Nobody’s going anywhere. We’re all going to hell, and every man knows this is in his bones. We’re being killed. Nothing has any meaning. That is why everyone is so frantic. Everyone wasn’t to make his money and run away. But where? That is what is driving people mad. They feel they’re losing the place they can run back to. – from A Bend in the River, page 272 -
Salim, an Indian man living on the East Coast of Africa, sets out to make a life at a small village at a bend in the river in the interior of Africa. He arrives there, following the old slave trails, shortly after the town has won its independence in 1963. The town is in shambles with a poor economy and hardly enough food to feed its people. Yet, Salim stays and builds a business. He is joined by a family servant named Metty and befriends a couple named Shoba and Mahesh. He also attempts to mentor a bush woman’s young son, Ferdinand. As the years roll by, the new President of this nation dumps money into building a University and “domain” where the rich white people live. In the background are always the soldiers and rumblings of war. Salim has a briefly passionate yet violent affair with a white married woman, and at one point is arrested for dealing in black market ivory.
V.S. Naipaul’s book A Bend in the River is perhaps one of the more depressing books I’ve read. Although the town is never named, it is most likely set in Zaire (currently the Democratic Republic of the Congo) during the rule of Mobutu Sese Seko in the late 1960s and early 1970s. At that time there was a great deal of social and political upheaval and violence. Naipaul’s protagonist, Salim, narrates the novel and spends much of his time philosophizing about the role of women in relationships, the political and military climate of the region, his own lack of direction, and the difference between modernized people and the bush people. The problem with this internalized dialogue was that I never felt connected to any of the characters. It was as though Salim was merely telling us his tale (with very little plot).
The themes of A Bend in the River include the view of the outsider (foreigner) vs. the insider, and African rage in response to colonialism. When a mild-mannered priest who is teaching in the town (and has created a museum of bush and tribal mementos) is brutally murdered and decapitated, the townspeople barely cease their every day routines in order to pull his mangled body from the river. Naipaul uses the river and its floating heaps of water hyacinths as symbols of the relentless changes moving through Africa.
Always sailing up from the south, from beyond the bend in the river, were clumps of water hyacinths, dark floating islands on the dark river, bobbing over the rapids. It was as if rain and river were tearing away bush from the heart of the continent and floating it down to the ocean, incalculable miles away. But the water hyacinth was the fruit of the river alone. The tall lilac-coloured flower had appeared only a few years before, and in the local language there was no word for it. The people still called it “the new thing” or “the new thing in the river,” and to them it was another enemy. – from A Bend in the River, page 46 -
This was my first V. S. Naipaul novel – and I had hoped to love it. Instead I found myself growing bored with Salim’s theorizing. The book crawls at a snail’s pace. It is perhaps the longest short novel I have ever read. I also did not appreciate the negative characterization of all the women in the book. Salim (and nearly all the men in the book) frequent the brothels, and Salim at one point theorizes: But if women weren’t stupid, the world wouldn’t go round (from page 186). He later brutally attacks and beats his mistress whose response is to climb into bed and open her legs to him. The one seemingly normal relationship between Mahesh and Shoba is harshly criticized by Salim.
Mahesh was my friend. But I thought of him as a man who had been stunted by his relationship with Shoba. That had been achievement enough for him. Shoba admired him and needed him, and he was therefore content with himself, content with the person she admired. His only wish seemed to be to take care of this person. He dressed for her, preserved his looks for her. I used to think that when Mahesh considered himself physically he didn’t compare himself with other men, or judge himself according to some masculine ideal, but saw only the body that please Shoba. He saw himself as his woman saw him; and that was why, though he was my friend, I thought that his devotion to Shoba had made him half a man, and ignoble. – from A Bend in the River, page 197 -
So, I guess, according to Naipaul’s protagonist … a man cannot be a man and be devoted to the woman he loves. Huh? Maybe I should not have been surprised to read this from Wikipedia:
Naipaul credits an extramarital affair for giving A Bend in the River and his later books greater fluidity, saying these “in a way to some extent depend on her (i.e., his mistress). They stopped being dry.”
If you haven’t guessed it by now, I am not going to recommend A Bend in the River. Scholars have credited this book with being one of the books to read about Africa. I would argue that a novel which has little plot, little story, reads like a tedious monologue from a textbook, and insults women is not one too many readers want to waste their time on. My recommendation for an amazing novel set in the Congo would be The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver (read my review).
Naipaul won the prestigious Nobel Prize for Literature in 2001 and was short listed for the Booker Prize for A Bend in the River in 1979, but he’s not getting any awards from me!
![]()
Read other reviews on this book:
Have you read this book? Please leave me a link to your review in the comments!













Oh no! I had hoped that this book would be good – I love books set in India. I think I need to get this one out of the way soon – I hate having terrible Bookers looking at me – I need to ensure I read them and have only the good ones left! I know that is a weird thing to do, but it helps me get through the lists!
Wendy, it won’t surprise you to know that I don’t care for Naipaul either! I read In a Free State last year (because it won the Booker). I despised it and, like you with this book, only gave it one star. I had high hopes for it too, simply because of the author’s reputation. Unfortunately its sole redeeming quality was that it was a short book !
Wow, what a powerful review! And how awful about his treatment of women! Disgusting quote from Wikipedia. Crossing him off my list!
When I started reading your synopsis, I thought this sounded like a powerful book, but as I read your reaction to it, I realize it wasn’t executed well. It sounds like one to skip.
Oh dear…I have an edition that contains both A Bend in the River and A House for Mr. Biswas. Guess I’ll attempt the second one first
Jackie: This is actually set mostly in the Congo (although the protagonist is an Indian). Some people have loved this book. I think my biggest problem with it was Naipaul’s writing…which I found dry and un-engaging. I also hated the portrayal of women and the attitudes toward them.
Laura: I remember that review! At the time I thought “Oh no” because I had a couple of Naipaul’s books already in my TBR stack. I only got through this one because I am leading a discussion on it for a book group. The more I learn about Naipaul himself, the more it impacts my reaction to his books. Apparently in his biography, he confesses to being a wife-beater…which given what happens to Salim’s lover makes me wonder if we are reading fiction or a review of Naipaul’s life. Ugh.
Jill: *nods* And note my comment to Laura above…apparently his bad behavior is not just limited to adultery. I could MAYBE overlook the author’s behavior in real life if his prose engaged me …. NOT.
Kathy: Others will probably disagree with me (I am in a book group discussing this book and I am a little surprised at the glowing reviews from others)…so you might want to see for yourself. But, I will avoid this author now.
JoAnn: Well, maybe you will like them! But it wasn’t for me
I know sometimes when I read a book with an underlying political or social issue, I always feel like I should like the book and I am so disappointed when I don’t, because at the heart of the book is the writing and if it isn’t there, it isn’t there.
I loved The Poisonwood Bible! It got a bit long at times, but I loved it.
Tracie Yule: I feel the same way! When a book has won awards, or is talking about something which seems important…I feel pressure to like it. Every now and then, though (as with this book), I just really do not like a book – whether it be style, voice, or just how the story is presented, or the characters…even though it makes me cringe a little, I have to be honest! Glad to hear you also loved The Poisonwood Bible…that was a book that sat on my TBR stack for more than 2 years before I read it *laughs*
Naipul is at best a very controversial writer; he is of Indian parentage but has written scathingly of Indian society; he was born and raised in the Caribbean but has been accused of drastically misrepresenting and demeaning Caribbean society in his work. He has been sharply criticized for many of his attitudes and prejudices, including those towards women. That said, “A House for Mr. Biswas” is a magnificent if painful novel, probably his best. I do find it interesting that, given his Indian and Caribbean heritage, many of his novels have been set in Africa, a place where for some reason he seems to feel more at home than in the countries of his actual heritage.
Hedgie: Thanks for the info on Naipaul. Usually I don’t really care much about an author’s personal life when I’m reading their fiction – but Naipaul seems to insert a lot of himself into his novels (at least this one!). I’ve heard than A House for Mr. Biswas is probably his best. At some point I’ll check it out.
I’m so glad you gave me the link to your review Wendy! I was sooooo bored during the book, that I forgot to even mention in the review how angry I was at how he portrayed women. How could I forget that?! Hmph. Maybe I won’t give Naipul a second chance.
Eva: Glad you stopped over! I found myself getting angrier and angrier with Naipaul re: his stance on women…there was so much I disliked about the book *laughs*