Whatever you do, don't try to attempt reading this book, unless you'd wish a thousand agonies on yourself.

To be fair, I didn't expect anything from Biswas when I chose to read it, but I never expected it to be this... excruciating.

I'm still left reeling after the torture I experienced at Naipaul's hands.

I chose to read it because of three reasons:

1) I used to be a huge fan of quiz shows back when I was a teenager. In the final round of one, the finalist, a white pensioner, had to name a Booker Prize Winning author who was obscure enough that others hadn't mentioned his name. He chose Naipaul - and won. I was bored, so I decided to google his name and Mr Biswas came up as his most famous work. It was a comedy. The name sounded funny. I thought it might be interesting. Then I saw that it was one of those multicultural books by an South Asian (or, specifically, Indo-Caribbean) author. You know, the ones people may have heard of, but no one will read, unless it's part of their niche or they want to impress others. Based on the blurb and book cover, I ruled it out, and promptly forgot about it.

2) Anthony Burgess lent his recommendation on the front of my tatty library edition. From the man who gave me a book hangover, I thought this would be a promising sign. How wrong I was!

3) My ex-lecturer recommended it. Thanks for the nostalgia trip.

In the spirit of open-minded human endeavour, I decided it was time for me to tackle Mr Biswas and perhaps vanquish some of my preconceived notions about Post-Colonial authors and their ilk.

Oh dear... If I knew what I knew now, I would have listened to my initial instincts, but I needed a longer book to add my trophy cabinet, so at least I got something out of it.

Summary: Told in omniscient third-person narrative, AHFMB is about a tyrannical and pathetic man who wishes to assert his independence from his wife's domineering family. Other minor characters drop in and out, but the main story is focussed around the bickering Biswases and Tulsis.

I didn't like this book. That's an understatement. I loathed it! Despite the smooth fluidity of the sentences, Naipaul's writing style is pedestrian and unexceptional. There's a lot of telling not showing in the descriptions and endless minutiae of repetitive, pointless details, so it felt that I was reading something with as much depth as the back of a cereal box. The lack of variation and rhythm in the sentence construction soon wore on my nerves and just made the experience of reading the book tedious.

The characters aren't given much opportunity to grow. They remain static throughout, so it was hard to see them as passable imitations of real people with dreams, hopes and fears. As such, I couldn't separate them from their basic caricatures. The author could have improved the story if he had focussed on Biswas's character development. Biswas's irritability, frustration, petty rivalries and breakdowns wouldn't have been so bad if I understood why he had such an irrational hatred towards his wife's family when they provided him with so much.

Tonally, it appears to be a tragic-comedy. The dark humour was one of the highlights of the story and it spurred me to finish the book, but towards the second part, reading the prose was like wading through sludge. The funny moments ceased to be funny and became repetitive. Biswas would be the equivalent of watching a 620+ page soap opera - add a couple of fights, a tonne of gossip and long-term family feuds and rinse repeat.

Structurally, there isn't much of a plot. Naipaul is no storyteller and it shows. Unless you think a third-world middle-class man living his life and reacting to events or situations is the height of excitement, which I don't.

While I was struggling through it, I considered turning it into a drinking game - a list of the common phrases/words which appear in the novel - verandah, mango trees, coconut trees, brahminical, astonishing, Hannuman House. I decided against it; I was in enough pain to extend it by distracting myself.

I didn't learn much from reading this book about Trinidadian culture or inter-mixing societies. It a pity, but it is was it is.

However, my patience for getting through big bad books has improved considerably. Thankfully, I can put Naipaul alongside the authors I won't be reading again.

Only pick this book up if you wish to slog through more than 600 pages filled with the bickering, moans and wailing of a large Indo-Trinidadian family. A Nobel Prize winner that disappoints. The plot is minimal, and the humor not to my taste. It bored me to such an extent that I have no desire to more fully explain. When a book is this boring there is just nothing to say.

After 144 pages: On the back cover Newsweek and Anthony Burgess speak of the book's "comic insight and power". What are they talking about?! There is a family where everyone is complaining and picking on each other. I don't see the humor at all. What I have learned about Trinidad and Tobago culture is minimal. Should I persevere?

Is this one of those books you are supposed to like, so no one admits it's bad?

Completed April 16, 2013

I read this book via audiobook. It is a slow moving tale about Mr. Biswas, a resident of Trinidad, of Indian ancestry. It begins when he is in his early twenties and ends upon his early death in his forties, sometime after WWII. Mr. Bismas marries into a dominating family and is unhappy in this marriage. He has two lifelong goals - to have a proper home of his own, and to be a writer and journalist. He is naive about many things and repeatedly is duped by unscrupulous craftsmen, business owners, and his own employers. He is not fond of his children, nor are they of him.

There are details about the lives of people of Indian descent - their religious and linguistic preferences, cultural practices which vary, and their place in Trinidadian society. Not much happens in this long novel, and Mr.Biswas leads a generally unproductive life, dying young as he pays little attention to his own health. Read for a class on Caribbean Lit. Considered a classic, this was V.S. Naipal's first widely acclaimed novel.

Naipal is a contentious character in the Caribbean although widely admired. He is seen to be uncritical of British values and influences. Educated at Oxford, his personal opinions often reflected more appreciation for Indian and British influences on Trinidad, rather than West Indian. He won the Booker Prize in 1971 for In a Free State and the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2001. He died in 2018 at the age of 86.

ما أفظع لو أنه لم يكن يمتلك هذا البيت في ذلك الحين ، لو أنه مات بين التولسيين ، وسط أفراد تلك الأسرة الكبيرة المفككة واللامبالية ، بظروفهم المقيتة ، لو أنه ترك شاما والأطفال يعيشون بينهم في حجرة واحدة ، والأسوأ من ذلك لو أنه عاش دون أن يحاول إعلان أحقيته في نصيبه من العالم .. لو أنه عاش ومات كما ولد : لا قيمة له ولا مأوي

،
الآن عرفت حصل نايبول علي نوبل ، فإن لم يكن هو قد كتب عن تلك البلد العجيبة البعيدة التي تقع خارج حدود العالم والتاريخ والزمان ، من كان ليكتب ؟ من كان لينتقل بنا هناك ؟
سأراجعها بشكل عشوائي ربما لا يصنف علي أنه مراجعة ، بعد رفقة 12 يوم وهي رفقة طويلة بالنسبة لي مع رواية أو حتي كتاب ، أستطيع أن أغير العنوان إلي
" يوميات السيد بيسواس ، يوميات مواطن تريندادي ، أحداث ساخنة من بلاد عجيبة "
رواية أشبه بالمسلسل الذي تتابعه وتتعلق بأشخاصه وأحداثة وتشاهده ، مسلسل ست كوم أو مسلسل ملحمي
،
نايبول والأشخاص : يبرع كاتبنا في إختيار الأشخاص بعناية ، فبعد الإطلاع علي ديموجرافية ترينداد وجدت أن نايبول إختار في روايته ممثلين عن طوائف تلك البلاد وعروقهم ، الزنوج والصينيين والهنود والهندوس والمسيحيين والمسلمين والإنجليز والإسبان والفرنسيين ، أراد نايبول أن يعطيك صورة كاملة عن المجتمع التوباجي متنوع الأشكال والألوان والثقافات ، وأهم ما لفت إنتباهي حقاً في تلك الرواية كيف أن ذلك المجتمع يعيش في سلام وتوائم بعيداً عن النزاعات الطائفية التي تسود العالم
،
نايبول والأحداث : كما رأينا في شارع ميجل ، فيمكننا أن نخلص إلي أن نايبول يبني أحداثه علي أساس أنها توثيق للشارع وأحداثه للعائلات ومعتقداتها ، رواياته لا تتحدث عن مشكلة بعينها في إنتظار الحل والإنفراجة ، أنها مجرد توثيق لأيام وسنين هؤلاء الأشخاص في فترة معينة غالباً تجدها ما بين الحربين الأولي والثانية كما في شارع ميجل ، أنت تقرأ بدافع الفضول لتعرف ما لا تعرفه عن سكان تلك البلد وأحوالهم وليس لأن هناك شئ أنت تنتظر حدوثه
أكاد أجزم أن نايبول كتب أدبه للعالم وليس لمواطنيه ، أراد أن يعرف العالم ببلاده ومواطني بلاده ، أما إذا قرأ تلك الرواية شخص مواطن سيجدها عادية فهي تحكي أشياء يعايشها ، وهذا شئ يحسب لنايبول أنه لم ينظر تحت قدمه ولكنه نظر للأمام ، نظر للعالم ، والعالم لم يظلمه بل أعطاه حقه وخلد إسمه وها قد عبرت روايته الحدود والمحيطات والبحار حتي وصلت إلي شخص يقطن في حي الدرب الأحمر في قاهرة المعز لدين الله بمصر
،
السيد بيسواس وعالمه : هو عالم حقاً تتوه فيه المشاعر وتختفي ، من بداية الرواية وحتي نهايتها لا يمكنك تصنيف السيد بيسواس علي أساس أنه نوع معين من الناس فهو يتراوح بين الطيب والإنتهازي والكسول والمكافح المثابر المقدام الذي لا يخشي الفشل ، وحتي أنك لا تستطيع أن تتبين بوضوح طبيعة مشاعره وقلبه هل قاسي أم لين ورقيق ، لم نجد ذلك الحب لزوجته أو أمه ، وحتي الأولاد لا يمكنك أن تتبين أنه حقاً يحبهم ، ولكن في وسط تلك الحياة الكادحة الفقيرة التي يعيشيها بيسواس ، هل يوجد مكان للحب ؟ هل يوجد مكان لنمو المشاعر الإنسانية كالأبوية والأمومة والحب والزواج الجيد في مجتمع مزدحم بالتناقضات ، إذن فأكثر ما يميز بطلنا هنا أنه بالفعل رجل غريب لا يمكن أن تتبين سرائره أو فلسفته ، تحرره وتنوره أم تزمته ، هو فقط شخص عنيد يعاند كل شئ ويناطح كل شئ هو - لامانشا بيسواس - الذي يطارد الطواحين .
،
بين بورت أوف سبين وشورتهيلز وبيت التولسيين : إستطاع العظيم نايبول أن ينتقل بنا في براعة وخفة بين بدوية الريف إلي حضارية المدينة في ترينداد ويبين لنا الفروق في أكثر من موضع ، وأكثر ما ركز عليه نايبول هو الفارق في الثقافة والأيدلوجية والتي نراه بين عقلية السيد بيسواس التي نالت نصيب من العلم والفكر وما يعايشه من معتقدات هندوسية عجيبة وغريبة يكرهها ويناقضها ولكنه أيضاً يلجأ إليها أحياناً ، والجميل في تلك الرواية حقاً أنها ركزت علي عائلة هندوسية كنت أتوق لمعرفة معتنقي الهندوسية أكثر من توقي لمعرفة الهندوسية نفسها ، ونايبول كان يملك الجواب الشافي والكافي في ذلك الجزأ خصيصاً ، وفي المجتمع التريندادي عموماً إستطاع أن ينقلنا إلي جميع أطواره ويفهمنا ما يدور فيه من إختلاف طائفة لأخري ، وطبقة والأخري .
،
أسلوب نايبول : هو حكاء وقاص ممتاز من الدرجة الأولي ، شاعري وبارع جداً في الوصف والسرد والإنتقال في الأحداث والتسلسل في عرضها أحياناً والعشوائية والصدف في أحيان أخري وكلاهما هو فيه فائق ، يعتمد علي الأسلوب الكوميدي المضحك ، ولكنه مبكي ، ما يسمونه كوميديا سوداء ، فتلك النزاعات الزوجية بين السيد بيسواس وزوجته وعائلتها التولسية وأسلافه كانت تسبب الإحتقان والعصبية فعلاً في نفسي ولكنها تدفعني للضحك من براعة نايبول في قولبة كل تلك الأحداث في قالب كوميدي مضحك مبكي مؤثر
،
أشياء أخري : لابد أن نوجه الشكر للمترجم الأستاذ والصديق صلاح صبري الذي لم يخذلني أبداً ولم أقرأ رواية ترجمها إلا وأعطيتها العلامة الكاملة ، ليس فقط إعتماداً علي براعة الكاتب ، ولكن أيضاً لبراعة المترجم في نقل المعاني التي يقصدها الكاتب والمشاعر التي يريد أن يشعر بها القارئ وهذا صعب في حال تغيرت اللغة ، ولكن مع الدكتور صلاح صبري كان رائعاً بل زاد الرواية جمالاً كما في الرواية الإنسانية الرائعة الخالدة كتاب الزنوج
،
وقال أيضاً وقتها أنه يتمني عند موته أن يكون المانشيت : " وفاة رحالة " ، ولكن نشرت السنتينال خبر وفاته قائلة " صحفي يموت فجأة " ولم تذكر الخبر أية صحيفة أخري ، وأذاع الراديو بياناً مرتين في جميع أنحاء الجزيرة ، ولكنه بيان مدفوع الأجر

Mohun Biswas story from start to finish is definitely not a page turner. He is a self centered, impulsive man and prone to complaining. His father dies early on through drowning while looking for him. He starts work as a sign writer and ends up marrying Shama and being embroiled in the Tulsi family life. Moving into his inlaws house is horrible, overcrowded and he is at the bottom of the pecking order. He lives with his wife and her extended family where he is dominated by her mother and sons. It is a toxic environment which psychologically scars him. His one driving desire is to escape the Tulsi family and move into his own house. Ultimately he does and finds you need to be careful what you wish for in life. The house he moves into on the surface looked good. He impulsively buys it without checking the price of other houses in the area or a surveyor to check the overall condition of the house.

The intrigues, lies and drudgery of life for a Trinidad Indian is captured in the almost 600 pages of this epic set between 1920-1955 or thereabouts. His four children, job as a journalist and bad luck dog him throughout his life. Happily the author throws in lots of comedic scenes. Worth a read.

This book belongs alongside the great existentialist novels... Nausea, The Stranger, The Trial. Like them, this book resonates with fundamental truths that are deeply depressing. Here, the central truth is the debilitating nature of culture and how ones relationships limit potential and crush the soul. Naturally, the book is a comedy.

Mr. Biswas is a pathetic and ridiculous figure. He shouldn't be sympathetic. He's a petty tyrant and a blowhard. His cowardice is the only thing that keeps him from terrorizing his wife and children. However, in light of his circumstances his bad nature and contempt for himself and others seems reasonable and kind of endearing. Sure he lashes out at everyone and everything in an impotent and self destructive way, but there's no target of his invective that is worthy of less.

The writing is very good. Naipaul has provided a vivid portrait of a bygone time and place, one that we can be glad has disappeared. Poverty and squalor may never go away, but at least these specific horrible neighborhoods, houses and families have vanished. As I reflect on it, it may be wrong to suggest inclusion in the canon of existentialist works. Though it is contemporary, the book may be better viewed as their counterpoint, presenting a man trapped in his culture and striving vainly for the blessed release of alienation.

“A Casa de Mr Biswas” (1961) parece, à primeira vista, uma regular saga familiar que extrapoladas as devidas distâncias culturais podemos aproximar do quadro criado por Mann com “Buddenbrooks” (1901), acrescendo o facto de ambas as obras se inspirarem em dados autobiográficos. A escrita de Naipaul difere bastante de Mann, menos rebuscada e bela, mas mais eficiente. Dito assim pode parecer que se ganhará com esta leitura apenas o acesso a um historial de costumes situado numa geografia distinta, Trindade e Tobago, contudo existe aqui algo mais. A longa tradição familiar, sustentáculo do romance de Mann, sofre aqui um enorme revés pelo enquadramento histórico da emigração que suporta as famílias do romance de Naipaul e dá conta do seu desenraizamento.

[ver com imagens: https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.com...]
A capital de Trindade e Tobago, Port of Spain, nos anos 1940

Trindade e Tobago é um país formado por duas pequenas ilhas — Trindade, a maior, e Tobago — ao largo da costa da Venezuela. Com pouco mais de um milhão de habitantes, mas detentora de petróleo, apresenta hoje um nível de vida, em termos de PIB per capita, três vezes superior à Venezuela, sendo mesmo ligeiramente superior a Portugal. A ilha foi descoberta por Colombo no século XVI tendo estado sob controlo Espanhol até ao século XVIII quando passou para as mãos de Inglaterra. Mais importante para a compreensão do cenário da obra de Naipaul é o facto de em 1831 ter sido abolida a escravatura na ilha, libertando os escravos provenientes de África que acabariam por abandonar a agricultura. Para dar resposta ao problema, os ingleses lançaram um sistema de incentivo à emigração de habitantes da Índia para Trindade que duraria até 1917, consistindo na introdução de cerca de 150 mil indianos na ilha. VS Naipaul era descente dessa corrente migratória, que representa hoje cerca de 50% do total do país. Este enquadramento não surge no livro, mas é requerido para o contextualizar.

[imagem]
Seepersad Naipaul (1906–1953), com o seu Ford Perfect, pai de VS Naipaul e que serviu de base para criar Mr. Biswas.

Naipaul abre o romance de forma a criar uma elipse narrativa, dando conta do facto de Mr. Biswas, personagem principal, estar com 46 anos e a 10 semanas do dia da sua morte. Viajamos depois até ao dia do seu nascimento, para ao longo das mais de 500 páginas o acompanhar a si, à sua família, a da esposa e depois os seus filhos. A saga inicia-se com um tom humorístico forte, inclinado à ironia e sarcasmo, mas vai evoluindo, como que amadurecendo, para se tornar cada vez mais melancólica. Tal como o próprio título indica o foco é a casa, mas essa só aparecerá no final, até lá Mr. Biswas terá de penar, chegando a viver com toda a sua família — mulher e 4 filhos — enfiados num único quarto.

Mas a casa serve mais do que isso, ela é a alegoria da emancipação, da libertação final. Ao longo de todo o livro vemos Mr. Biswas progredir mas sempre debaixo da alçada de alguém, nomeadamente a partir do momento em que casa e entra no seio de uma família alargada, com algumas posses e que preserva tradições do país de origem, a Índia. Mr. Biswas vive dependente, buscando as mais diversas formas de fazer frente à opressão de que é alvo pela família da mulher. Tudo parece resumir-se sempre às casas onde vai vivendo, sempre sob os comandos da família da esposa, nas quais se torna difícil compreender quantas pessoas lá vivem e como cabem lá. O excesso de pessoas confere dinâmica, mas confere também um sentido de caos. As tradições pairam, mas apenas isso, o caos é dominante e tudo é volátil, faltam âncoras, tudo é demais e esgota quem ali vive. A possibilidade de viver em casa própria, com a família, é miragem libertadora mas vão ser precisas várias tentativas goradas para lá chegar. Aliás, podemos ver estas tentativas de libertação metáfora dos contratos que os ingleses faziam com as famílias da índia que os obrigavam a trabalhar durante anos em Trindade e Tobago para pagar as viagens e os alugueres dos espaços em que moravam quando chegavam.

[imagem]
A casa que serviu de base à Hanuman House onde vivia a família da esposa de Mr. Biswas com todas as suas irmãs.
[imagem]
A família Capildeo que serviu de base à família Tulsi, as 9 irmãs e os dois "deuses", da mulher de Mr. Biswas

Mas o que é mais interessante é o modo como Naipaul consegue levar-nos a sentir essa mesma libertação no final. Após centenas de páginas de andar para frente e para trás, de felicidade misturada com tristezas, de parecer impossível sair do mesmo lugar, e quando se sai, apesar da casa não ser nenhuma cama de ouro, mas sendo deles, sendo daquela família que claramente a merece, é chegada a hora do fim de Mr Biswas. Batemos no início do livro e sentimos as páginas fecharem-se, como se nenhum outro final fosse possível.

A casa e a libertação de Mr Biswas não representam apenas o crescimento, o deixar para trás, mas representam a criação de um verdadeiro porto seguro que provém de um sentimento telúrico que se liga intimamente com a responsabilidade de velar pela família. É por isso que Mr Biswas pode finalmente partir, é esse reconhecimento que produz em nós a sensação de libertação pelo dever cumprido, de luta encerrada.


Publicado no VI: https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.com...

Once in rare while one comes across a book that is so rich in detail that it makes the reader believe that he has been to this place, this house, seen these people and know them as intimately as his own friends and family. Yet the world that Naipaul draws here is remote in terms of place, time, and history.

I grew up in recently post-colonial India and have intimately seen the effect that colonial life leaves behind long after it is gone. The novel takes place in a country suffering from the effects of the same colonial rule, but on a group of people who left India a long time ago. These are rootless people, desperately trying to hold on to gossamer threads of an old culture that makes little sense in a remote place. These are people who have been robbed of all dignity, and yet they want to build a dignified life with the little they still have. Mr. Biswas, the protagonist, lives through a bitter and intensely cynical life, perennially trying to build something he can call his own. It is a deeply tragic story, but told mercilessly in a strange tone that is humorous and cruel at once.

The most remarkable aspect of this great novel is Naipaul’s astounding ability to observe people and paint them with infinite detail and clarity through the use of tiny details of their behavior. His use of language is so mesmerizing that it almost made me feel jealous.

A House for Mr. Biswas was unpleasant to read, but not because the writing was bad. Naipaul is an OK writer -- not great, but good enough. But this book is dreary and depressing, and makes you embarrassed on the protagonist's behalf.

The basic premise is that the main character, Mr. Biswas, in denial about his own cowardice and character flaws, blames his continual bad luck on the machinations of others. Because he's incapable of seeing his own role in his misfortunes, any time something bad happens to him, he blames his family members, complains incessantly, puffs himself up with self-importance, and makes grand pronouncements about how he's going to be so much better off once X is accomplished, "X" in most cases being "the purchase of a house" (hence the book's title).

To Mr. Biswas, owning a house represents wealth, respectability, and stature, and he undertakes several half-hearted, cheapskate, shortcut attempts to build or buy a house. Each attempt is more pathetic than the last, and he ends up being swindled by an amateur house builder into living in a ruined dump of a house, but he's too proud (and indebted) to move out. Mr. Biswas is the ultimate victim, but his status is mostly self-inflicted, and his botched attempts to rescue himself only prove how much he lacks in integrity and honesty. It's very hard for the reader to feel sorry for such a narcissistic, delusional, ungrateful, and un-generous character, and Naipaul doesn't really do a good job of convincing us that we should care what happens to him.

Something else that bothered me while I was reading this book was what I knew of the author himself. Apparently, Naipaul is a misogynist. He's on record as saying that women's writing is inferior to men's, which, aside from being horribly bigoted, doesn't even make sense -- I'm not sure how much women's writing you'd have to read to have the credibility to make that statement, but it's certainly more than one person could ever read in one lifetime. In the same interview, Naipaul said that there was no female writer he would consider his equal, and that all women's writing is sentimental and reflects their narrow view of the world.

Once again, it goes without saying that such views are morally repugnant. But they also just don't hold water. If (and this is a huge "if") women's writing reflects a narrower view of the world than men's writing does, isn't that largely because women have historically been confined to a narrower section of the world than men since the beginning of human history? I'm just sayin', if society has told your gender to stay in the kitchen and watch the kids for thousands of years, is it any wonder if you, when you finally get the societal freedom to become a published author, are more inclined to write about issues that matter to you, which might seem narrow and inconsequential to a man because those issues don't reflect his life experience?

Naipaul has also said that "I read a piece of writing and within a paragraph or two I know whether it is by a woman or not." Maybe that could be the case for 19th century marriage plot novels, but, again, women were more likely to turn to those literary conventions because that was a truer reflection of what life was like for them at that time. And, um, a lot has been written by women since the days of Jane Austen. I find it highly doubtful that Naipaul could pick up a book by a modern female author and instantly be able to tell it was written by a woman. Does he think female authors write about their periods and makeup all the time, or that all books by women have pink covers? Grow up, dude.

In short, this book is so-so...but once you learn about the author's background, it becomes completely soured.

And, Naipaul? I have some news for you. You're not even one-one-millionth as good of a writer as your ego thinks you are. If you're going to say really outlandish and offensive things in public, at least have the chops to back it up. Asshole.

Based on the life of the author’s father, this is the story of one man’s life lived in the Indian diaspora in Trinadad. Born under an inauspicious sign, it is predicted that his will be a life of misfortune. Throughout his life, he perceives his situation as misfortunate. But whether he is the victim of bad luck, of poor choices or of chronic dissatisfaction, the reader must decide. This is the story of one man’s desire to break free of the traditional constraints of his culture and to thrive in a modern world. It is the story of a life lived between what had served his community for generations and what will serve his children. This novel is often included on lists of the best 100 books of the 20th century. The writing is excellent, but I found Mr. Biswas to be exasperating and depressing in turns.

บ้านของบิสวาส เป็นวรรณกรรมที่ถ่ายทอดความรู้สึกของผู้แสวงหาอิสระเสรีแต่ไม่มีความหวังได้อย่างลึกซึ้ง และฉายภาพการต่อสู้ดิ้นรนเพื่อชีวิตที่ดีขึ้นและอนาคตที่มั่นคงได้อย่างชัดเจน

บิสวาส ได้แต่งงานกับ ฌามา ลูกสาวครอบครัวตุลสี โดยเหตุผลเดียวที่นางตุลสียกลูกสาวให้ก็คือเพื่อให้มีผู้ชายไว้ช่วยงานในกิจการต่างๆ โดยไม่ต้องจ้างคนนอกครอบครัว บิสวาสย้ายเข้าไปอยู่ใน "บ้านหนุมาน" ของครอบครัวตุลสี "โดยมีเสื้อผ้าพอแขวนบนตะปูตัวเดียว" นางตุลสีมีลูกชายสองคนและลูกสาวอีกหลายคน ทั้งหมดรวมถึงบรรดาสามีและลูกของลูกสาวอาศัยอยู่รวมกันในบ้านหนุมาน

ถึงแม้ วี.เอส.ไนพอล ผู้เขียน จะเป็นผู้เล่าเรื่องเองแต่อ่านแล้วเหมือนกับเขาเล่าผ่านมุมมองของบิสวาส เป็นการเล่าด้วยน้ำเสียงเสียดสีและตลกร้าย โดยเฉพาะเมื่อเล่าถึงพิธีกรรมและความวุ่นวายต่างๆ ในบ้านหนุมาน

บิสวาสเป็นคนฉลาดแต่ขาดต้นทุนชีวิต เขาต้องการมีบ้านของตัวเองเพื่อพาครอบครัวออกมาให้พ้นจากบ้านหนุมาน ความยากไม่ใช่แค่เรื่องมีบ้านแต่รวมถึงเรื่องความมั่นคง เพราะอย่างไรเสียลูกเมียก็จะไม่ลำบากมากนักถ้าอยู่ที่บ้านหนุมาน นี่คือที่มาของความรู้สึกโกรธแค้นและสิ้นหวังจนกระทั่งไม่เห็นคุณค่าของตัวเอง

ผู้เขียนเล่าเรื่องให้ผู้อ่านรับรู้ความรู้สึกของบิสวาสได้อย่างชัดเจนและลึกซึ้ง โดยเฉพาะคนที่ตกอยู่ในสถานะเดียวกับบิสวาสจะยิ่งเข้าใจ ไม่เฉพาะคนที่ต้องการออกจากบ้านเท่านั้นแต่รวมถึงคนที่ต้องการออกจากสภาพต่างๆ ที่ไม่มีความสุข ซึ่งแม้ตัวเองจะมีศักยภาพพอแต่ก็ยังต้องคิดหนักด้วยเงื่อนไขบางอย่าง

นอกจากความรู้สึกแล้วผู้เขียนยังบรรยายภาพการต่อสู้ดิ้นรนเพื่อชีวิตที่ดีขึ้นและอนาคตที่มั่นคงได้อย่างชัดเจน (ฉากของเรื่องนี้คือ ประเทศตรินิแดตและโตเบโก ค.ศ.1900-1950) เช่น

การพยายามทำกิจการต่างๆ ของบรรดาแม่หม้ายครอบครัวตุลสีในยามที่เศรษฐกิจฝืดเคือง

การตื่นตั้งแต่ตีสี่เพื่อไปโรงเรียนและการเรียนกวดวิชาของเด็กๆ

การไปให้กำลังใจลูกของบรรดาพ่อแม่ในวันสอบเข้าเรียนชั้นมัธยม

ป.ล. หนังสือเล่มหนามากเพราะ ส.น.พ. ใช้ตัวอักษรใหญ่ระยะบรรทัดกว้าง อ่านง่ายสบายตา

Took a while to finish because it was so depressing. Rasa macam menonton this one guy gets into a big hole (either by his own fault atau orang lain), he gets out then jatuh balik ke dalam lubang yang sama. Berkali-kali.

Beberapa watak was just infuriating and frustrating, penulis berjaya dalam mencipta watak yang dibenci sepenuh hati.

Watak utama pula, minta untuk disimpati. Dan bila kita sudah penat bersimpati, kita mula membenci. Dan bila kita sedar we can relate so much to the him, kita mula bergelumang dalam self-pity.