dice Proust «sono dentro di noi, indistinte, come il ricordo di un’aria che ci delizia senza che riusciamo a ritrovarne i contorni … Chi è ossessionato da questo ricordo confuso di verità che non ha mai conosciuto ha un dono … Il talento è una sorta di ricordo che gli permetterà di avvicinare a sé questa musica confusa, di sentirla chiaramente, di annotarla…».
Il «talento», dice Proust. Io direi la fortuna, e molta fatica.”
May 26, 2017
ligeramente entretenido. le falta pasión.
May 14, 2019
Eloquent and developed. I will have to read more of Naipaul. I identify with him quite a bit.
January 13, 2024
Leituras de 2024
.
Ler e escrever [2001/2020]
Orig. Reading and writing
V. S. Naipaul (🇹🇹1932-2018)
Âyiné, 2017 e 2021, 124p.
Trad. Rogério Galindo e Sandra Dolinsky
_____________________________
“Eu queria ser escritor. Mas junto com o desejo, viera a compreensão de que a literatura que me havia causado esse desejo era de outro mundo, muito distante do meu” (pág 15/iBooks).
.
Ah, férias…somente este hiato de trabalho e demais afazeres compreendidos no ano útil, para me permitir poder ler com vagar as coisas que há tanto quero lê-las. E nada como a celebrada condição de estar, ainda que momentaneamente, desligado desses afazeres e poder viver o deleite de ler um livro atrás do outro nesses dias brejeiros...
.
Sempre que posso, gosto de ler sobre livros, leitura e o ofício de escrever. É um universo instigante para mim o que pulula a cabeça do escritor, as gentes dos livros somos levados a crer num mar de palavras e ideias, uma mixórdia de temas que se misturam à própria vivência do escritor e que, uma vez deitados ao papel, se tornam arte, se tornam livros.
.
Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul, ou, para ficar mais fácil, V. S. Naipaul, nascido na idílica Trinidad & Tobago, é um escritor que ganhou o prêmio Nobel de literatura em 2001. Entre seus livros mais famoso estão “Os mímicos”, “Uma curva no rio” e “Uma casa para o Sr. Biswas”, livros que aliás os possuo e que estão já há algum tempo relegados à espera e à falta de lepidez de seu dono, para lê-los. Paciência.
.
Em “Ler e escrever”, são juntados três textos do autor: este que dá título ao livro, “O escritor e a Índia” (uma viagem que Naipaul fez em busca das suas raízes mais primárias) e o famoso “Dois mundos”, que trata do seu discurso quando laureado com o Nobel pela Academia, em 2001.
.
Bom, topei com este livro de bolso por acaso na loja de livros do iBooks, ainda enquanto lia o romance do Kawabata, minirresenhado ontem. Fiquei logo interessado em saber do universo criativo de um autor que tenho imensa vontade de ler algum de seus livros (quem sabe, não já emplaque um dos dele na próxima leitura?) e o que pude notar é que Naipaul teve lutas internas difíceis de lidar, já que, à medida em que foi amadurecendo seu estilo de escrita, concomitantemente, aumentava seu amadurecimento social.
.
Uma vez que Naipaul olhou com olhos críticos toda a história por trás das bases literárias, às quais foi apresentado ainda quando estudante de Trinidad, uma vez já vivendo em Londres, ele pode perceber um imenso hiato na qualidade e eficácia do ensino escolar de ambos os países - compreensivelmente, já que estamos falando de colônia e colonizador. A disparidade percebida por Naipaul não era somente racial ou étnica. A própria literatura da ilha e outras que posteriormente analisou, não eram de fato coerentes com a própria história de vida ali. Naipaul escreveria “Os mímicos” para justamente falar dessa falha, ‘um sentimento de vergonha e fantasia colonial, de impotentes mentindo sobre si mesmos e para si mesmos’.
.
O livro em si, de forma simples, muito entrega da vida intelectual de Naipaul e seu universo de criação literária. Vale a pena sua leitura principalmente por se debruçar sobre o problema da herança maldita relegada pelo processo colonizador, quando homens que se consideram superiores, invadem vidas e histórias e as tornam subalternas, danificando - por muito tempo, vê-se - aquela forma particular de se ver e de ver o mundo. Trágico, ainda que cômico.
.
Ler e escrever [2001/2020]
Orig. Reading and writing
V. S. Naipaul (🇹🇹1932-2018)
Âyiné, 2017 e 2021, 124p.
Trad. Rogério Galindo e Sandra Dolinsky
_____________________________
“Eu queria ser escritor. Mas junto com o desejo, viera a compreensão de que a literatura que me havia causado esse desejo era de outro mundo, muito distante do meu” (pág 15/iBooks).
.
Ah, férias…somente este hiato de trabalho e demais afazeres compreendidos no ano útil, para me permitir poder ler com vagar as coisas que há tanto quero lê-las. E nada como a celebrada condição de estar, ainda que momentaneamente, desligado desses afazeres e poder viver o deleite de ler um livro atrás do outro nesses dias brejeiros...
.
Sempre que posso, gosto de ler sobre livros, leitura e o ofício de escrever. É um universo instigante para mim o que pulula a cabeça do escritor, as gentes dos livros somos levados a crer num mar de palavras e ideias, uma mixórdia de temas que se misturam à própria vivência do escritor e que, uma vez deitados ao papel, se tornam arte, se tornam livros.
.
Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul, ou, para ficar mais fácil, V. S. Naipaul, nascido na idílica Trinidad & Tobago, é um escritor que ganhou o prêmio Nobel de literatura em 2001. Entre seus livros mais famoso estão “Os mímicos”, “Uma curva no rio” e “Uma casa para o Sr. Biswas”, livros que aliás os possuo e que estão já há algum tempo relegados à espera e à falta de lepidez de seu dono, para lê-los. Paciência.
.
Em “Ler e escrever”, são juntados três textos do autor: este que dá título ao livro, “O escritor e a Índia” (uma viagem que Naipaul fez em busca das suas raízes mais primárias) e o famoso “Dois mundos”, que trata do seu discurso quando laureado com o Nobel pela Academia, em 2001.
.
Bom, topei com este livro de bolso por acaso na loja de livros do iBooks, ainda enquanto lia o romance do Kawabata, minirresenhado ontem. Fiquei logo interessado em saber do universo criativo de um autor que tenho imensa vontade de ler algum de seus livros (quem sabe, não já emplaque um dos dele na próxima leitura?) e o que pude notar é que Naipaul teve lutas internas difíceis de lidar, já que, à medida em que foi amadurecendo seu estilo de escrita, concomitantemente, aumentava seu amadurecimento social.
.
Uma vez que Naipaul olhou com olhos críticos toda a história por trás das bases literárias, às quais foi apresentado ainda quando estudante de Trinidad, uma vez já vivendo em Londres, ele pode perceber um imenso hiato na qualidade e eficácia do ensino escolar de ambos os países - compreensivelmente, já que estamos falando de colônia e colonizador. A disparidade percebida por Naipaul não era somente racial ou étnica. A própria literatura da ilha e outras que posteriormente analisou, não eram de fato coerentes com a própria história de vida ali. Naipaul escreveria “Os mímicos” para justamente falar dessa falha, ‘um sentimento de vergonha e fantasia colonial, de impotentes mentindo sobre si mesmos e para si mesmos’.
.
O livro em si, de forma simples, muito entrega da vida intelectual de Naipaul e seu universo de criação literária. Vale a pena sua leitura principalmente por se debruçar sobre o problema da herança maldita relegada pelo processo colonizador, quando homens que se consideram superiores, invadem vidas e histórias e as tornam subalternas, danificando - por muito tempo, vê-se - aquela forma particular de se ver e de ver o mundo. Trágico, ainda que cômico.
May 17, 2019
Like a cigarette
"Literature is the sum of its discoveries. What is derivative can be impressive and intelligent. It can give pleasure and it will have its season, short or long. But we will always want to go back to the originators. What matters in the end in literature, what is always there, is truly good. And though played-out forms can throw up miraculous sports like the The Importance of Being Earnest or Decline and Fall - what is good is always what is new, in both form and content. What is good forgets whatever models it might have had, and is unexpected, we have to catch it on the wing. Writing of this quality cannot be taught in a writing course.
Literature, like all living art, is always on the move. It is part of its life that its dominant form should constantly change. No literary form - the Shakespeare play, the epic poem, the Restoration comedy, the essay, the work of history - can continue for very long at the same pitch of inspiration. If every creative talent is always burning itself out, every literary form is always getting to the end of what it can do."
- V.S. Naipaul
"Literature is the sum of its discoveries. What is derivative can be impressive and intelligent. It can give pleasure and it will have its season, short or long. But we will always want to go back to the originators. What matters in the end in literature, what is always there, is truly good. And though played-out forms can throw up miraculous sports like the The Importance of Being Earnest or Decline and Fall - what is good is always what is new, in both form and content. What is good forgets whatever models it might have had, and is unexpected, we have to catch it on the wing. Writing of this quality cannot be taught in a writing course.
Literature, like all living art, is always on the move. It is part of its life that its dominant form should constantly change. No literary form - the Shakespeare play, the epic poem, the Restoration comedy, the essay, the work of history - can continue for very long at the same pitch of inspiration. If every creative talent is always burning itself out, every literary form is always getting to the end of what it can do."
- V.S. Naipaul
July 10, 2025
I really enjoyed reading this essay.
Things I enjoyed: The author gives an honest account of his childhood years and how he started reading. He also explains his first writings and how his writing later shifted to fit his new worldview and circumstances. I liked very much his explanation about shifting from fiction to non-fiction writing. It is also very good to read his ideas/views about other authors' writing accounts of India.
What I enjoyed less: I appreciate his honesty about contemporary fiction, but I do not agree with him. He argues that the novel as a genre has ceased to explain the world today. In his view, the novel worked miraculously in the 19th century, but it lost its dynamic from the 20th century onwards. On the contrary, he finds, that it is cinema and films that work best in the 20th century, doing the job that novels did in the century before.
We are now in the 21st century and I find that many contemporary novels are able to portray the world today vividly. It is true that it is much more difficult for a novelist to innovate today and that perhaps the novel as a form has been exhausted. However, novels can still offer fresh subject matters and new ideas. After all, cinema is also old now too.
Things I enjoyed: The author gives an honest account of his childhood years and how he started reading. He also explains his first writings and how his writing later shifted to fit his new worldview and circumstances. I liked very much his explanation about shifting from fiction to non-fiction writing. It is also very good to read his ideas/views about other authors' writing accounts of India.
What I enjoyed less: I appreciate his honesty about contemporary fiction, but I do not agree with him. He argues that the novel as a genre has ceased to explain the world today. In his view, the novel worked miraculously in the 19th century, but it lost its dynamic from the 20th century onwards. On the contrary, he finds, that it is cinema and films that work best in the 20th century, doing the job that novels did in the century before.
We are now in the 21st century and I find that many contemporary novels are able to portray the world today vividly. It is true that it is much more difficult for a novelist to innovate today and that perhaps the novel as a form has been exhausted. However, novels can still offer fresh subject matters and new ideas. After all, cinema is also old now too.
December 16, 2021
O livro tem dois ensaios e o discurso do autor ao receber o Nobel, todos excelentes. O conteúdo é mais ou menos parecido. Naipaul trata da infância em Trindade e Tobago, o estranhamento em relação a viver a cultura indiana transportada para uma colônia caribenha, a decisão de se tornar escritor antes mesmo de compreender a literatura, por influência do pai jornalista, e a necessidade de migração da ficção para os relatos de viagens no fim da carreira. O autor é muito franco em relação às dificuldades e à falta de um planejamento prévio para a escrita de suas obras, e confesso que isso me deixou ao mesmo tempo fascinado e desconfiado. Naipaul também escreve sobre identidade e desenraizamento sem ressentimentos, mas também sem deslumbre, e sempre com um toque de leveza e humor. É mais um autor a quem eu devo mais leituras.
January 17, 2022
Om skrivandets och läsandets villkor för de som står utanför västvärldens "monopol" på berättelser, så upplever jag denna. Känns väldigt viktigt, och är någonting jag har funderat över också när jag läser litteratur från andra världsdelar, som inte delar samma litteraturhistoria men ändå har "påtvingats" den genom kolonialism. Hur skulle det sett ut annars? Och hur kan man läsa den litteraturen med en större förståelse, försöka ha icke-västerländska premisser? Svårt, men första steget är väl att tänka på det, och det tycker jag att Naipaul här får en att göra genom att berätta om sin egen resa som både läsare och författare. Dessutom: länders historia som glöms bort, stor påverkan också. Bara tre för att jag gärna hade sett den fördjupad, det är en så kort essä.
April 3, 2022
Não era o livro que esperava de um Nobel.
São dois textos curtos e o discurso de agradecimento pelo Nobel.
Não estava esperando algo ficcional, mas algo voltado sobre como apreciar o que lemos ou como escrever melhor...
Vejo a narrativa do ponto de vista de um indiano em um país estrangeiro e suas dificuldades; outro texto sobre conquistadores na América Central; por fim, um texto técnico de agradecimento, com citação de outro autor.
A nota baixa é que não correspondeu às expectativas pelo título.
São dois textos curtos e o discurso de agradecimento pelo Nobel.
Não estava esperando algo ficcional, mas algo voltado sobre como apreciar o que lemos ou como escrever melhor...
Vejo a narrativa do ponto de vista de um indiano em um país estrangeiro e suas dificuldades; outro texto sobre conquistadores na América Central; por fim, um texto técnico de agradecimento, com citação de outro autor.
A nota baixa é que não correspondeu às expectativas pelo título.
August 6, 2019
En kanska trevlig essay även om titeln kanske missar målet. Det intressanta är spekulationerna kring förutsättningarna för litteratur och vad som gör litteratur ”bra”. När jag första gången löste boken så tyckte jag att det mesta var ”mossigt” och väl kulturkonservativt. Kanske en missuppfattning för de exempel som lyfts ur, säg, Dickens är belysande.
February 3, 2024
Un libro suddiviso in due parti predominanti: l’iniziazione dell’autore ai libri e al mondo della scrittura, e la vita coloniale che toglie non solo diritti, ma anche una storia passata a cui fare riferimento per il popolo colonizzato. Queste due condizioni poi, durante tutto il testo, si mischiano, si mescolano e si amalgamano a vicenda, costruendo un racconto appassionante e sincero.
January 13, 2025
There is little of value in this essay. Perhaps the last line, where he declares that those who would have gone into literature in times past are now working cinema is the most interesting idea. He also mentions that novels must innovate in form and content. Otherwise, passable.
June 4, 2018
Me hubiese gustado que fuese más largo.
July 29, 2018
Algunos pasajes algo aburridos, pero al final el estilo del autor los salva y te permite conocer una gran experiencia literaria.
March 5, 2024
Bem interessante, o grande escritor ganhador do Nobel, nos conta um pouco da sua história.
February 25, 2020
Libricino poco conosciuto, ma dal buon potenziale... Per conoscere cosa ne penso ed eventuali citazioni visita il mio blog: www.flaviasdiary.com
January 3, 2017
Muy claro y personal, espero leer más de Naipaul pronto. Di con este libro gracias a los ensayos de Fabián Casas.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews