Tecnicamente muito bom. Diria mesmo irrepreensível. Mas pessoalmente menos atractivo para mim, por estar pensado e "artilhado" com bons mecanismos narrativos mas lhe faltar a genuinidade do pessoal.
Há tessituras de realidades aparentemente rapinadas das vivências (reais ou hipotetizadas) numa África abstracta, feita de muito concreto particular junto.
Nada é deixado ao acaso, mas há diversos termos em branco, sendo a nota dominadora a de um malogrado iter africano, pertença ele ao negro do mato, ao mestiço do meio termo racial e geográfico, ou ao branco que vai de fora com intuito dominador ou salvador.

Bayıldım! Ne muhteşem, ne dürüst bir dil. Boşa harcanmış tek bir satırı yok gibi. Bu adama aslında nasıl içten içe yanan bir utançla ve kompleksle saldırdıklarını da anlamış oldum böylece. Ona kızan hatta ondan nefret edenlere bir bakın. Kolonyalizm, oryantalizm ya da kendine, kendi kültürüne yabancılaşma.. Eskimiş ve yoz, bugün hiçbir yerde durmayan, artık hiçbir şeye sığmayan bir dolu sözle nasıl hakaret ettiklerini hatırlıyor musunuz Naipaul'a..

Aylardır kapanıp okusam da hemen hiçbir şey böyle vurup geçmedi ve yeniden dönüp okumamak için hiçbir neden yok şimdi kitabı. Kolay kolay dönemiyorsunuz o nehrin dönemecinden, çıkamıyorsunuz bir buğu gibi yükselen ormanın içinden çünkü.

I went to Africa once and actually thought it was quite nice. Great book notwithstanding

This did nothing for me. The characters were light and airy, and the plot just never cohered.

A young man of mixed Indian-Arab heritage living on the east coast of Africa in the early 1960s moves further inland to take over the ownership of a small general store in a town on a bend in the river.

This is my second book by VS Naipaul. The first one I read was In a Free State, which was a collection of three novellas. While I was completely engaged with the characters and their plights in that one, this one was only able to arouse a cursory interest. My feeling is that Naipaul is well suited to writing short fiction, but can't sustain a plot over an extended series of chapters. As such, much of this novel is just a collection of little things that happened to the main character as the situation builds into something else.

As far as the purpose of the novel goes, it's an exploration of post-colonial Africa. I think the protagonist could have been removed entirely and the book published as a treatise on how Naipaul sees the continent. The writing and the setting are decent, even though there were times when they did falter.

I'm surprised this book is as well received as it is. Certainly there are portions that would be criticized by today's readers as insensitive, racist, elitist, etc. But that wasn't really my issue. I recognize it as a product of its times. It's the actual lack of polish to the narrative and the way we're kept from completely understanding the character. And there are even what I felt were contradictions in both. Perhaps that's what he was trying to get at, though.

After reading In a Free State, I was curious to read more by Naipaul. After this one, my curiosity is lessened. I may try another one, but I'm not in a hurry.

Thought provoking...profound...sad...excellent read.

Just about to re-wash my eyes and heart with Edward Said. No wonder this bizarre book won a Nobel Prize. No wonder the word "Orientalism" is very, very, important for us.

Book features a sinfully uncharismatic main character who above all wishes to fall asleep on a rainy African afternoon and wake up a white man. 3/5

A bend in the river is one of those places where dreams are born while also come to die, it is about human thriving, of daily struggling, of a life of decadence and excess in the middle of nothing, the only constant of this jungle, of this caos is the continued floating of the downstream hyacinths.

The novel takes place on a small town so remote that it could be considered a womb of the World, but also it’s graveyard.

Africa id presented here with all its complexities, the universal appeal which cannot be extricated from violence and the pointlessness of human endeavors, and nature at its wildest.

“The World is what it is, men who are nothing, who allow themselves to become nothing, have no place in it”, opening words and epitaph, and a forewarning, it could very well be applied to almost everything in this life. “It’s just bush” too.

The novel gave me an unquenchable thirst for knowledge and previously unknown curiosity and desires to visit and understand Africa. It broke my heart and It made me hate the protagonist and at other moments it depressed me, but nothing more can be asked of top rate universal literature.

Elegant writing, although not quite as elegant as you would think reading Naipaul's narcissistic opining about himself. The story dragged in places, and, to echo a criticism that I saw floating on Goodreads, the characters felt flat at times, as if pantomiming the symbolic roles they have been assigned. But the last 20 pages make the book a masterpiece, and their contrast with the rest of the book give sense to the whole.

Is Naipaul racist? Is he sexist? Of course he is, and it manifests in the book—see, for example, the flat, essentializing, and extremely vague ways in which he describes Africans and "African" culture. But I don't read novels for moral edification, and I also don't think it healthy to confound protagonist and author (even if one definitely inspires the other, namely the DV scene which recalls Naipaul's own revolting confession about being his lover). Furthermore, I don't think it is fair to characterize all aspects of the book as racist and thus unworthy of being read, namely its depiction of postcolonial chaos, violence, and senselessness. If you are familiar with a few different countries' postcolonial history, you might find that the ruthless disarray that befell the unnamed country in the book evokes aspects of decolonization elsewhere, including in places outside of Africa. If I had to pick a book that reminds me of my family's hardest days after decolonization, it would be this one. I don't think it is racist to portray non-Western characters as capable of malice and tyranny. To recognize their humanity is to recognize they are very much capable of these things, just as the white colonizers were.

Amazingly written book - thinking back through the progression of events and character arcs, it's hard to believe this wasn't 800+ pages. What Naipaul does is something I don't find often enough: he tells a forwardly propulsive story with incident while simultaneously working through the artist's true responsibility - illumination. The ratcheting up of impending doom throughout is masterful as well
I don't think there was a single misstep in this book

I enjoyed this book very unevenly. Its strongest asset was its investigation into the different, often contradictory, realities of Africa during the end of the colonial period as its countries navigated independence and identity. There were also events, however, related to Salim’s personal experiences with Yvette that, while serving as an important catalyst for change, were handled in a way that was jarring for me. I’m uncertain whether the disconnect was a cultural one or a question of certain interactions being treated in an outdated manner.