I got this book out of the library and put off reading it as it sounded like it might be hard work.

How wrong I was. Once I started I couldn't stop.

If you want to know why Islam has grown, and how and why so many happily kill themselves for it, this tells you - even though it was written well before the current lunacy.

That sounds a rather depressing recommendation, but the book is utterly fascinating - and made me understand why Naipaul won the Nobel Prize.

He goes into prodigious detail, never criticizes, only describes people's astonishing lives with a quiet but sympathetic irony.

As it happens I have spent time in three of the four countries he covers - Iran, Malaysia and Indonesia - and recognised many of the things he talks about.

His description of what had happened in the one I don't know - Pakistan - was deeply disturbing. It makes you realise what a disaster partition was -with the most appalling consequences, many surely yet to unfold.

No lo terminé

Interesting stories, but not sure what his point was.

Wow. If travel books are like this i am reading more of them. Hardly any travel and almost all people, and peoples lives: Malaysia, Indonesia, Iran and Pakistan, in the late 1990s; and sometimes in the context of 1979. Amazing stuff. Is there really so much to say about different cultures, individual lives just in context. Sure there is. And a whole lot more. The only obvious observation that i can see in the negative, is that it might have been double in length!

fascinating description of islam and its power in societies and it strangle on inclusion of others.

What I learned: Islam is an Arab religion and “it makes imperial “Arabizing” demands on its converts”. (Robert Irwin, Guardian - back of book)

What has this Arab Islam done to the histories of Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan and Malaysia?

What is Arab Islam’s affect on it’s converts and their futures in their respective countries?

These are just a few of the questions that are addressed by Naipaul in this compelling read. In 1979 he visited Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan and Malaysia and wrote the precursor to this book, “Among the Believers”. Then seventeen years after his first visit,in 1996, he revisited these same areas again and to some degree some of the same people he had spent time with on his first visit. He set out to discover for himself how the countries and peoples he had first visited had fared in the intervening years with the influence of Islam on their lives and their cultures.

As you read about the lives of people who were born in these countries and how they and their families have fared with the coming of Islam to their lands you become very much aware of the devastating affects that “imperial Arabizing” has had on the traditions of the cultures of each of these nations. It struck me as tragic to read about what has been lost in the histories and traditions of these areas of the world. Most especially the sense among these people about who they are. Naipaul says, “ . . . Islam seeks as an article of the faith to erase the past; the believers in the end honour Arabia alone; they have nothing to return to”.

Women are less than second class citizens in the cultures of these nations. Not all of it is attributed to Islamic influence. Some of it was decidedly due to the traditions of the cultures of this area of the world. But, Islam as it has been practiced in these countries during the time frame of this book (1979-1996) had not been kind or nurturing to the wives and daughters of these nations. You learn about concepts such as “purdah” which is, as per Wikipedia," ... a curtain which makes sharp separation between the world of man and that of a woman, between the community as a whole and the family which is its heart, between the street and the home, the public and the private, just as it sharply separates society and the individual.” At its most virulent it makes women a non-entity in the nations where it is practiced and according to Wikipedia, it is practiced in one form or another in all the countries where Islam is present.

To quote the comments on the back cover of this book, “ . . . it is not a book of opinions. It is— a very rich and human book, full of people and stories .. . skeptical, inquiring, sharply observant and unfailingly stylish in (its) formulations . . . “. I found this to be a disturbing, enlightening reading experience and it made me, once again, most grateful for the blessing of being born and raised in the USA in the twentieth century.

Another masterpiece by Naipaul.

Terrific look at Islam's effect on non-Arab countries that previously had different histories and cultures (e.g. Iran, Indonesia). Naipaul is a tremendous observer of the human condition and above all, a true humanist. Hard to disagree with his conclusion that Islam is the most comprehensive form of imperialism, in that it erases any history that precedes it. The chapter on Pakistan is devastating, and that was written over ten years ago.

Mostly read it for his bits on Malaysia...

I (gladly, eagerly, feelingly) learned something new on every page. So engaging, on days when I set it down I found myself thinking back to it and wondering what would happen next. Also, anyone who knows me will tell you I couldn’t shut up about it for weeks — always a good sign.

I especially value this book for its long form deliberate research and context. The author visited these counties in the 1970s, and the 1990s, which really gives much needed foundation, context, and perspective for viewing and understanding current affairs.

In the beginning itself Naipaul asserts that the USA is the land of freedom and opportunity, where a Muslim preacher goes to theologically indoctrinate the university students of Indonesia. Islamic organisations in Kuwait and Saudi A finance him.
In detail Naipaul goes on to describe how rigourously the devouts of Islam are expected to undertake the rituals of it. But, on a closer scrutiny, most of the religions are like that. None could be said to be more liberal, considered at a fundamental level.
The author talks of the people converted to Islam being more fundamentalist. It is similar with the people who are converted to Christianity, who outnumber by far the Islamic converts.
Hinduism, which has no place for conversion, if considered at its ritualistic level, has a strong violence concealed behind it. The ritual of animal sacrifice being one of the cases to mull over.
So, a discourse on religions is fraught with looking farcical, more so when an author wants to present one religion as superior than another, the one who belongs to neither. Such type of writing may be entertaining to read for some people. But it must not be considered a serious literature, as it inherently is prejudiced to serve the purpose of a few opportunists waiting to grab power, once this conflict of religions becomes more wide spread. It is more important to single out this flaw of the writers like Naipaul, as the 'war against terrorism' is becoming more wide-spread and consuming almost the whole world.

Also that Gandhi learnt his social welfare ideas from Christianity, though he has been a devout Hindu all his life, is mentioned in this book. Naipaul said it only in one sentence, without substantiating it in any manner. The Hindu way of life depends a great deal on the idea of society and family. How painfully Naipaul had described it in 'A House For Mr. Biswas'.

Without a critical scrutiny, these two kind of opinions, supporting Christianity while criticizing Islamism rigourourly and Hinduism passingly, I am not able to push down my throat.

In his lifetime itself, most of Naipaul's non-fiction could become irrelevant, as it dwells too much on the conflicts of religions. Also it is over-rated, for having claimed various literary awards, from a literary world too keen to find a work which confirmed to its long-held, fossilized notions of literature.

Unless you have a constituency of the readers, you can not do this kind of writing. It is like preaching what you already know, or pretend to know, instead of exploring deeper the people you seem to interview in the course of writing a travel-book. There is hardly a moderate, common man or woman, met by Naipaul, in this book so far. So, it all depends on the kind of people you want to meet. If they are in or around the offices of supreme power of a country with religious leaning, the opinions you discover might only conform your own prejudices.


The power writing has occasionally becomes over-bearing even for the best ones, and you want your share of the political-cake, instead of mere readership.

Two stars are for keeping the language simple.
Shall the later part of the book be any better?

I've read several of Naipaul's works, but this one tends to be more academic, and hence more difficult to read. He follows the growth of Islam in four "non-Arabic" countries: Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, and Malaysia, generally told through the eyes on individuals he has encountered during his trips there. Much of the narrative may be unfamiliar to the Western reader, but nevertheless educational. I particularly found interesting the portion of the book dealing with Iran, as it addressed the growth of Islam leading up to the Iran revolution during the time of the Carter/Reagan administrations. However, not for the reader interested in lighter works.