Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.42 AVERAGE
3.42 AVERAGE
Brilliant novel, indeed, one to discuss for hours. The protagonist’s deep longing for first world experience, his failure to achieve it through his own merit, his frustrated lashing out, his ultimate subservience, make him one of the more pathetic characters I’ve come across. The setting in a country and continent in post-colonial upheaval is portrayed with brutal and sympathetic reality, including the struggles of various characters to sort out their attitudes, directions, and even wardrobes in the face of major change.
The story is so-so, it is the strength of Naipaul's writing which carries it up to two stars. Maybe two and a half. It falters often, but on occasion will come across as perceptive and wise of the world.
I'm skeptical and wary of Naipaul's outlook and politics, although he cloaks them well enough that it's hard to tell the exact perspective he is coming from. Also, talk about depressing. There isn't a moment of true joy to be found. Just anxiety, estrangement, fear of the future, resentment, paralyzed inaction, exploitation, and so on. Times of uncertainty can reveal the nature of people. Some will see the potential for good and positive change in the space which has opened up, others will predict dark things. Naipaul likely falls into the second camp, although I suspect he'd argue it as being realistic instead, not jaded.
I'm skeptical and wary of Naipaul's outlook and politics, although he cloaks them well enough that it's hard to tell the exact perspective he is coming from. Also, talk about depressing. There isn't a moment of true joy to be found. Just anxiety, estrangement, fear of the future, resentment, paralyzed inaction, exploitation, and so on. Times of uncertainty can reveal the nature of people. Some will see the potential for good and positive change in the space which has opened up, others will predict dark things. Naipaul likely falls into the second camp, although I suspect he'd argue it as being realistic instead, not jaded.
I don't think I've read another book that so prosaically bears its symbolism.
This book is basically the story of a whiney, adultering, mistress-beating, smuggler who doesn't know what he wants out of life. I don't tknow what I want out of life either, but I hope I live my life with more integrity than Salim does.
3,5 Sterne – „An der Biegung des großen Flusses“ (Kongo) liegt Kisangani, eine Stadt im Nordosten der heutigen Demokratischen Republik Kongo. In Naipauls Roman werden weder die Stadt noch der Staat beim Namen genannt, aber sie stehen exemplarisch für das postkoloniale Zentralafrika, dem Schauplatz der Handlung.
Salim stammt aus einer Familie indisch-muslimischer Händler, die seit Generationen an der Ostküste Afrikas leben, sich selbst jedoch nicht als Afrikaner verstehen. „Wir […] waren eigentlich ein Volk des Indischen Ozeans. Das wahre Afrika lag in unserem Rücken.“ (14) Dennoch kann sich diese privilegiert Minderheit (ehemaliger Sklavenhändler und immer noch Sklavenhalter!) den Veränderungen, die das Ende der Kolonialzeit mit sich bringt, nicht entziehen. Umsturz und Armut drohen, so dass Salim mit Anfang zwanzig der unsicheren Küstenregion und seiner traditionellen Großfamilie Adieu sagt und ins Innere des Kontinents auswandert, wo er einen kleinen heruntergekommenen Laden übernimmt. Das nicht namentlich genannte Land ist gerade unabhängig geworden, die Europäer haben es überstürzt verlassen und die gesamte Wirtschaft liegt darnieder. Salim versucht das Geschäft wieder aufzubauen und in der Fremde Fuß zu fassen. Er sucht nach Sicherheit, Wohlstand und Zugehörigkeit.
Die Geschichte, die sich über ungefähr zehn Jahre erstreckt, wird aus der Perspektive Salims erzählt und beschränkt sich auf die Gegenstände seines Interesses. Sein Blick ist vor allem auf sich selbst, den Alltag und die Menschen gerichtet, mit denen er zu tun hat: der afrikanischen Händlerin Zabeth und ihrem Sohn Ferdinand, dem Familiensklaven Ali, dem an einer britischen Universität ausgebildeten Jugendfreund Indar, der Belgierin Yvette. Dialoge sind selten. Und obwohl – oder gerade weil – er alle Personen so genau analysiert, bleibt er auf Distanz. Salim schwankt zwischen Verachtung für diejenigen, die keinen Erfolg haben, z.B. die Afrikaner im Busch, die (ehemaligen) Sklaven und Verehrung für diejenigen, die sich ihren Platz im neuen Afrika erobert haben.
Sehnsucht und Enttäuschung, Ordnung und Gewalt kennzeichnen auch den zweiten Protagonisten des Romans, nämlich die Stadt an der Biegung des großen Flusses. Genau wie Salim kommt sie nicht zur Ruhe und öffnet sich abwechselnd westeuropäisch-liberalen, sozialistischen und traditionell afrikanischen Ideen, die jedoch weit davon entfernt sind, das Land zu einem besseren Ort zu machen, sondern – zumindest in Salims Augen – die Kolonialzeit als Epoche der Stabilität und des Wohlstands erscheinen lassen. Leider wird auch Salim nicht unbedingt zu einem besseren Menschen. Ob daran der unsichere, selbstbezogene Protagonist schuld ist oder die politischen Umstände, lässt der Roman meines Erachtens offen.
„An der Biegung des großen Flusses“ ist die Geschichte eines gescheiterten Aufbruchs, in dem ein entwurzelter junger Mann und ein neuer Staat vergeblich nach Identität suchen. Es ist ein melancholischer und weitgehend unaufgeregter Roman, der einen faszinierenden Eindruck von einer Gesellschaft im Übergang vermittelt und durch eine abwechselnd präzise und poetische Sprache besticht.
Salim stammt aus einer Familie indisch-muslimischer Händler, die seit Generationen an der Ostküste Afrikas leben, sich selbst jedoch nicht als Afrikaner verstehen. „Wir […] waren eigentlich ein Volk des Indischen Ozeans. Das wahre Afrika lag in unserem Rücken.“ (14) Dennoch kann sich diese privilegiert Minderheit (ehemaliger Sklavenhändler und immer noch Sklavenhalter!) den Veränderungen, die das Ende der Kolonialzeit mit sich bringt, nicht entziehen. Umsturz und Armut drohen, so dass Salim mit Anfang zwanzig der unsicheren Küstenregion und seiner traditionellen Großfamilie Adieu sagt und ins Innere des Kontinents auswandert, wo er einen kleinen heruntergekommenen Laden übernimmt. Das nicht namentlich genannte Land ist gerade unabhängig geworden, die Europäer haben es überstürzt verlassen und die gesamte Wirtschaft liegt darnieder. Salim versucht das Geschäft wieder aufzubauen und in der Fremde Fuß zu fassen. Er sucht nach Sicherheit, Wohlstand und Zugehörigkeit.
Die Geschichte, die sich über ungefähr zehn Jahre erstreckt, wird aus der Perspektive Salims erzählt und beschränkt sich auf die Gegenstände seines Interesses. Sein Blick ist vor allem auf sich selbst, den Alltag und die Menschen gerichtet, mit denen er zu tun hat: der afrikanischen Händlerin Zabeth und ihrem Sohn Ferdinand, dem Familiensklaven Ali, dem an einer britischen Universität ausgebildeten Jugendfreund Indar, der Belgierin Yvette. Dialoge sind selten. Und obwohl – oder gerade weil – er alle Personen so genau analysiert, bleibt er auf Distanz. Salim schwankt zwischen Verachtung für diejenigen, die keinen Erfolg haben, z.B. die Afrikaner im Busch, die (ehemaligen) Sklaven und Verehrung für diejenigen, die sich ihren Platz im neuen Afrika erobert haben.
Sehnsucht und Enttäuschung, Ordnung und Gewalt kennzeichnen auch den zweiten Protagonisten des Romans, nämlich die Stadt an der Biegung des großen Flusses. Genau wie Salim kommt sie nicht zur Ruhe und öffnet sich abwechselnd westeuropäisch-liberalen, sozialistischen und traditionell afrikanischen Ideen, die jedoch weit davon entfernt sind, das Land zu einem besseren Ort zu machen, sondern – zumindest in Salims Augen – die Kolonialzeit als Epoche der Stabilität und des Wohlstands erscheinen lassen. Leider wird auch Salim nicht unbedingt zu einem besseren Menschen. Ob daran der unsichere, selbstbezogene Protagonist schuld ist oder die politischen Umstände, lässt der Roman meines Erachtens offen.
„An der Biegung des großen Flusses“ ist die Geschichte eines gescheiterten Aufbruchs, in dem ein entwurzelter junger Mann und ein neuer Staat vergeblich nach Identität suchen. Es ist ein melancholischer und weitgehend unaufgeregter Roman, der einen faszinierenden Eindruck von einer Gesellschaft im Übergang vermittelt und durch eine abwechselnd präzise und poetische Sprache besticht.
adventurous
dark
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
dark
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I was enthralled by the beginning of the book but not as interested as political issues emerged. See my complete review here: https://whatmeread.com/2025/02/28/review-2549-a-bend-in-the-river/
This book was pretty disappointing. I love a good book that can transport you to a new perspective and a new place, which is what I came into this book thinking it would be. I had recently read some great British/Indian books and was ready to keep that roll going.
Instead I got a book that was extremely boring with a protagonist that bored me to tears with mediocrity, and a plot that was just filled with implicit racism. Of course, the more you read about Naipaul himself, the less there is to like. But to overlook his personal faults to enjoy some masterpiece would questionable at best, yet to do it for a boring, self-serving book with little purpose is downright foolish.
Instead I got a book that was extremely boring with a protagonist that bored me to tears with mediocrity, and a plot that was just filled with implicit racism. Of course, the more you read about Naipaul himself, the less there is to like. But to overlook his personal faults to enjoy some masterpiece would questionable at best, yet to do it for a boring, self-serving book with little purpose is downright foolish.
The writing was beautiful, flowing like a river. The story was bleh--kind of dull. I had to slog through the book, and I kept looking at how many pages I had left to read. There were parts where I perked up.
Now, I do realize this book had important messages and metaphors and themes. For one, the difficulty newly independent countries have/had/are having to find a balance between their history and modern realities. A new country--like a freed slave--previously a colony, must climb from its past to a new beginning, but how is the question. With no background in democracy, only vague memories of its tribal past, and a desire to throw off the shackles of a colonial history, strongmen/women take hold of the country with disastrous results. We read it in the news every day.
There are metaphors galore--flimsy "modern" compounds; a river--with clogging weeds--flowing through a dark forested land, to name just two.
Two other facts to be mentioned. This book is quite old, written from "July 1977--August 1978". The author has been criticized for being racist and stereotypical towards Africans.
He was a violent man, and he abused women, yet he won the Nobel Prize for Literature. I am not sure how I feel about that.
A Bend in the River appears to be autobiographical, since the main character, Salim, is Indian, born in a colony, and eventually moves to Europe. Naipul was born in Trinadad, a former colony of England. He became an assimilated English writer, an expatriate himself living in England.
Now, I do realize this book had important messages and metaphors and themes. For one, the difficulty newly independent countries have/had/are having to find a balance between their history and modern realities. A new country--like a freed slave--previously a colony, must climb from its past to a new beginning, but how is the question. With no background in democracy, only vague memories of its tribal past, and a desire to throw off the shackles of a colonial history, strongmen/women take hold of the country with disastrous results. We read it in the news every day.
There are metaphors galore--flimsy "modern" compounds; a river--with clogging weeds--flowing through a dark forested land, to name just two.
Two other facts to be mentioned. This book is quite old, written from "July 1977--August 1978". The author has been criticized for being racist and stereotypical towards Africans.
He was a violent man, and he abused women, yet he won the Nobel Prize for Literature. I am not sure how I feel about that.
A Bend in the River appears to be autobiographical, since the main character, Salim, is Indian, born in a colony, and eventually moves to Europe. Naipul was born in Trinadad, a former colony of England. He became an assimilated English writer, an expatriate himself living in England.
V.S.Naipal's A Bend in the River begins with Salim, a muslim in Africa with Indian ancestry, moving from the eastern coast of Africa to an unnamed town situated at the bend of an unidentified river in Central Africa. There has been a revolution we learn; Europeans have taken control of large parts of Africa from the Arabs, and Africans from the "bush" -- natives who feel they have had enough -- unleash violent reactions on Europians and all other kinds of foreigners. Considering that I know very little about African history, and lesser about most of the demographics in question, I had to read through many interpretations of the book to confirm my understanding of my book. I agree with some of the interpretations, and disagree with a few others, but like the book itself, all of them are worthy of considerable thought.
I know very little about African history because I gain most of my knowledge from the backdrops of fictional works ("Non-fiction can distort; facts can be realigned. But fiction never lies."), and I have not read any books set in Africa. I did try once, and picked up a novel by a famed author. For a long time, the book described the narrator getting high on some African drink, and the language was so confusing that I gave up without finding out if the author was too clever for me or if I was too clever to read this author. There are no such problems with A Bend in the River - the language is simple enough, but V.S.Naipal is much cleverer than me. The prose flows like a river as we follow a part of Salim's life. He settles down on the said unnamed town and witnesses drastic changes to the anonymous country that affects his life. The country is Congo, say many readers who know about such things. It doesn't matter though, for V.S.Naipal is driving at the larger picture. Looking at it one way, he seems to say that individuals do not have control over their lives when put in such volatile backdrops. Like Shakespeare remarked, "As flies to wanton boys are we to th' gods. They kill us for their sport". Looking at it from another angle, things become more problematic; for he seems to suggest that Africa was better off under colonial rule. In other words, some people, such as Africans, are incapable of ruling themselves.
As Salim sets down to live life in his own modest ways, he meets a handful of personalities all of whom are struggling like him for their own identity and place in the World. Revolutions come and go, and slowly, an authoritarian dictator referred to as "Big Man" strengthens his hold on his country. The foreigners, the natives, the elites, the uneducated are all pawns in the Big Man's plans, to be elevated and discarded at whim. The Big Man uses patriotism as a glue to try and extend his control. We get a glimpse into the Big Man through an array of characters, prominent among whom is an European historian who is more of an academic. In my opinion, Indar has the best character graph. A couple of monologues from Indar are still relevant to migrants across the World - people stuck between the past, the present and the future; people stuck between here, there and nowhere.
While Naipal's writing has won him a nobel prize and appreciation from across western press, there are some glitches if you look hard in a certain way. Salim is a problematic narrator. There is a curious passage where he unleashes violence on a woman and and she shrugs it off. Also there seems to be a definite lean towards western civilization, and scorn towards Arabs. An offhand remarks suggests that some slaves like to be slaves, and are better off as slaves. The problem with the book is not these biases alone, for each of us have our own biases. It is rather that Salim seems to think he is much better off than the people of the bush, when there is not much evidence to back this up. We do not see much of Salim's modus operandi. He buys things, he sells it to others. In contrast, certain characters like Nazerudeen have discernible business acumen. Salim seems to think that though fate has its own vagaries, he deserves more than the many unnamed and unrepresented people of the bush. To this, I do not agree. I was surprised that V.S.Naipal's own views from many of his interviews coincide with Salim's, making the book more autobiographical. Hence, Salim is an endorsement of the author's views, and his actions can not be overlooked as the quips of a fictional character.
On the whole, A Bend in the River is a good starting point for me to explore more on African history, which seems to have a lot to think about. As a novel, it does not have a conventional plot, but V.S.Naipal is in absolute control of his prose. And the book is short enough. I would definitely suggest A Bend in the River. Chances are that you would love it more than I did.
I know very little about African history because I gain most of my knowledge from the backdrops of fictional works ("Non-fiction can distort; facts can be realigned. But fiction never lies."), and I have not read any books set in Africa. I did try once, and picked up a novel by a famed author. For a long time, the book described the narrator getting high on some African drink, and the language was so confusing that I gave up without finding out if the author was too clever for me or if I was too clever to read this author. There are no such problems with A Bend in the River - the language is simple enough, but V.S.Naipal is much cleverer than me. The prose flows like a river as we follow a part of Salim's life. He settles down on the said unnamed town and witnesses drastic changes to the anonymous country that affects his life. The country is Congo, say many readers who know about such things. It doesn't matter though, for V.S.Naipal is driving at the larger picture. Looking at it one way, he seems to say that individuals do not have control over their lives when put in such volatile backdrops. Like Shakespeare remarked, "As flies to wanton boys are we to th' gods. They kill us for their sport". Looking at it from another angle, things become more problematic; for he seems to suggest that Africa was better off under colonial rule. In other words, some people, such as Africans, are incapable of ruling themselves.
As Salim sets down to live life in his own modest ways, he meets a handful of personalities all of whom are struggling like him for their own identity and place in the World. Revolutions come and go, and slowly, an authoritarian dictator referred to as "Big Man" strengthens his hold on his country. The foreigners, the natives, the elites, the uneducated are all pawns in the Big Man's plans, to be elevated and discarded at whim. The Big Man uses patriotism as a glue to try and extend his control. We get a glimpse into the Big Man through an array of characters, prominent among whom is an European historian who is more of an academic. In my opinion, Indar has the best character graph. A couple of monologues from Indar are still relevant to migrants across the World - people stuck between the past, the present and the future; people stuck between here, there and nowhere.
While Naipal's writing has won him a nobel prize and appreciation from across western press, there are some glitches if you look hard in a certain way. Salim is a problematic narrator. There is a curious passage where he unleashes violence on a woman and and she shrugs it off. Also there seems to be a definite lean towards western civilization, and scorn towards Arabs. An offhand remarks suggests that some slaves like to be slaves, and are better off as slaves. The problem with the book is not these biases alone, for each of us have our own biases. It is rather that Salim seems to think he is much better off than the people of the bush, when there is not much evidence to back this up. We do not see much of Salim's modus operandi. He buys things, he sells it to others. In contrast, certain characters like Nazerudeen have discernible business acumen. Salim seems to think that though fate has its own vagaries, he deserves more than the many unnamed and unrepresented people of the bush. To this, I do not agree. I was surprised that V.S.Naipal's own views from many of his interviews coincide with Salim's, making the book more autobiographical. Hence, Salim is an endorsement of the author's views, and his actions can not be overlooked as the quips of a fictional character.
On the whole, A Bend in the River is a good starting point for me to explore more on African history, which seems to have a lot to think about. As a novel, it does not have a conventional plot, but V.S.Naipal is in absolute control of his prose. And the book is short enough. I would definitely suggest A Bend in the River. Chances are that you would love it more than I did.