You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
danbydame 's review for:
A Bend in the River
by V.S. Naipaul
Yah, I know. Another "India" book. But it takes place in Africa ... And it's been on my shelf for a long time. Time to read it or ditch it.
A testament to both the American education system, and my own lacking in awareness.... I had no historical knowledge to use as a foundation for reading this book. Similar to reading Midnight's Children, this book expected the reader to be able to relate to the events and setting, at least on a basic level. There was no background primer provided in the story itself. Once again, thank you, Wikipedia, for filling in some of the gaps. (Wiki for Congo Crisis and Mobutu before reading this)
One of the themes of this book was the very human tendency to just "carry on". Just keep doing what you are doing, despite no assurances that anything will come of it. You could succeed, or you could get squashed like so many ants. Really, the world as a whole doesn't care. If you get squashed, more ants will step up to replace you. What a bit of irony that this was also one of the central themes of my experience reading this book. Maybe the story will have a big payoff at the end, or maybe it will all have been a waste of time for me. I had to just "carry on" and read to the end.
My reading result? I wasn't squashed, but I also did not feel fully enlightened. It was a struggle for me to tap into the pain and emotion that seemed to be trying to surface in the story. This is strong stuff -- the aftermath of colonialism (again, like Midnight's Children). To juxtapose two very different constructs: this is a clear lesson on why the Federation has their Prime Directive. Europe did not follow the Prime Directive. They came in to Africa, stirred everything up socially, politically, economically and then just vanished, leaving the Africans to make sense of what was left to them and to build a whole new society from the detritus of colonization. Going back to "before" is impossible, but picking up where the Europeans dropped everything is out of their skill set.
But despite all the potential of this story, I was left flat, shrugging my shoulders, if you will. There were moments when I could connect, but they were scattershot. I am hesitant to blame the book, though. The lacking might stem from my ignorance of the events. Thus the three stars. As a story in itself, it didn't miss the target, just the bullseye. And it did open my eyes to a part of my world (in the geographical sense if not in the personal sense) I could stand to learn more about.
A testament to both the American education system, and my own lacking in awareness.... I had no historical knowledge to use as a foundation for reading this book. Similar to reading Midnight's Children, this book expected the reader to be able to relate to the events and setting, at least on a basic level. There was no background primer provided in the story itself. Once again, thank you, Wikipedia, for filling in some of the gaps. (Wiki for Congo Crisis and Mobutu before reading this)
One of the themes of this book was the very human tendency to just "carry on". Just keep doing what you are doing, despite no assurances that anything will come of it. You could succeed, or you could get squashed like so many ants. Really, the world as a whole doesn't care. If you get squashed, more ants will step up to replace you. What a bit of irony that this was also one of the central themes of my experience reading this book. Maybe the story will have a big payoff at the end, or maybe it will all have been a waste of time for me. I had to just "carry on" and read to the end.
My reading result? I wasn't squashed, but I also did not feel fully enlightened. It was a struggle for me to tap into the pain and emotion that seemed to be trying to surface in the story. This is strong stuff -- the aftermath of colonialism (again, like Midnight's Children). To juxtapose two very different constructs: this is a clear lesson on why the Federation has their Prime Directive. Europe did not follow the Prime Directive. They came in to Africa, stirred everything up socially, politically, economically and then just vanished, leaving the Africans to make sense of what was left to them and to build a whole new society from the detritus of colonization. Going back to "before" is impossible, but picking up where the Europeans dropped everything is out of their skill set.
But despite all the potential of this story, I was left flat, shrugging my shoulders, if you will. There were moments when I could connect, but they were scattershot. I am hesitant to blame the book, though. The lacking might stem from my ignorance of the events. Thus the three stars. As a story in itself, it didn't miss the target, just the bullseye. And it did open my eyes to a part of my world (in the geographical sense if not in the personal sense) I could stand to learn more about.