Soca Warriors Online Discussion Forum

General => General Discussion => Topic started by: trinindian on April 22, 2008, 06:47:02 AM

Title: Naipaul again
Post by: trinindian on April 22, 2008, 06:47:02 AM

I was abused as a child’
(http://www.newsday.co.tt/news/0,77404.html)BY ANDRE BAGOO Tuesday, April 22 2008

click on pic to zoom inTRINIDAD-born Nobel Lau-reate Sir VS Naipaul was sexually molested as a child by a male relative for years, a new authorised biography published this month reveals.

The child abuse, taking place intermittently over two to three years until Naipaul was ten, is recounted in the opening chapters of Patrick French’s biography The World Is What It Is. The biography, published by Picador in the United Kingdom this month and due to be published by Alfred A Knopf in the United States in November, was approved by Naipaul, 76, for publication without any changes to the text.

Naipaul is quoted in the book as stating that the molestation occurred in Trinidad shortly after 1940, when the Naipauls moved into a family commune in an old colonial house in Petit Valley along with members of their extended family. The family would later move to Luis Street, Woodbrook.

“Cool and shady, with savannah and plenty of snakes, Petit Valley was unfamiliar land,” French notes. Naipaul’s parents “were given a space in the servants’ quarters to the back of the house,” but all of the children slept in a separate area.

“The cousins—boys and girls—were not encouraged to associate with people who lived nearby,” and so, “there were no friends, only family.” It was in this setting that Naipaul’s first unwanted sexual encounter occurred. “The children made their own entertainment,” French notes wryly.

According to the biographer, Naipaul was “seduced by his cousin.” In an interview with Naipaul on July 25, 2002, Naipaul describes the encounter to French. “I was myself subjected to some sexual abuse by an older cousin. I was corrupted, I was assaulted. I was about six or seven. It was done in a sly, terrible way,” he says.

According to French, “molestation continued intermittently over the next two or three years, usually in the area where the boys slept.” “Vidia never mentioned it to anyone, at the time or later. He insisted he was never a willing participant,” French adds.

Naipaul, however, insists that the encounter did not affect his sexuality and said: “I never went through a period of liking the same sex.”

Later, Naipaul, who was honoured with the Trinity Cross, would pen several classics, including A House for Mr Biswas and In a Free State the latter of which features gay characters. In another interview with French on September 20, 2002, Naipaul says, “It was an outrage, but it was not a defining moment. I was very young. This thing was over before I was ten. I was always coerced. Of course he (the older cousin) was ashamed too later. It happened to other cousins.”

Naipaul suggested that child abuse is common: “I think it is part of Indian extended family life, which is an abomination in some ways, a can of worms…After an assault one is very ashamed—and then you realise it happens to almost everybody.”

All children are abused,” he states, adding, “All girls are molested at some stage. It is almost like a rite of passage.”

Yesterday, Naipaul’s sister Kamla Tewarie, 79, told Newsday that despite her close relationship with her brother, he never mentioned his childhood trauma to her. “I don’t know about this. Because if I did I would have been mad like hell. I would have been extremely annoyed. Nothing was told to me,” she said.

Tewarie said that she did not think the experience would have affected her brother’s later life.

“He’s not easily worried by something like that. If he writes something it’s quite honest. It rubs off him, it rubs off me myself,” she said. Naipaul’s child abuse is one of a string of revelations about his life in The World Is What It Is. His later relationship with his first wife, Patricia Ann Hale, is treated in depth as is his decades’ long sadomasochistic affair with Margaret Gooding, an Anglo-Argentinian. Of the latter relationship, French notes, “the affair was to be intense and intensely sexual… (Margaret) liked to be his slave and his victim… (Naipaul) had a mental dependence on both women: the ‘master’ in a masochistic relationship… (He) found himself unable, despite repeated efforts, to break away from either Margaret or Pat.”

How childhood abuse manifests itself in later life is a matter of how the individual deals with it, noted psychotherapist Camille Ojar-Franco yesterday. Ojar-Franco nonetheless pointed out that generally, such abuse affects an adult’s ability to trust persons around him and may fill that person with a lingering sense of shame.

Naipaul was awarded the Nobel Prize in 2001 “for having united perceptive narrative and incorruptible scrutiny in works that compel us to see the presence of suppressed histories.” Regarded by many as the finest writer of the English language, he is the author of more than two dozen works of fiction and non-fiction including Miguel Street, A Bend in the River, The Loss of El Dorado and Beyond Belief. His list of glittering literary accolades include: the Booker Prize, the David Cohen Prize for Literature, the John Llewellyn Rhys Prize, the Somerset Maugham Award as well as the Hawthornden Prize.

A Queen’s Royal College, Port-of-Spain graduate, he was awarded an island scholarship in 1949 and left for Oxford University in 1950. His first wife, Pat whom he met at Oxford and married in 1955 died in 1996. He married his second wife, Lady Nadira Naipaul, 55, that very year.

He has not lived in Trinidad for any extended length of time since leaving in 1950. Naipaul was honoured by the University of the West Indies last year.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: ZANDOLIE on April 22, 2008, 08:00:36 AM
No wonder he such an ass
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 22, 2008, 10:16:19 AM
Naipaul could haul he f**king ass.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: asylumseeker on April 22, 2008, 10:20:40 AM
Naipaul hadda be the most despised national award recipient ...
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Deeks on April 22, 2008, 08:45:40 PM
Guys,
           Most of these famous artists tend to be eccentric. There is some method to their madness. Thats what make their talent flow.  Maybe that is why they are famous. Naipaul is a great writer. Deep down, I think Naipaul loves TT, but TT is too small for him. he did all what he had to in TT already. There was nothing more that TT could offer to satisfy his drive.

Yes, he does not bigup TT like other famous people, but you can't take away the TT in him. Even now you can still hear his Trini accent. I have seem him on Tv giving interview and he does not have any strong Brit accent.  Look how long he left TT.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 22, 2008, 09:03:51 PM
Guys,
           Most of these famous artists tend to be eccentric. There is some method to their madness. Thats what make their talent flow.  Maybe that is why they are famous. Naipaul is a great writer. Deep down, I think Naipaul loves TT, but TT is too small for him. he did all what he had to in TT already. There was nothing more that TT could offer to satisfy his drive.

Yes, he does not bigup TT like other famous people, but you can't take away the TT in him. Even now you can still hear his Trini accent. I have seem him on Tv giving interview and he does not have any strong Brit accent.  Look how long he left TT.

Eccentric??  Not bigging up TnT?

Whey you been?? The man DISAVOWED TnT....he has made it known that he is British first, Indian second...and everything else afterwards.



Oh yeah, btw....it just so happens he was born on this small insignificant, nondescript island call Trinidad, but doh concern allyuh self with that.



Let him haul he muddac**t.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 23, 2008, 04:55:04 AM
Naipaul hadda be the most despised national award recipient ...

Naipaul should get another T&T National Award.

The Order of the Big Stone and Bull Pistle!  To be administered in Woodford Square
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bourbon on April 23, 2008, 05:27:21 AM
Guys,
           Most of these famous artists tend to be eccentric. There is some method to their madness. Thats what make their talent flow.  Maybe that is why they are famous. Naipaul is a great writer. Deep down, I think Naipaul loves TT, but TT is too small for him. he did all what he had to in TT already. There was nothing more that TT could offer to satisfy his drive.

Yes, he does not bigup TT like other famous people, but you can't take away the TT in him. Even now you can still hear his Trini accent. I have seem him on Tv giving interview and he does not have any strong Brit accent.  Look how long he left TT.

Eccentric??  Not bigging up TnT?

Whey you been?? The man DISAVOWED TnT....he has made it known that he is British first, Indian second...and everything else afterwards.



Oh yeah, btw....it just so happens he was born on this small insignificant, nondescript island call Trinidad, but doh concern allyuh self with that.



Let him haul he muddac**t.

Exactly. And the setting used for a good portion of his literary work was Trinidad. He does just upset me. He got the best of what ever little we had at the time...and then he identifying himself as English First....Indian Second? Steups.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: warmonga on April 23, 2008, 08:14:42 AM
Naipaul could haul he f**king ass.
a same sumthing mi sey from long time!!!!!!!!
War
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Organic on April 23, 2008, 08:18:28 AM
loved most of his books from a liuterary perspective, i  eh rally care what his persoal views are about trini..... personally. it have enough people who claim to ove trini and f**kin it over off ah greed, if someone makes me look at trini critically then i find dais god.

loved sam selvon more. Although he use to criticize trini also..his work still had a hopeful tone. Despite our problems etc etc.....

Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 23, 2008, 08:42:12 AM
loved most of his books from a liuterary perspective, i  eh rally care what his persoal views are about trini..... personally. it have enough people who claim to ove trini and f**kin it over off ah greed, if someone makes me look at trini critically then i find dais god.

loved sam selvon more. Although he use to criticize trini also..his work still had a hopeful tone. Despite our problems etc etc.....



ah feel I go write a book for VS..I go call it " AH Bull for Mr Naipaul...ooops he done get dat already!
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: pecan on April 23, 2008, 09:15:56 AM


anyone familiar with Neil Bissoondath??

Neil Devindra Bissoondath (born April 19, 1955 in Arima, Trinidad and Tobago) is a Canadian author who lives in Ste-Foy, Quebec. He is a noted writer of fiction, and also an outspoken critic of Canada's system of multiculturalism. He is the nephew of authors V.S. Naipaul and Shiva Naipaul.

Works

    * Digging Up Mountains - 1987
    * "Im Not Racist, But..." - 1989
    * A Casual Brutality - 1989
    * On the Eve of Uncertain Tomorrows - 1991
    * The Innocence of Age - 1993
    * Selling Illusions: The Cult of Multiculturalism in Canada 1994
    * The Worlds Within Her - 1999 (Nominated for a Governor General's Award)
    * Doing the Heart Good - 2002
    * The Unyielding Clamour of the Night - 2005

I have seen him on TV and from all appearance, he does not seem to embrace his Trinidadian roots ...  and look, he related to VS Naipaul
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Organic on April 23, 2008, 09:24:02 AM
So de indian man who born in trinidad (arima no less) living in de french people place and do not like multiculturalism.....anyone say slow boat to Goa.........maybe he ahd a bad experince(s) growing up in arima..lol

anyways...
Micheal Anthony another really good trinidadian author.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Queen Macoomeh on April 23, 2008, 09:31:38 AM
Naipaul has so little respect for his homeland...pity. I like his work but when he opens his mouth I am disappointed.
T&T is not perfect, but to claim to be English - a land that decimated most of the known world...T&T appears to be idyllic in its history in comparison.

He is a poor ambassador.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 23, 2008, 09:59:12 AM
Naipaul has so little respect for his homeland...pity. I like his work but when he opens his mouth I am disappointed.
T&T is not perfect, but to claim to be English - a land that decimated most of the known world...T&T appears to be idyllic in its history in comparison.

He is a poor ambassador.

nah, yuh wrong queenis hs is not a poor ambassador, he is ah damn sour old fart.

He deserve ah damn good calpet and if I had meh way, ah woulda ban he from T&T.

Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: WestCoast on April 23, 2008, 10:03:30 AM
He deserve ah damn good calpet and if I had meh way, ah woulda ban he from T&T.
I thought ya wanted to ban Wim :devil:
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 23, 2008, 10:04:23 AM
He deserve ah damn good calpet and if I had meh way, ah woulda ban he from T&T.
I thought ya wanted to ban Wim :devil:

I want wim sit dong onder a coconut tree in ah very high wind.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: WestCoast on April 23, 2008, 10:05:58 AM
He deserve ah damn good calpet and if I had meh way, ah woulda ban he from T&T.
I thought ya wanted to ban Wim :devil:

I want wim sit dong onder a coconut tree in ah very high wind.

:rotfl:
he go lorse he nuts :devil:
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: dcs on April 23, 2008, 10:58:39 AM

ent Naipaul was born a British citizen?

I doh care too much about his distancing from us....he grow up here as a teenager and then left.  and it didn't have as much communication and connection with home then so probably was easy to just assimilate.
takes all types....he is representative of a large number of emigrants...especially from that era.  Like how many people left here back in the day when they had the choice to take up British citizenship....home is a new place and trinidad a distant memory. 
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 23, 2008, 11:44:35 AM
Exactly. And the setting used for a good portion of his literary work was Trinidad. He does just upset me. He got the best of what ever little we had at the time...and then he identifying himself as English First....Indian Second? Steups.

Di'n he win ah island scholarship to go study in England too?  If I correct we pay fuh he education and now dat he reach de facker wha' turn 'rung and fack we up like we eh nutten.



man fack he, oui.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 23, 2008, 11:52:51 AM

ent Naipaul was born a British citizen?

I doh care too much about his distancing from us....he grow up here as a teenager and then left.  and it didn't have as much communication and connection with home then so probably was easy to just assimilate.
takes all types....he is representative of a large number of emigrants...especially from that era.  Like how many people left here back in the day when they had the choice to take up British citizenship....home is a new place and trinidad a distant memory. 

leh meh remind yuh of a popular kaiso called Trini tuh de bone

Distant memory?  cyar be ah distant memory if he only mentioned we in ha bad light..leh he haul he c**t....ah feel de f**ker racist
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Jah Gol on April 23, 2008, 04:02:04 PM
Yeah I ain't buying that distant memory thing neither. As Bourbon correctly stated most of his best work was set in Trinidad. He chose to forget Trinidad. His literary genius doesn't give him an excuse to proverbially shit on the flag.

Regarding the abuse,if it's true I think it is tragic that he had to experience that. 

Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Trini _2022 on April 23, 2008, 05:00:43 PM
Charlie Rose - NAIPAUL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfFCRx5Pw0I
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Midknight on April 23, 2008, 05:35:05 PM
I cyan stand him either but lord have mercy i never see so much hate for one man in a thread dealing with his tragedy that is no fault of his own...

Maybe the abuse helped to condition his view of Trinidad  :-\
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: dcs on April 23, 2008, 05:36:53 PM
When exactly he start getting heat from Trinis?  I think he said something when he won the nobel...didn't read all his books so i not sure if is based on that.
When he was here last year he say is a big misunderstanding...lol
don't really care....just another one of many who leave and don't have good things to say bout home...usually based on bad experiences (even though he claim he is misunderstood...or was it his wife say that?)
for some reason jus cool come to mind...at least when he had now come and was explaining his signature
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 23, 2008, 06:32:21 PM
What a piece of work this guy is....more from his biography

My cruelty killed first wife: V S Naipaul    
 
Friday, 21 March , 2008, 19:13 
 
London: Nobel Prize-winning writer Sir V S Naipaul says the mental cruelty he inflicted on his first wife may have contributed to her death, according to a new biography quoted by a British newspaper Friday.

 
Naipaul, 75, tormented his first wife Patricia for four decades, visited prostitutes and had an extra-marital affair for 24 years, the biography by Patrick French says.

The Daily Telegraph, which is to serialise the book, said that although Patricia knew of Naipaul's affair with his love Margaret Gooding, it was his disclosure about visits to prostitutes that finally killed her.

According to Patrick French, Patricia learnt that her husband regularly saw prostitutes in London after he boasted about it in a magazine interview in 1994. She had just had a mastectomy and was in remission from cancer.

She found the disclosure so abhorrent that it sent her rapidly downhill and she died in 1996, says French.

Naipaul admits in the biography, titled The World Is What It Is: "I think that consumed her. I think she had all the relapses and everything after that. She suffered. It could be said that I killed her. It could be said. I feel a little bit that way."

Patricia and Naipaul, who met at Oxford, were married in 1955. He ended his affair with the married Margaret Gooding as Patricia lay dying.

A day after her funeral, Naipaul "welcomed into his home" a Pakistani journalist, Nadira Khannum Alvi, and married her two months later, the newspaper reported.

French, a well-known writer on India and Tibet, was given free access to all of Naipaul's papers and is the first person to read Patricia's 24 volumes of diaries, kept under lock and key at the University of Tulsa since Naipaul sold his archive for $620,000.
 
Source (http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14627860)
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Trini _2022 on April 23, 2008, 06:39:30 PM
A day after her funeral, Naipaul "welcomed into his home" a Pakistani journalist, Nadira Khannum Alvi, and married her two months later, the newspaper reported.

Lord he eh easy
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Queen Macoomeh on April 23, 2008, 06:47:53 PM
I cyan stand him either but lord have mercy i never see so much hate for one man in a thread dealing with his tragedy that is no fault of his own...

Maybe the abuse helped to condition his view of Trinidad  :-\

For me, there's no hate for Naipaul. I don't know the man and can't hate someone I do not know. It's hard enough for me to hate people I do know...
But there seems to be at least one screw loose here that can't simply be ascribed to his eccentricity. If he was abused, I am sorry to hear. That should happen to no child. But here he is saying it happens to all Indian children in Trinidad. How crazy is that? Is he just trying to sell books?

The bridge crossed has been damned soundly and publicly. He speaks about my country of birth so I take offence, especially when he applauds another that is mired in age old blood.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 23, 2008, 07:01:06 PM
I cyan stand him either but lord have mercy i never see so much hate for one man in a thread dealing with his tragedy that is no fault of his own...

Maybe the abuse helped to condition his view of Trinidad  :-\

I'm sure you use it figuratively...but there isn't a single person on God's green earth that I 'hate'.  Truth be told I won't even invest as much emotion in the man as to despise him.  I would have harsh words for anyone speaking ill of my country as QM said, that it is one of our own biting the hand that fed him means that his words/actions only cut deeper.  England can have him...but fack him all the same.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: ZANDOLIE on April 23, 2008, 07:04:43 PM
A fine Englishman indeed.

http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/post/caribbean/naipaul/meena.html

Naipaul is kind of like Mike Tyson....great at one specific thing, but an utter failure as a human being. Like most people possesed of a single standout talent he had neither the integrity nor intelligence to overcome the damning consequences of that single talent.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Grande on April 23, 2008, 07:26:28 PM
Didn't he come to Trinidad recently to do a series of UWI readings and lectures for some schoolchildren? I remember he was of a more mellow nature and was talking about the need to forget any sense of African and Indian and progress instead as Trinidadian
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Deeks on April 23, 2008, 07:28:45 PM
Love him or hate him, he is a mad Trini GENIUS!!!!
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Queen Macoomeh on April 23, 2008, 07:35:33 PM
genius?  ???
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 23, 2008, 07:52:06 PM
A fine Englishman indeed.

http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/post/caribbean/naipaul/meena.html

Naipaul is kind of like Mike Tyson....great at one specific thing, but an utter failure as a human being. Like most people possesed of a single standout talent he had neither the integrity nor intelligence to overcome the damning consequences of that single talent.
...except I'd hardly say that his apparent personality defects are a consequence of his talent.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 23, 2008, 07:53:06 PM
Love him or hate him, he is a mad Trini GENIUS!!!!

"...you spit on your people
your people applaud"




QM there's no denying his genius.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Queen Macoomeh on April 23, 2008, 08:06:19 PM
on the contrary...his work is appreciated differently by different people. It is subject to personal preferences..

I read his work, I enjoy it. I would read more, but I would not place genius on it. So while I don't deny it, I question the title. To me, there are fewer geniuses than publicly lauded. And more unknown...

...just my 2 cents TT
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 23, 2008, 08:08:56 PM
on the contrary...his work is appreciated differently by different people. It is subject to personal preferences..

I read his work, I enjoy it. I would read more, but I would not place genius on it. So while I don't deny it, I question the title..
From a completely objective standpoint, and as one schooled in the art (not that it qualifies me more than others)...I can honestly say that one may disagree with the content and characterizations, but one absolutely cannot quibble with the craft.  The label is hardly subjective...but your opinion is yours.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 23, 2008, 08:13:22 PM
More from the repulsive genius..

"ON receiving the Nobel Prize for Literature this year, V.S. Naipaul has responded by paying tribute to England, "(his) home", and India, "the home of (his) ancestors". Oddly enough, Trinidad does not merit a mention in Naipaul's tribute - though he was born and grew up in Trinidad, and though it is the home of his most admired early works such as The Mystic Masseur, A House for Mr Biswas and Miguel Street. Or perhaps it is not so odd, considering that Naipaul has written, "I knew Trinidad to be unimportant, uncreative, cynical... (with)... an indifference to virtue as well as vice." - Source  (http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1823/18230700.htm)


I am not much for regrets...but I thoroughly regret the sense of pride, the euphoria I naively felt upon hearing word of his being awarded the Nobel Prize back in 2001.  Upon reading the interview with him in The Washington Post that day my emotions were properly put in perspective by his apathy for Trinidad...but I never knew it was this bad. 

Apathy would be charitable.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 23, 2008, 08:49:03 PM
Curlish, mewling asshole that he is..I hate he damn ass..I despise him.  He turn he back on his home land for nutten.  Trinidad didn't bull him, is one ah he family members.  He claims to be English and then Indian, so f**k he, why we care about this old mangy f**k tard?

I eh go lie, I did enjoy his books in secondary schools, de same ones dey make we read becasue it was about life in T&T from a T&T born author, but de man is ah asshole.

This is how he should describe he life.

1.  Asshole first
2. Asshole second
3....and assshole third.
4.  I thank England for making me into a grade A asshole
5.  And my ancestors, and relatives, especially the one who bull meh for grooming me and making me into a more complete asshole.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Deeks on April 23, 2008, 10:28:08 PM
If Naipaul that bad, what about Stephen Mallory?
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 23, 2008, 10:37:03 PM
If Naipaul that bad, what about Stephen Mallory?

I fail to see the comparison.  At least Mallory had the good graces not to bad talk the land of his birth...and he actually spent less time on Trini soil than that turncoat bastard.

But feel free to create he own thread fuh him all the same...
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 23, 2008, 10:49:03 PM
Trinidad wasnt even considered ah country when stephen mallory was aorund.

de man wasnt ah trini he was ah american.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 23, 2008, 10:54:40 PM
Trinidad wasnt even considered ah country when stephen mallory was aorund.

de man wasnt ah trini he was ah american.

Deeks just trying tuh deflect attention away from de chinks in he hero armor.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: ZANDOLIE on April 23, 2008, 11:59:50 PM
Curlish, mewling asshole that he is..I hate he damn ass..I despise him.  He turn he back on his home land for nutten.  Trinidad didn't bull him, is one ah he family members.  He claims to be English and then Indian, so f**k he, why we care about this old mangy f**k tard?

I eh go lie, I did enjoy his books in secondary schools, de same ones dey make we read becasue it was about life in T&T from a T&T born author, but de man is ah asshole.

This is how he should describe he life.

1.  Asshole first
2. Asshole second
3....and assshole third.
4.  I thank England for making me into a grade A asshole
5.  And my ancestors, and relatives, especially the one who bull meh for grooming me and making me into a more complete asshole.


Naipaul for T&T senior football coach!!!

Ok TT who yuh hate de wuss....Wim or Naipaul?
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 24, 2008, 05:49:32 AM
Curlish, mewling asshole that he is..I hate he damn ass..I despise him.  He turn he back on his home land for nutten.  Trinidad didn't bull him, is one ah he family members.  He claims to be English and then Indian, so f**k he, why we care about this old mangy f**k tard?

I eh go lie, I did enjoy his books in secondary schools, de same ones dey make we read becasue it was about life in T&T from a T&T born author, but de man is ah asshole.

This is how he should describe he life.

1.  Asshole first
2. Asshole second
3....and assshole third.
4.  I thank England for making me into a grade A asshole
5.  And my ancestors, and relatives, especially the one who bull meh for grooming me and making me into a more complete asshole.


Naipaul for T&T senior football coach!!!

Ok TT who yuh hate de wuss....Wim or Naipaul?


wim dutch born, he come here and pull ah little con game, make some change get ketch and ride out.

Wha is Naipaul story?

he born here, he is ah f**king trini, yet he claim england and India..shows the f**king lack of character by this man.  And he so indian yet he hate trinidad some would say because he suffer abuse here at the hands of a relative..ah bet yuh de relative was indian..why he also hate indians?

de man is ah nasty c**t...f**k he I woulda withdraw every national honour and ban he from entering T&T.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Queen Macoomeh on April 24, 2008, 07:43:51 AM
on the contrary...his work is appreciated differently by different people. It is subject to personal preferences..

I read his work, I enjoy it. I would read more, but I would not place genius on it. So while I don't deny it, I question the title..
From a completely objective standpoint, and as one schooled in the art (not that it qualifies me more than others)...I can honestly say that one may disagree with the content and characterizations, but one absolutely cannot quibble with the craft.  The label is hardly subjective...but your opinion is yours.

not to belabour the point...but once again I beg to differ.
The arts are subjective. That, to me, is what makes it an art - subject only to the senses which are as yet, unquantifiable. I do quibble with the idea of objective 'craft' - what then is the definition of craft? One craftsman may bring you to tears with his rendition while another, in the same genre, may leave you unaffected. It has the je ne sais quoi for you but not for me. I think that is the beauty in art. How many times have we said "I don't know why, but I like that..."? While someone else looks at it and steupse?

My opinion is mine yes, of course, it cannot be otherwise. I learned that I can only present it, I cannot force it on others. It's an art... :D

Good seque away from Naipaul...he frets me.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Toppa on April 24, 2008, 08:24:48 AM
Then the UNC was vex how de National Library wasn't name after him.

Leh Britain andI ndia buil' library fuh him.

I hope he didn't get dah Trinity cross after he made those comments eh.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: asylumseeker on April 24, 2008, 10:19:03 AM
Rumour has it the V.S. Naipaul Society meets once annually at varying obscure locations, on Naipaul's birthday, to pay homage to Naipaul's preserved depiction of Trinidad as colony and island-village-outpost-backwater.

Membership in the society is not prized and is thought to be confined to Hat's descendants resident on Miguel Street and a handful of ailing contemporaries known as the Bogarts. The latter are nostalgic about what never was, and remain bitter about the nation's 1977 transition to republicanism. Each openly longed to acquire the knighthood that VS casually attained and which has evaded them due to constitutional and historical circumstance. To a man they despise Sir Ellis and are jealously mystified as to why Vidia Surajprasad does not use the honorific. They would kill for it, and may have.

Meanwhile, Hat's descendants wonder what the fuss is about. They have never met VS. And, although they enjoy the feasts served on these occasions, they have tired of the ordeal to which the old men subject them. Credible authority has it conversation between the groups is restricted to: 'What happening there, Bogart?' ... 'What happening there, Hat?'

:P
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 24, 2008, 10:22:52 AM
Rumour has it the V.S. Naipaul Society meets once annually at varying obscure locations, on Naipaul's birthday, to pay homage to Naipaul's preserved depiction of Trinidad as colony and island-village-outpost-backwater.

Membership in the society is not prized and is thought to be confined to Hat's descendants resident on Miguel Street and a handful of ailing contemporaries known as the Bogarts. The latter are nostalgic about what never was, and remain bitter about the nation's 1977 transition to republicanism. Each openly longed to acquire the knighthood that VS casually attained and which has evaded them due to constitutional and historical circumstance. To a man they despise Sir Ellis and are jealously mystified as to why Vidia Surajprasad does not use the honorific. They would kill for it, and may have.

Meanwhile, Hat's descendants wonder what the fuss is about. They have never met VS. And, although they enjoy the feasts served on these occasions, they have tired of the ordeal to which the old men subject them. Credible authority has it conversation between the groups is restricted to: 'What happening there, Bogart?' ... 'What happening there, Hat?'

:P

wey dey does hold dese feasts?  In de Dharma Saba (sp)?
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Deeks on April 24, 2008, 07:04:41 PM
Aye Asylumseeker,
                           That part about TT is a republic is ah flicking joke. We still have to subject ourselve to the Privy Council. Naipaul was right we are Mimic men. When Eric had the opportunity to make us a real republic, he chose to  hold on to the Queen's coat-tail. We still scared to swim in the deep as the saying goes.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 24, 2008, 07:44:06 PM
Aye Asylumseeker,
                           That part about TT is a republic is ah flicking joke. We still have to subject ourselve to the Privy Council. Naipaul was right we are Mimic men. When Eric had the opportunity to make us a real republic, he chose to  hold on to the Queen's coat-tail. We still scared to swim in the deep as the saying goes.

Actually Eric did a good job with the whole republic thing.  Had we divorced the crown completly without the necessary infrastructure, we would have been in a truely dark place.

Mimic men?  not really, it is called laying the foundation...setting a legacy.

Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 24, 2008, 09:12:48 PM
Aye Asylumseeker,
                           That part about TT is a republic is ah flicking joke. We still have to subject ourselve to the Privy Council. Naipaul was right we are Mimic men. When Eric had the opportunity to make us a real republic, he chose to  hold on to the Queen's coat-tail. We still scared to swim in the deep as the saying goes.

Deeks we are a young republic with a growing judiciary...as it stands we need need to firm up our appellate system and until that point comes we have chosen to be guided by the Privy Council.  By no means are we subject to their rulings...if you recall they ruled in favor of the Dole Chadee gang and we still executed them.  So that really has nothing to do with us being a republic or not.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: asylumseeker on April 24, 2008, 11:24:01 PM
A day after her funeral, Naipaul "welcomed into his home" a Pakistani journalist, Nadira Khannum Alvi, and married her two months later, the newspaper reported.

Lord he eh easy

She eh easy either ...
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Midknight on April 25, 2008, 08:42:34 AM
Queen Macoomeh
Quote
For me, there's no hate for Naipaul. I don't know the man and can't hate someone I do not know. It's hard enough for me to hate people I do know...

I'm sure you use it figuratively...but there isn't a single person on God's green earth that I 'hate'.

Yes, it was figurative.

Apparently the only person in the thread who claiming to literally hate him is truetrini (correct me if I wrong) and he seem to have his reason. I not knocking anybody opinion, i ent have no soft spot for naipaul.

I wasn't looking for any excuses for his behaviour either, more trying to understand where his apparent 'hate' of a place that, according to him had such little impact on who he grew up, to be could come from.

I personally would be ready to subscribe to the mad genius theory. From what I reading in the snippets of the bio this 'irrational' hatred (assuming that the abuse has nothing to do with it) is not the only screw he have loose up in the membrane.

That said, nobody ent paying me to psychoanalyse him so I go leave it at that.

I agree 100% with the person who say they prefer Selvon though. If it wasn't for Miguel Street I probably wouldn't know who V.S. was before he get his prize.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 25, 2008, 11:59:44 AM
Queen Macoomeh
Quote
For me, there's no hate for Naipaul. I don't know the man and can't hate someone I do not know. It's hard enough for me to hate people I do know...

I'm sure you use it figuratively...but there isn't a single person on God's green earth that I 'hate'.

Yes, it was figurative.

Apparently the only person in the thread who claiming to literally hate him is truetrini (correct me if I wrong) and he seem to have his reason. I not knocking anybody opinion, i ent have no soft spot for naipaul.

I wasn't looking for any excuses for his behaviour either, more trying to understand where his apparent 'hate' of a place that, according to him had such little impact on who he grew up, to be could come from.

I personally would be ready to subscribe to the mad genius theory. From what I reading in the snippets of the bio this 'irrational' hatred (assuming that the abuse has nothing to do with it) is not the only screw he have loose up in the membrane.

That said, nobody ent paying me to psychoanalyse him so I go leave it at that.

I agree 100% with the person who say they prefer Selvon though. If it wasn't for Miguel Street I probably wouldn't know who V.S. was before he get his prize.
Something turn in me de day I read that article on him after that Nobel win.  It's no exaggeration to say that Naipaul had an influence on me as a young writer, his gift to me was as apparent as the need for oxygen...and felt just as refreshing when I first read Miguel Street in Form 1 (2?).  I could definitely understand that having lived in england for so long that has become both his physical and emotional home.  But I saw nothing in his early writings to betray anything in his sentiments about Trinidad, so wretchedly negative as he has come to express in his later years.  My shock was eclipsed only by my disappointment in him.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: trinindian on April 25, 2008, 12:23:40 PM
In early 2007, V.S Naipaul made a long-awaited return to his homeland of Trinidad. He urged citizens to shrug off the notions of "Indian" and "African" and to concentrate on being "Trinidadian". He was warmly received by students and intellectuals alike and it seems, finally, that he has come to some form of closure with Trinidad. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._S._Naipaul)

The things that come out sometime.

Has anyone read Mr Naipaul books that are not set in Trinidad.
I never read Miguel street, but I did read a House for Mr. Biswas and Mystic Masseur. I truly enjoyed these two books, but i enjoyed them because of their familiarity and nostalgia it invoked. I am not sure if his other books would invoke the same feeling.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: dinho on April 25, 2008, 12:38:25 PM
In early 2007, V.S Naipaul made a long-awaited return to his homeland of Trinidad. He urged citizens to shrug off the notions of "Indian" and "African" and to concentrate on being "Trinidadian". He was warmly received by students and intellectuals alike and it seems, finally, that he has come to some form of closure with Trinidad. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._S._Naipaul)

The things that come out sometime.

Has anyone read Mr Naipaul books that are not set in Trinidad.
I never read Miguel street, but I did read a House for Mr. Biswas and Mystic Masseur. I truly enjoyed these two books, but i enjoyed them because of their familiarity and nostalgia it invoked. I am not sure if his other books would invoke the same feeling.


ummm no eh!

the in-person accounts from his visit to Trinidad is that he came across as extremely condescending and dismissive of the same 'students and intellectuals alike' mentioned above, refusing to answer questions and labelling them as trivial.

Here is an account from a high school student who attended that event:

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/index.pl/article_opinion?id=161135441
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: trinindian on April 25, 2008, 12:44:07 PM
In early 2007, V.S Naipaul made a long-awaited return to his homeland of Trinidad. He urged citizens to shrug off the notions of "Indian" and "African" and to concentrate on being "Trinidadian". He was warmly received by students and intellectuals alike and it seems, finally, that he has come to some form of closure with Trinidad. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._S._Naipaul)

The things that come out sometime.

Has anyone read Mr Naipaul books that are not set in Trinidad.
I never read Miguel street, but I did read a House for Mr. Biswas and Mystic Masseur. I truly enjoyed these two books, but i enjoyed them because of their familiarity and nostalgia it invoked. I am not sure if his other books would invoke the same feeling.


ummm no eh!

the in-person accounts from his visit to Trinidad is that he came across as extremely condescending and dismissive of the same 'students and intellectuals alike' mentioned above, refusing to answer questions and labelling them as trivial.

Here is an account from a high school student who attended that event:

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/index.pl/article_opinion?id=161135441


I quite familar with the was VS behaved on his visit to trini, but my quote was off on posted in wikipedia.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 25, 2008, 01:01:26 PM
Naipaul get raped and he is now a boorish rube who chooses to intrude on our peace and serenity.

Hey Vidia (is that really a man name?) how about this as a piece ah literature?

"I hope yuh grow some unsightly warts on thy unsighly countenance, as thou art naught but a cod sniffing canker flower, on the ass of all of Trinidad!"

f**k he
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: asylumseeker on April 25, 2008, 02:13:44 PM
As de saying goes, Naipaul doh give a rat's ass. He could care less.

Ah siddung literally RIGHT IN FRONT de man, his wife, and his son and watch dem dash wey a series of questions from (based on de locale) what had to have been a pretty astute audience. Plus, many were gathered for HIS booksigning. It struck me as being inappropriate. So ah could well imagine how dismisive he may have been of secondary schoolers.

[Ah find these letters to the editor ought to be attributed. Whaiz dis 'high school student'  thing .. sometimes yuh even seeing things like ... "Bitter in Belmont" ... "Disturbed in Diego" ... anyhow, diff'rent topic. Iz time de express realize it's a national newspaper and not some bachannalist rag.]

 
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Deeks on April 25, 2008, 05:58:43 PM
Guys,

         all yuh sentiments bordering on vitriolic. The man was abused as a kid which has left an indeliable stain on his psyche. But his "naybull string" bury in TT. We have to take the "good" and the "bad". He is OURS, even though he don't big up TT.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 25, 2008, 06:43:35 PM
he nabel string buried in T&T?  Nah!

I feel dem clamp and cut Mr. Naipaul damn toti orf...and leave he nabel sting attached dat is why he so f**ked up and vex with sweet Trinidad.

I could see how getting bulled can screw up ah man psyche eh...but what does Trinidad as a nation have tuh do with dat?  Why doesn't he hate his family and his people for failing to protect him?

Steups.

And my theory has more credence as since he eh have no toti he come out ah BIG sucker!

f**k he!



Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 25, 2008, 07:50:34 PM
Guys,

         all yuh sentiments bordering on vitriolic. The man was abused as a kid which has left an indeliable stain on his psyche. But his "naybull string" bury in TT. We have to take the "good" and the "bad". He is OURS, even though he don't big up TT.

Deeks you reallll going tuh bat fuh dis man dred...but I hear yuh.  You could claim him, lol
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 25, 2008, 08:13:19 PM
Guys,

         all yuh sentiments bordering on vitriolic. The man was abused as a kid which has left an indeliable stain on his psyche. But his "naybull string" bury in TT. We have to take the "good" and the "bad". He is OURS, even though he don't big up TT.

Deeks you reallll going tuh bat fuh dis man dred...but I hear yuh.  You could claim him, lol

ent.

Yuh is ah true christian fella...unless yuh is he family and yuh was dey when he was young and yuh.....nahhhhhh  cyar be.  :devil:
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Bakes on April 25, 2008, 08:31:07 PM
Guys,

         all yuh sentiments bordering on vitriolic. The man was abused as a kid which has left an indeliable stain on his psyche. But his "naybull string" bury in TT. We have to take the "good" and the "bad". He is OURS, even though he don't big up TT.

Deeks you reallll going tuh bat fuh dis man dred...but I hear yuh.  You could claim him, lol

ent.

Yuh is ah true christian fella...unless yuh is he family and yuh was dey when he was young and yuh.....nahhhhhh  cyar be.  :devil:

Nah...I staying away from dat one, lol
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: rotatopoti3 on April 26, 2008, 05:37:17 PM
some ah allyuh ah shame to call even friggin trini...

When i read some of allyuh post....it filled with ingrained hatred...because Naipaul is a blasted coolie right?

Admit it ...race has alot to do with allyuh criticisms...it really sad how as a litterate society some people cant come to terms with separating  culural pressures with that of merit.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Dutty on April 26, 2008, 05:54:21 PM
some ah allyuh ah shame to call even friggin trini...

When i read some of allyuh post....it filled with ingrained hatred...because Naipaul is a blasted coolie right?

Admit it ...race has alot to do with allyuh criticisms...it really sad how as a litterate society some people cant come to terms with separating  culural pressures with that of merit.


I cyah speak for dem fellahs...but I eh think so

I doh see nobody callin for ah boycott of he books or nuttn....his writings are still held in wide esteem
But the fact his for decades he consistently 'waste down' not only where he comes from but the people he left behind in a most condescending manner...especially as his fame and fortune was launched by writing about the very same island he has held in contempt for years.

Regardless of yuh race..dat does pretty much qualify anyone as ah walking penis

Personally I think he mad for years
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 26, 2008, 06:10:58 PM
some ah allyuh ah shame to call even friggin trini...

When i read some of allyuh post....it filled with ingrained hatred...because Naipaul is a blasted coolie right?

Admit it ...race has alot to do with allyuh criticisms...it really sad how as a litterate society some people cant come to terms with separating  culural pressures with that of merit.


whappen to you fella, yuh reverting tuh yuh crazy ways or what?

Like yuh never hear de things Naipaul say about trinis and trinidad or what?

Some of his most stinging criticisms have come from Indians.

I hate he nasty ass....take dat in yuh pweffen and chill tuh f**k out.

He could be ah f**king balck man, ah indian ah chinee and ah whiteman...he is still ah f**king asshole.

yuh come with shit ass talk about you shame tuh call some ah we trini?

He is de one who disoen trinidad and say he is ah englishman first and den ah indian second...if anyone racist is he

f**k he and you and de horse dat bull him
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: rotatopoti3 on April 26, 2008, 08:20:01 PM
f**k he and you and de horse dat bull him...i was surprised yuh didnt say d horse dat bull me too.... ;D

There is way too much ingrained hatred and i stand by that...regardless of whether he iz ah imps or not..d man put we on d map....

It have some trinis who feel dem more american than trini too....and feel like tnt aint nuttin to dem until dey realise america aint give ah shit about them too...
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: just cool on April 26, 2008, 10:01:29 PM
When exactly he start getting heat from Trinis?  I think he said something when he won the nobel...didn't read all his books so i not sure if is based on that.
When he was here last year he say is a big misunderstanding...lol
don't really care....just another one of many who leave and don't have good things to say bout home...usually based on bad experiences (even though he claim he is misunderstood...or was it his wife say that?)
for some reason jus cool come to mind...at least when he had now come and was explaining his signature
So how i get in this argument partner. i dun wid the racist talk on this board,BC doh matter what i say in regard to race, it will allways be missunderstood just like my sig. 


PS:for the record, i'm a trinidadian and i love my country, i just real openly critical of the hypocrisy that plague my home town, and the wickedness that most of our less fortunate citizens have to endure under the govt, and the capitalist who happen to be mainly old money white racist facked-up trini's who does segregate their self from the rest of the population in ah real apartheid stylie.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: trinindian on April 26, 2008, 11:20:03 PM
some ah allyuh ah shame to call even friggin trini...

When i read some of allyuh post....it filled with ingrained hatred...because Naipaul is a blasted coolie right?

Admit it ...race has alot to do with allyuh criticisms...it really sad how as a litterate society some people cant come to terms with separating  culural pressures with that of merit.


While I agree with your views on some of the posts on the board, I would not call anybody a coolie especially since I would not like to be call one. As for my personal opinion of VS I think he full of himself and that is why I don't care much for the individual. I do appreciate his wrk, however his apparent disdain for his home land the setting for for his more successfull wrks makes me dislike the indvidual even more.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: ZANDOLIE on April 27, 2008, 01:31:27 AM
some ah allyuh ah shame to call even friggin trini...

When i read some of allyuh post....it filled with ingrained hatred...because Naipaul is a blasted coolie right?

Admit it ...race has alot to do with allyuh criticisms...it really sad how as a litterate society some people cant come to terms with separating culural pressures with that of merit.


WDMCIDIHHS?  Call out people if you feel so strongly, but don't cover everybody with them blanket accusations. How you know who here is Indian and who is not? Naipaul considers himself an English aryan. And he denigrates African people and Indian people of so-called lower caste. He more likely to denigrate people as "coolie" than many of us here on this board. He is an jackass with a single talent for writing words on paper.

How much Englishman you think does laugh behind Naipaul back?

And as for "put we on the map", he hold we up as fools and nothing else.

Some people here does consistently make some real ignorant racist statements, that they would not like turned back on themselves and their people. And many times it does go unchallenged. But don't paint everybody with the same brush.

Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 27, 2008, 07:24:14 AM
Put we on de map?  How so?  By bad talking me...we the mimic men?

I said I enjoyed reading his works, regret I  did though, I vex I contribute one cent to dat lout.

f**k he and he defenders.

I eh care if he get bull, it is obvious he eh get bull enough.....dey should bull him senseless.

Fuch dat Englishman and Indian..f**k he!

I cyar stand he guts.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: pecan on April 27, 2008, 01:12:04 PM

hmm .. I think I have to conclude that TT doh like de man .. :devil:
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: asylumseeker on April 27, 2008, 03:47:09 PM
f**k he and you and de horse dat bull him...i was surprised yuh didnt say d horse dat bull me too.... ;D

There is way too much ingrained hatred and i stand by that...regardless of whether he iz ah imps or not..d man put we on d map....

It have some trinis who feel dem more american than trini too....and feel like tnt aint nuttin to dem until dey realise america aint give ah shit about them too...


Well yeah! Lehwe pelt more pitch oil on de fire. I fuh dat. Ah glad race reach in dis, but not for the reason advanced by rotato.

Why? Because race has been a significant component on which Naipaul's legacy has been built. Doh geh tie up tall atall atall ... I would love to delve deeper into Naipaul's frame of race. Frankly, HE has left me VERY curious over time about the lens through which HE views race relations. Hence it's appropriate to deal with this race supposition rotato pushed.

When I read Naipaul I get a sense of racial dynamics in the country 50 years ago. I get hints of why our politics is where we are today. I read confirmation of social marginalization. I also get that Naipaul let experiences before his 18th birthday completely dominate his relationship to OUR country. Ah say that having read several of his works. Some more than once.

+++

rotato that accusation yuh brandish dey is a double-edged sword ... buh lehwe sharpen it lil bit bredda ...

French writes of Naipaul: "The only Blacks he associated with now were Conrad and Barbara" ...

Wheeler writes: "His dismissal of his homeland became part of his persona."

Naipaul on himself: "An autobiography can distort; facts can be realigned," ... "But fiction never lies: it reveals the writer totally."

Akash Kapur writes: "Few writers have offended their readers as regularly as V.S. Naipaul has. From his first travel book, which disparaged the West Indies as a "dot on the map" where "nothing was created," to his most recent, in which he dismissed Pakistan as a "criminal enterprise," the Trinidad-born author of Indian ancestry has shown a staggering capacity for insensitivity and prejudice. Africa is filled with "bow-and-arrow people." India is "an area of darkness." "V.S. Nightfall," Derek Walcott has called him; like a man who turns his back to the sun, Naipaul sees the world through his own shadow."

+++

Further, iz long time now I know VS to be disparaged by all de creeds and races that are trying to find equal places on dem twin islands in de blue Caribbean Sea we call Trinidad & Tobago. Long time!

Today Naipaul is a cynical, eccentric and idiosyncratic old man. Yesteryear he was a cynical, eccentric and idiosyncratic young man.

It's clear that he was affected by his years at Oxford. But I have a fair sense that the man relishes being somewhat of a misogynist ... he may be a firm bastard, but ah go continue to read him. Ah eh read him in 5-6 years (around de time he pulled that stunt with de ppl's questions) but whenever I return to him I find some insights  ... Jes like how when ah figure ah suss EVERY Marley line to emotive perfection, somedays a line from Bob will strike me differently ...

One bone I have to pick with VS is that he's studiously left a void with respect to attaining a Trinidad-centered definition of him. By not answering questions, by being dismissive, by defaulting on the opportunity to place himself in context to a place that wants to claim him, if only as prodigal son ... Yuh would figure that he would employ a path of redemption and conciliation as he heads into his 80s ... but apparently not. He will die an ornery and contrary bastard.

So rotato, guess what? The consequence of this is the firm leverage of vitriol (and even hate) from yet another generation of Trinbagonians.

Naipaul is a missed opportunity. A missed opportunity to broker within our society. A missed opportunity to explain to curious 16, 17 and 18 year olds the difficulties of extricating yuhself from de society one is born into ... to alien worlds in pursuit of ambitions ... as many times as Naipaul bounce he head, he's more than equipped to share.

In the end VS fulfills one of the stereotypes associated with the roots we know him to have had. The greatest taint left by Naipaul is his being the comprehensive definition of an emigre with purposeful amnesia.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 27, 2008, 04:12:57 PM
afterall dat analysis, he remains ah c**t...f**k he

he is de racist.

haul he stink (******) modder c**t!  (put whatevr adjective yuh want in dey)
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: asylumseeker on April 27, 2008, 04:35:13 PM
Quote
Naipaul learns he has "one" the 1971 Booker from an illiterate note by the publisher Carmen Callil. At a writers' symposium in Sweden our hero and Michael Frayn try their first sauna. When Kurt Vonnegut finds them naked on a bench ("It seems to be getting hotter"; "It's quite hot now"), they are mistakenly still in the changing room. Pity we couldn't have had this as a jacket image.

Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Dutty on April 27, 2008, 04:39:02 PM
Quote
Naipaul learns he has "one" the 1971 Booker from an illiterate note by the publisher Carmen Callil. At a writers' symposium in Sweden our hero and Michael Frayn try their first sauna. When Kurt Vonnegut finds them naked on a bench ("It seems to be getting hotter"; "It's quite hot now"), they are mistakenly still in the changing room. Pity we couldn't have had this as a jacket image.



Two question?

What de hell does dat quote mean?....and how yuh kick off de tibetan flag undercover so?
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 27, 2008, 04:43:27 PM
f**k Tibet too
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Dutty on April 27, 2008, 04:46:25 PM
f**k Tibet too

blasted kismihass flag flappin yankee
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 27, 2008, 07:00:02 PM
f**k Tibet too

blasted kismihass flag flappin yankee

de only flag I have is ah trini flag.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Organic on April 28, 2008, 06:29:29 AM
When exactly he start getting heat from Trinis?  I think he said something when he won the nobel...didn't read all his books so i not sure if is based on that.
When he was here last year he say is a big misunderstanding...lol
don't really care....just another one of many who leave and don't have good things to say bout home...usually based on bad experiences (even though he claim he is misunderstood...or was it his wife say that?)
for some reason jus cool come to mind...at least when he had now come and was explaining his signature
So how i get in this argument partner. i dun wid the racist talk on this board,BC doh matter what i say in regard to race, it will allways be missunderstood just like my sig. 


PS:for the record, i'm a trinidadian and i love my country, i just real openly critical of the hypocrisy that plague my home town, and the wickedness that most of our less fortunate citizens have to endure under the govt, and the capitalist who happen to be mainly old money white racist facked-up trini's who does segregate their self from the rest of the population in ah real apartheid stylie.

u sure u eh talking bout yuh good ole USA or  even canada???  or Brooklyn eh count
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Jumbie on April 28, 2008, 08:18:42 AM

Is it me or TT don't like the English chap?



Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Organic on April 28, 2008, 08:30:22 AM

Is it me or TT don't like the English chap?




it have anybody TT like??
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Jumbie on April 28, 2008, 08:49:39 AM

Is it me or TT don't like the English chap?




it have anybody TT like??

His ..

President - Bushy
Prime Minister - Manny

and

coconut vendors.. he like the feel of big nuts in his hand and on his lips.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: asylumseeker on April 28, 2008, 08:53:24 AM
Quote
Naipaul learns he has "one" the 1971 Booker from an illiterate note by the publisher Carmen Callil. At a writers' symposium in Sweden our hero and Michael Frayn try their first sauna. When Kurt Vonnegut finds them naked on a bench ("It seems to be getting hotter"; "It's quite hot now"), they are mistakenly still in the changing room. Pity we couldn't have had this as a jacket image.



Two question?

What de hell does dat quote mean?....and how yuh kick off de tibetan flag undercover so?


The quote is from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2008/04/12/bonai112.xml

***

The Tibet flag will be back. It was up there with the South African flag on a human rights level. The fact that South Africa 2010 is the football destination comes as coincidence.

Why? IMV the South African flag and the Tibetan flag hold shared meaning, especially when one interprets current events. These events have presented China with its hugest PR challenge since 1989.

We don't speak much about the 1976 Olympics that we attended and medalled at ... but at which many countries decided not to participate at on the grounds of opposition to sporting links with South Africa.

(http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39959000/jpg/_39959062_montreal238.jpg)

There are several parallels with what Tibet represents today and what South Africa represented in years past.
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 28, 2008, 09:19:35 AM

Is it me or TT don't like the English chap?




it have anybody TT like??

Plenty I like, but yuh have tuh give meh reason tuh like yuh.

So whappen Organic one, yuh like Very Shitty Naipaul?
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Organic on April 28, 2008, 09:25:28 AM

Is it me or TT don't like the English chap?




it have anybody TT like??

Plenty I like, but yuh have tuh give meh reason tuh like yuh.

So whappen Organic one, yuh like Very Shitty Naipaul?
i doh dislike de man he never do i anythign.. i said i liek him fomr a literary perspective. and i do.
but i perfer sam selvon and micheal anthony ... for reasons in my initial reposne in this thread
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 28, 2008, 09:26:43 AM
f**k naipaul he is ah ****** c**t
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Jumbie on April 28, 2008, 10:00:08 AM

Quote

Plenty I like, but yuh have tuh give meh reason tuh like yuh.

So whappen Organic one, yuh like Very Shitty Naipaul?
Quote
i doh dislike de man he never do i anythign.. i said i liek him fomr a literary perspective. and i do.
but i perfer sam selvon and micheal anthony ... for reasons in my initial reposne in this thread
Quote

Green days by the river is still one of my fav books.

doh worry wid TT, he experiencing menopause.



Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: truetrini on April 28, 2008, 10:01:33 AM

Quote

Plenty I like, but yuh have tuh give meh reason tuh like yuh.

So whappen Organic one, yuh like Very Shitty Naipaul?
Quote
i doh dislike de man he never do i anythign.. i said i liek him fomr a literary perspective. and i do.
but i perfer sam selvon and micheal anthony ... for reasons in my initial reposne in this thread
Quote

Green days by the river is still one of my fav books.

doh worry wid TT, he experiencing menopause.





I had a hot shit earlier from some roti..and I used Miguel Street to wipe meh arse!   And ah only do dat cuz I couldn't use Naipaul heself as he was not available.  Ah hear he very absorbant
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: WestCoast on April 28, 2008, 10:03:11 AM
 :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
allya are de bess
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: dinho on November 20, 2008, 10:30:47 PM
V. S. Naipaul, a Man Who Has Earned a Knighthood, a Nobel and Enemies Galore
By DWIGHT GARNER

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/books/19garn.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/books/19garn.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print)

THE WORLD IS WHAT IT IS
The Authorized Biography of V. S. Naipaul
By Patrick French




Books about literary friendships (James and Wharton, Kerouac and Ginsberg, Melville and Hawthorne) drop into bookstores with numbing regularity. Books about literary revenge are more rare and thus more interesting.

In 1998 Paul Theroux published “Sir Vidia’s Shadow,” a memoir about the crumbling of his long friendship with V. S. Naipaul, the great Trinidad-born novelist. Mr. Theroux’s book was a potent, carefully mixed cocktail, served ice cold. It laid bare Mr. Naipaul’s racism, misogyny, vanity, stinginess and (most distressingly) his emotional cruelty to Patricia, his first wife.

Now, 10 years later, comes “The World Is What It Is,” Patrick French’s authorized biography of Mr. Naipaul. It’s a handsome volume, jacketed in silver and black, with a disarming cover photograph of Mr. Naipaul stooping, with a gap-toothed grin, to tie a loose shoelace.

Flip Mr. French’s book over, however, and you confront this Voldemortian clump of words from Mr. Naipaul’s old nemesis, Mr. Theroux: “It seems I didn’t know half of all the horrors.” Cue the scary organ music.

Well, the reader thinks, here we go: Mr. French’s 550-page biography will be a long string of bummers, a forced march through the life of a startlingly original writer with an ugly, remote personality.

The good news is that Mr. French, a young British journalist, is certainly unafraid to face unpleasant facts about his subject. But the better news about “The World Is What It Is” is this: it’s one of the sprightliest, most gripping, most intellectually curious and, well, funniest biographies of a living writer (Mr. Naipaul is 76) to come along in years.

Mr. French is a relative rarity among biographers, a real writer, and at his best he sounds like a combination of that wily bohemian Geoff Dyer and that wittily matter-of-factual cyborg Michael Kinsley.

Even the cameos in Mr. French’s biography are crazily vivid. Here is his hole-in-one description of the editor Francis Wyndham: “Popular, gentle, solitary and eccentric, Wyndham lived with his mother, wore heavy glasses and high-waisted trousers, gave off random murmurs and squeaks and moved with an amphibian gait.”

It is to Mr. Naipaul’s credit that this crafty and inquisitive book exists. “He believed that a less than candid biography would be pointless,” Mr. French writes, “and his willingness to allow such a book to be published in his lifetime was at once an act of narcissism and humility.”

Mr. Naipaul gave Mr. French access to his archives , including journals of his first wife that he’d not yet read. Mr. Naipaul was allowed to examine the completed manuscript but requested no changes.

Mr. French indicates, early on, that he is not playing softball. On his book’s second page we read that Mr. Naipaul “said, or was said to have said, that Africa had no future, Islam was a calamity, France was fraudulent, and interviewers were monkeys. If Zadie Smith of ‘White Teeth’ fame — optimistic and presentable — was a white liberal’s dream, V. S. Naipaul was the nightmare. Rather than celebrate multiculturalism, he denounced it as ‘multi-culti,’ made malign jokes about people with darker skin than himself, blamed formerly oppressed nations for their continuing failure.”

“For a successful immigrant writer to take such a position,” Mr. French continues, “was seen as a special kind of treason.”

But Mr. French quickly and adroitly steps back to give us a wide-angled and morally complicated view of how Mr. Naipaul, knighted in 1990 and named a Nobel laureate in 2001, made his way in the world, how his greatest books were conceived and composed, how he became what he became: genius, loner, sexual obsessive, ogre, snob, provocateur and profoundly influential and controversial thinker on subjects like colonialism and belief and unbelief.

Born into an Indian family in Trinidad in 1932, Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul was raised in relative poverty. His hapless father, a sign painter and occasional journalist, was the inspiration for what may be Mr. Naipaul’s signal work of fiction, “A House for Mr. Biswas” (1961). Mr. Naipaul’s more animated mother, Mr. French suggests, inspired his literary voice: “bright, certain, robust, slightly mocking.”

A scholarship took Mr. Naipaul, at 18, to University College, Oxford, and he has lived in England ever since. When Mr. Naipaul’s first novel, “The Mystic Masseur,” was published in 1957, Mr. French notes, in typically vivid prose: “Like a tiger cub bringing home his first kill, he copied out extracts for his mother from the reviews.”

Mr. Naipaul’s dealings with women make up a good part of “The World Is What It Is.” You will often wish to cover your eyes. After a fumbling sexual encounter that reads like an outtake from Ian McEwan’s “On Chesil Beach,” Mr. Naipaul proposed to Patricia Hale, an aspiring young actress. They would remain married until her death in 1996, but it was often a twisted, withered, tenuous relationship. Mr. Naipaul criticized her remorselessly and regularly visited prostitutes; he also carried on a decades-long affair with a younger woman, Margaret Murray, whom he sometimes violently beat. For her part, Ms. Murray liked to entertain Mr. Naipaul by mailing him life-size drawings “of his erect penis, done in dark brown felt-tip; the penis wore sunglasses and a lime green cowboy hat.”

Though Patricia Naipaul frequently came along with her husband when he researched his travel books, she is rarely mentioned in them; she floated behind, a kind of ghost in his life. Later, when she was dying of breast cancer, he was angry she did not perish quickly enough. He wished to marry his current wife, Nadira.

Mr. French writes with wit and feeling about Mr. Naipaul’s books, and about Mr. Naipaul’s sense of his career. He was grimly determined not to be seen as merely a West Indian writer. “Like Ralph Ellison after the publication of ‘Invisible Man,’ he maintained that he was in a category all of his own.”

Mr. Naipaul was capable of racism. And his success sometimes brought it out in others. Evelyn Waugh, in a 1963 letter to Nancy Mitford, noted that Mr. Naipaul had won yet another literary prize: “Oh for a black face,” he wrote.

Mr. French details the off-and-on animosity between Mr. Naipaul and the Caribbean poet and fellow Nobelist Derek Walcott. Would people still praise Mr. Naipaul’s “nasty little sneers” against black people, Mr. Walcott has asked, if those sneers were turned on Jews?

The final sections of Mr. French’s biography grow a bit deflated and sad; the book becomes a list of awards and obligations, and a compendium of Mr. Naipaul’s boorish behavior. (He dressed down Iris Murdoch while both were dining with Margaret Thatcher at 10 Downing Street; he soured an evening at Francis Ford Coppola’s Napa Valley estate by disapproving of the food and by sneering at George Lucas: “I don’t know ‘Star Wars,’ I am not interested in films.”)

“A writer is in the end not his books, but his myth,” Mr. Naipaul has written. “And that myth is in the keeping of others.” Mr. Naipaul was brave to allow this complicated parsing of his own myth into the world. You will finish “The World Is What It Is” wishing to reread Mr. Naipaul’s best books immediately. You will also be glad he is not your friend, neighbor, sibling, landlord or barista.

But what of it? Bad people write good books. And as Mr. Naipaul pointedly says here, “I remain completely indifferent to how people think of me.”
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: WestCoast on November 20, 2008, 10:42:29 PM
wait nuh
Naipaul does post on here sometimes :devil:

serious: thanks Omar...good read
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: royal on August 11, 2018, 04:51:25 PM
VS Naipaul has passed away . He was 85
Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Sando prince on August 11, 2018, 05:55:35 PM

RIP Mr Naipaul

https://www.facebook.com/CNC3Television/posts/10156683680737996

Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: asylumseeker on August 11, 2018, 06:13:50 PM
Good shout informing us that the "British author" has passed away.

From his obit in The Telegraph :

Quote
As Edward Said,  a former professor of English and comparative literature at Columbia University, once put it, although Naipaul, in the West is seen as "a master novelist and an important witness to the disintegration and hypocrisy of the third world, in the postcolonial world he's a marked man as a purveyor of stereotypes and disgust for the world that produced him - though that doesn't exclude people thinking he's a gifted writer."

Not sure [how] he'll be mourned, but he will leave a void.

Several comments on this thread are aligned with Said.

RIP.

Particularly fitting that he would die during the week that the TTFA President sought to tangle, then disentangle, then re-engage with the US Embassy.

Not too long ago a fellow named Nakhid described a view of the reconstructed football world order that's consistent with Naipaulian themes. Playing out before our eyes from the Home of Football to Marli Street are some of the repugnant things that compelled Naipaul's disdain for some of our indigenous habits. In this sense, he should be embraced.

RIP for that as we teeter on the edge of the end of the generation to which Naipaul belonged (although he truly belonged to no one and that was at the core of why he is today known as the "British author" merely born in Trinidad.)



Title: Re: Naipaul again
Post by: Sando prince on August 11, 2018, 06:53:17 PM

RIP Mr Naipaul

https://www.facebook.com/CNC3Television/posts/10156683680737996



well ah reading the comments under the original FB post and plenty pople saying he did not like Trinidad and in fact had deep contempt against T&T and saw himself as British. He refused to accept any awards from T&T throughout his lifetime. But still we should recognise him for his contribution to Caribbean literature, but I will recognise him as a British man