A bad choice for a book to read after Oscar Wilde and Tom Robbins. The former has a rich language and the latter, a great sense of humour. I have heard from people that Naipual’s books are humorous. May be my sense of humour is pathetic, I didn’t see any humour in this book.
The book is the story of Ganesh, his failure as a primary teacher, his transformation into a mystic, a writer and finally an MBE. The story is set in Trinidad and concentrates on the small Indian community settled there. I am confused about the location and the people. They speak a weird dialect of English and it is weird to an extent that the dialgoues began to irritate me. Every sentence spoken in adorned with man or girl (and sometimes both) and no where grammatically correct. If the dialogues are getting on your nerves, the narration doesn’t help much. It is bland and sometimes makes you skip it. And why do newspapers in Trinidad carry reviews of Hindi films?
Ganesh’s metamorphosis is not totally belieavable. He appears to be a useless, good for nothing guy at one time, and the know-it-all mystic with a lot of self confidence at other times. There is nothing about Ganesh which the reader would remember. Behary, Ganesh’s friend, is an interesting character. I enjoyed the conversations between Behary (Suruj Poopa, as in Suruj ke pappa) and his wife, Suruj Mooma (you know what that means). Ganesh’s wife and his father-in-law add a bit of garnishing.
I appreciate the subtle, polished humour of P G Wodehouse and also in the face, wacky humour of Tom Robbins. Naipaul’s humour lies somewhere in between, and, I think, is targetted at the Indian community settled overseas. I can imagine the migrated Indians reading and laughing at the Indian culture and practices. I might be wrong about who his target audience is, but I am sure I am not one of them. This was my first Naipaul book, and in all probability, this will be the last one too.
[...] Mystic Masseur – VS Naipaul anaamica added an interesting post on The Mystic Masseur – VS NaipaulHere’s a small excerptA bad [...]
You have to be the most close minded person I have ever come across
Wow Shane, thanks for the compliment!
What a shame you are such a careless reader. The Mystic Masseur is a wonderful, understated narrative full of sly humour and psychological insight. I do beg you to read it again and then discuss it with others who have got more out of it. Then you could try A House for Mr Biswas, Naipaul’s masterpiece.
As I said in my review, I am through with Mr. Naipaul. You seem to have liked this book of his. Mind telling me what psychological insight you got from this book?
I am not fully agree with Anaamica.I have just completed
the novel and I find it interesting.For a while if I just accept that Anaamica is right than can we judge a novel only from the point of view of its lack of humour?The answer will be a big “NO”.
The novel shows us the rise of the protagonist
Ganesh from a boy from a village to a successfu writer,masseur and politician.The novel shows us that success doesn’t come in a day as we see Ganesh going through the stage of failure as a school teacher,masseurwriter in his life.
but eventually he got tremendous success.
But I am agree with Anamikaa in a few matters.The novel contains funny use of words like “sheself” instead of ‘herself’.Maybe Naipaul shows the use of English by Indian communities in Trinidad as we also find use of Hindi words in the discourse of the characters.
I think in the novel there are numerous instances of houmour on Indian masseurs who kills patients rather than treat;superstition of Indians as in the novel a patient see clouds trying to kil him.Mention must be made of the marriage ceremony of Ganesh and Leela,a very long procees
which creates a sense of borringness in me as a reader,thus Naipaul may tries to makes humour of Indian rituals.
However as a first novel of Naipaul we cannot demand a lot.But the novel may be taken as a pathway to his another novel “India:A Wounded Civilization”which is regarded as a satire on India.
I am not fully agree with Anaamica.For a while though I am agree with her than can we suppose to think that
humuor is the only criteria for judging a writer.The answer will be a big “NO”.
The novel shows the rise of the protagonist Ganesh
from a boy of a village to a successful writer, masseur and
politician.Naipaul shows us success doesn’t come in a day
as we see in the life of Ganesh who got initial failures in his life but throughout he stands firm and eventually success
kisses his feet.
But I am agree with Anaamica in a few matters.In the novel there are uses of incorrect English like”sheself”
instead of’herself’.Naipaul may shows the use of English
among Indian communities at Trinidad as we also find Hindi words in the discurse of the characters.
There are instances of humour on Indian rituals,superstition,customs etc. In the novel author makes humour of masseurs who kills the patients rather than save;shows superstition as apatient sees clouds going to take his life.The long marriage ceremony of Ganesh is borring to me as a reader.
But as the first novel of Naipaul we cann’t expect too much as the novel paves the way for “India:A Wounded Civilization”a novel by the same writer critiquing Indians.
the mystic masseur is a great novel. it contains humours on superstitions, indian customs, etc. it gives a nice picture of a protagonist. it contains sly humour and pyschological insight.
THE MYSTIQUE MASSEUR is a masterpiece. I suggest everyone to read it once.
in order to enjoy , understand and appreciate the full contour of the novel and therby the resulting humour , you need to come up with the realization of the tone -particularly the falling-rising tone- of the mindset of the people of north- indian origin.
suhail
research scholar on v.s. naiaul
I am yet to write a review on this but I could not help but comment my favorite comment on this one – we Indians have the habit of thinking that all great writers are foreigners (or not of Indian origin).
I just finished an EM Forster and believe you me Sir Naipaul is about a million times better.
Also what are you saying about Trinidad newspapers carrying reviews of Hindi films, that’s so silly of you, but of course Hindi films are very popular throughout the world esp because of Amitabh Bacchan and there are a whole lot of Indian settlers there!
And I cannot believe that you said Suraj Poppa is funny!!!!!
But hey that’s the beauty of democracy – you can have your own opinion! Cheers to that.
Thanks for dropping by, Ira.
We Indians have the habit of thinking that all great writers are foreigners (or not of Indian origin).
You might think so, I don’t. If you look at the list of books I have read, then you will see what I mean. Atul Gawande, Gaurav Suri, Hartosh Singh Bal, Namita Devidayal, Jhumpa Lahiri, Vikas Swarup – need I say more? Just because Naipaul is from my country, I can’t start liking him, like some people do. What has origin got to do with writing? A good writer is a good writer, no matter where he is from. Why be prejudiced?
Also what are you saying about Trinidad newspapers carrying reviews of Hindi films, that’s so silly of you, but of course Hindi films are very popular throughout the world esp because of Amitabh Bacchan and there are a whole lot of Indian settlers there!
This further proves my point that the target audience is not native Indians but those settled abroad. I rest my case.
And I cannot believe that you said Suraj Poppa is funny!!!!!
Umm, where did I say that?
great to know that this blog gets updated unlike mine
tell me how do you manage!
mate, stop reading anything if you did not like this book..i finished it for the second time yesterday…ur review sucked..