Rating: 
Summary: Naipual: Great writer, dreadfull historian
Review: No one can dispute Naipual as a writer, some would say he's one of the greatest writers of english in the similiar vein of Conrad but as a historian, Naipaul is absolutly awfull with no prentension to being impartial... He makes outlandish claims and sweeping generalisations, (eg: 60,000 Hindu Temples being destroyed which many historians have doubted and questioned; or the fact that he ignores the fact that Vijayanagar was influenced by muslim art and customs: Hindu kings stoped appearing bare chested in public and began wearing clothes similiar to their muslim counterparts who brought their cultural tastes from the east like Isfahan) the facts to Naipaul are something that comes in the way of his writings. (That aside, one cannot dispute the importance of his contributions to literature)
Rating: 
Summary: Struck a nerve?
Review: Seems from the bitter tone of the negative reviews that Naipaul has struck a nerve, which means he probably got it right. Naipaul makes no pretensions to scholarship; he is a skeptic who calls it as he sees it. Early on in the book, he calls himself a "seeker," which by itself undercuts accusations that he is a biased Hindu nationalist with an axe to grind. Regardless, Naipaul doesn't condemn Islam; he expresses his doubts about a particular interpretation of Islam and its political manifestations in particular societies at a very specific time in history. Iran's recent softening of its stance toward the West especially highlights Naipaul's prescience vis a vis his analysis of that nation's complicated ambivalence toward the United States and Europe. Similarly, any anti-Muslim bigot who uses Naipaul to rationalize an irrational hatred cleary refuses to acknowledge the profoundly sympathetic tone of Naipaul's portrayals of the people he meets and places he goes. Naipaul doubts ideology, not individuals. Outstanding travel writing.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Account
Review: The book is an excellent documentation of the author's observations in his journey among the Muslim believers. Particular Islamic states have been chosen by the author for his journey, in which the people are converted Muslims and are different from original Arab believers. This record shows the confusion, bigotry and also suffering of mankind in such places.
Sometimes we read the news about the stoning of women, mutilation of men, flogging of youth, public throat slitting of infidel in Islamic world and also see the suffering of Muslim women in TV who live in their societies covered with burqua moving just like meaningless black and blue objects in streets and Wonder! This book may shed light on some aspects of these people's lives.
The morally bankrupt Muslim culture, which is millennia behind the civilized world, needs to reconsider its tenets and embrace principles of humanity.
Rating: 
Summary: "Among the Believers: An Islamic Journey"
Review: This book caused an uproar when it was first published, in 1982. After 9/11, it gained itself a whole new readership. Naipaul's first "Islam" book is a collection of opinions about the effect of Islam on what he calls the "converted" (non-Arab)peoples ... the Iranians, who woke up from history with the new knowledge of an surrounding infidel civilization, one that could not be dominated and so instead was to be rejected ... rejected, and depended upon, the Pakistanis, who threw out the rule of law that they inherited from their former British administrators and replaced it with nothing. This book also concerns itself with the Malay cultures of Malaysia and Indonesians, whom Naipaul seems to both admire and disdain. The admiration stems from their post-war economic achievements (which he attributes to their Chinese minorities); the distain stems from the short-sightedness of their "New Islam" leanings, and their iconoclastic reaction to their pre-Islamic history (which he seems to respect more than Islam ... no surprise, since they were Hindu cultures). As always, Naipaul uses the stories of ordinary people to prove what he considers Islam's cultural destructiveness, a sort of colonization no better or worse that the Western form that he experienced in his boyhood Trinidad. That said, this is a great book, full of the clear-eyed truths for which Naipaul is so well known. But, as with this book's sequel, "Among the Believers," it has to be taken with a grain a salt: Naipaul, as a Brahmin, deeply resents the affect of Islam of his marble model of ancient India. But his assessments will resonant very clearly with those who approach the subject of Islam, especially "New Islam," with an open mind.
Rating: 
Summary: Extremely biased toward Muslims around the world.
Review: This book is extremely biased toward Muslims not only in Pakistan but in America as well. As a Pakistani Muslim I totally do not agree with his point of view on Muslims in Pakistan. It is unfairly written from a biased person's point of view. The majority of the text written in the book is written totally without any knowledge of Islam.
Rating:
Summary: A Hindu writer's journeys to the Islamic lands
Review: This book written by the Trinidad born and Cambridge educated Naipaul is a outsiders view on Muslims. The book begins with the authors interaction with Muslims in Trinidad itself, where the Muslims of Indian sub-continent origin have an uneasy relationship with the majority Hindus, who are also from the Sub-Continent. Then it moves on to Muslim majority lands from Egypt to Malaysia where the author mingles with the locals and tries to understand their morals, ethics and livestyles The author being a non-muslim however could'nt visit to the Islamic holy lands of Mecca and Medina thereby leaving a big gap in truly understanding the Muslim Psyche. Maybe Naipaul's recent marriage to a Muslim Pakistani novelist will help him in gaining entry to these cities.
Rating:
Summary: Bitter, Biassed and One-sided Account
Review: This is a terrible book! I am not sure why this author is so often lauded if he puts out such one-sided and distorted material as this. Clearly, Naipaul has an agenda with this book: to depict a negative account of Muslims who converted. (Naipaul seems very bitter that Muslims converted and left religions such as his own: Hinduism.) As a reader, I kept wishing that he could just learn to bury the incredible chip on his shoulder and let go his bitterness. As a student of Islam, there are plenty of reasons (populist, humanitarian, etc.) to convert to Islam. It is (believe it or not Mr. Naipaul!) the "social justice religion". What is most appalling about this work is that Mr. Naipaul often interrupts his interview subjects to inject words into their own mouths or to push along his very clear personal agenda. Why is he so afraid to let them speak fully, or finish there sentences? Is it possible, that then a very different novel would result? Hmmm ....
Rating:
Summary: A truly comprehensive work
Review: To those amateurish readers who have deemed Naipual's work as a mere "travelogue"- you have clearly missed the point. Every detailed description of nature, or the city is infused with symbolism of some sort. Some fail to take notice of this.
The book starts in Iran, the "land of the revolution", where under the influence of Islam, Ayatollah khomeini launced a bloody revolution to "cleanse the nation into an Islamic Republic". This event was bloody, and did not help the nation. Naipaul describes the breakdown of services and infrastructure as an aftermath, while potraying the lives of common people. We come to see the true madness of Islam, which goads its followers to go back in time, regress, to a pure ideal. In short, Islam has kept Iran backward.
In Pakistan, Islam achieves a new passion, a renewed 'rage'. Pakistan was formed to realise the Islamic ideal of purity. But the vision of Utopia was quickly shattered, when Islam failed. Islam failed, but the people's aspirations did not. The ideal is to be achieved by all means, women are to be abused in the name of protection. People are to be tortured. Public whipping is to be made compulsory to "cleanse" the people. All laws are to be in concurrence with the Quran- the age at which a girl marries, the number of witnesses in the court, etc. There is to be no questioning. No individual thought. Only submission. Yet, the people have not realized the fact that Islam has failed. For them, it will always be the people who have failed.
In Malaysia, Islam is the religion of a failed population. It provides an illusion of equanimity, and self-satisfaction. The Chinese control everything. The Malays are backward. They find it difficult to adjust to new technological age. They don't want to adjust. So, they will change the world around them. And Islam is their weapon- the same ideal of 'cleansing'.
In Indonesia, Islam only aggravates the political turmoil, adds to the intolerance. Millions are to be killed. The past is to be erased from the memory. The nation is to be "cleansed".
Naipaul's sharp observation and analysis are impeccable. My only complaint is that he should have elaborated a bit more.
Rating:
Summary: Just plain boring!
Review: While I find many of the criticisms levelled against this book to be quite true, the fact of the matter is that it is just plain boring. Naipaul's tone is arrogant and pedantic. I found it impossible to finish.
|
