Rating: 
Summary: Good for Several Rereadings
Review: An opinionated writer is often a pleasure to read. A diplomat is always a bore. SIR VIDIA'S SHADOW contains two writers, fully opinionated, and no diplomats. There is much about VS Naipaul in this portrait by Paul Theroux that is the sort of thing that is normally obscured by diplomacy: ambition, egotism, overbearance, intransigence, candor...Naipaul is a real piece of work, and Theroux shows him in all his glory. Perhaps he went further into the personal than was proper, but that is Naipaul's misfortune, not ours.I've read many other books by Theroux and Naipaul, some good, others less than that. I like the nonfiction of both better than their fiction. But never have I read anything by either of them as compelling as this. I tore through SIR VIDIA'S SHADOW in two sittings. I don't know whether it's due more to Naipaul's charm or the skill of SIR VIDIA'S author, Theroux. They begin in Uganda, sparring, as writers do, over other writers. Theroux mentions his admiration for Nabokov, whom Naipaul rejects: "Forget Nabokov. Read Death in Venice. Pay close attention to the accumulation of thought." This dismissal was surprising because as the persona of Vidia the Great Writer was developed through the book I was reminded constantly of Nabokov, particularly Nabokov's volume of criticism called STRONG OPINIONS. And Nabokov's scorn of Mann was second only to his scorn of Freud. But Naipaul and Nabokov have in common their legendary erudition, their strong opinions expressed elegantly, seldom dipping into vulgarity, their rootless lives lived mostly far from their natal homes, their wary eyes kept peeled for the brutes of the world--Naipaul sees at once that Uganda is on theverge of anarchy and goes around asking the people what they will do when the "crunch" comes. Just five years later the crunch does come in the form of Idi Amin. Coming from Third World squalor himself, Naipaul has no patience for the make believe that constitutes Ugandan government, universities, and newspapers. He marries, 30 years later, the same female about whom he says, in a spasm of vituperation, "What a horrible child!" Then the irony becomes still heavier when Theroux, a lover of children, is harshly abused by the new wife of his longtime friend. Theroux reveal nearly as much of himself as of Naipaul while playing a sort of straight man to his friend's winsome incorrigibility. The pair could hardly be more dissimilar: while Naipaul is driven into a foul mood just by the nearness of African families laughing and playing music on a Sunday, Theroux revels in their society, speaking Swahili, teaching English, and coupling with African women with joyous abandon. Somewhere in Theroux's other writings I'd gotten the impression that he was a bit of a New England puritan. But next to the fastidious Vidia, who is paralyzed with revulsion merely by a workman sitting on his (Naipaul's) bed, Theroux looks positively sybaritic. The writing is so fluid and well-timed that it looks easy. But there is so much, such exquisite renderings of dozens of day-to-day encounters over the course of 30 years, that Theroux must either have the memory of an Intel chip, or the exuberant creativity of the finest writers of fiction, or both. SIR VIDIA'S SHADOW rises far above mere biography or memoir to become a marvellous work of art.
Rating: 
Summary: Defense of David Birney as reader of "Sir Vidia's Shadow"
Review: Over last weekend, my husband and I listened to the audiocassette of David Birney reading Paul Theroux's "Sir Vidia's Shadow." Though I've only read short pieces by both Theroux and Naipaul (mostly in The New Yorker) before "reading" this book, I was so intrigued and impressed by what I heard--and that goes for the reader as well as the author--that I decided to check out the reviews and comments in Amazon. com. It was therefore with complete amazement that I read the negative review of Birney's reading in Audiophile, and felt I had to write and cast a vote for the actor. He was absolutely magnificent! He captured wonderfully the voice and accent that I imagine Vidia had, as well as those of the author and the many other characters in the book. In fact, I even commented to my husband as we were listening that while I'd probably have enjoyed the book if I read it in the traditional way, I felt Birney's delivery enhanced the experience immeasurably. As far as the book itself goes, though it did reveal some waspishness on the author's part, and at times more venom than I think he's admitted to himself, I felt it was a powerful description of a relationship and rang very true to me. The book was also full of marvelous similes and metaphors (a piece of praise that might make Theroux wince--and certainly would Naipaul, who so hated the intrusions of academic analysis of writing). Nonetheless, Theroux's descriptive powers--of people,nature, relationships--deserve to be recognized. I also marveled at Theroux's memory of conversations that took place decades earlier. Yet they sounded completely authentic and I can only assume the author has the audio equivalent of a photographic memory. All in all, I felt the audiobook was one of the most successful translations of book to tape I've heard, and hope this review will counter the negative review in Audiophile and encourage others to "read" and enjoy the book as much as we did. ----------------------------------------------------------------- I should add that I'm the author of many articles that have appeared in The New York Times, The New York Observer, Reader's Digest, and many other publications, and also of two published books that will soon be re-issued by the Author's Guild If possible, please FORWARD THIS REVIEW TO ACTOR DAVID BIRNEY.
Rating: 
Summary: Beware loss of respect for the author.
Review: My first discovery of Thoreux was through his travel novels -- such works as The Old Patagonian Express, and Riding the Iron Rooster. Like many people, I was amazed by his facility with language, his seemingly perfect memory for detail, and his wide-ranging knowledge of literature. I was hooked. I started to doubt my preferences when I read 'The Pillars of Hercules'. I'd purchased two copies, one for myself, another for my grandmother to share my interest in this excellent writer of travel literature. Woe to me! I purchased the copy for my grandmother because she'd toured the Mediterranean, but giving it to her unread was a mistake. The Pillars of Hercules contained several vulgar pages detailing Salvador Dali's bizarre sexual predelictions, the excuse for which was Thoreux's visit to the Dali museum. There were other passages, similar in tone. Then I read Fresh Air Fiend, where Thoreux complained - vociferously - when a fellow author wrote an autobiography and stated he would not be discussing his sex life. How does this apply to Sir Vidia's Shadow? It applies because the entire book is an exercise in the common, a vulgar slog through Thoreux's memories during his days with Naipaul in Uganda. As much about Thoreux as it is about Naipaul, after reading about their misbehaviour the years (Thoreux describing the lust he felt for Naipaul's wife, then repeatedly sleeping with African prostitutes, Naipaul calling people 'infies' - inferiors - and generally acting like a petulant child), I didn't want to meet, much less know more about, either one of them. The revelations were disappointing. After reading Bryson, I know I would enjoy the man. Horowitz, the same. Barry, yes. Thoreux - no. So was this useful to you? If you think me a prude, then you might find the book enjoyable, even if you disagree with me. If you'd just as soon avoid the sort of writing I mention above, then I'm sure you'll find the review equally useful. But if you rate my review 'Not useful' simply because you disagree with it, then you're being dishonest to yourself and others.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent and fair portrait.
Review: Paul Theroux's "Sir Vidia's Shadow" has taken quite a beating in some quarters. Many feel Theroux betrayed V.S. Naipaul by writing this memoir, but the fact remains that this is Theroux's story as much as it is Naipaul's. This book has been attacked for being nasty and unfair, but is actually an evenhanded and penetrating look at writing, friendship and human frailties. Theroux meets Naipaul in Uganda in 1966. Over the next 30 years, they remain friends through wide distances, triumphs and failures, divorces and deaths. Naipaul emerges as an extraordinarily compelling character. Perceptive, brilliant, egocentric and obsessed with writing, he abuses and uses his friends, family and professional acquaintances. He is also generous, needy and sometimes kind. What we end up with is a portrait of a supremely gifted but infantile man who is a fascinating but sometimes repugnant human being. Theroux is brutally honest not just about Naipaul's faults, but his finer qualities. He uses that same objectivity towards himself as well. In the end, "Sir Vidia's Shadow" betrays Theroux's hurt feelings after Naipaul terminates their relationship following his second marriage; it does not display meanspiritedness. This superb memoir is a gripping read, from the first page to the last. The story it has to tell is well worth reading, and Theroux writes beautifully (as ever). All in all, I highly recommend "Sir Vidia's Shadow."
Rating:
Summary: Defense of David Birney as reader of "Sir Vidia's Shadow"
Review: Over last weekend, my husband and I listened to the audiocassette of David Birney reading Paul Theroux's "Sir Vidia's Shadow." Though I've only read short pieces by both Theroux and Naipaul (mostly in The New Yorker) before "reading" this book, I was so intrigued and impressed by what I heard--and that goes for the reader as well as the author--that I decided to check out the reviews and comments in Amazon. com. It was therefore with complete amazement that I read the negative review of Birney's reading in Audiophile, and felt I had to write and cast a vote for the actor. He was absolutely magnificent! He captured wonderfully the voice and accent that I imagine Vidia had, as well as those of the author and the many other characters in the book. In fact, I even commented to my husband as we were listening that while I'd probably have enjoyed the book if I read it in the traditional way, I felt Birney's delivery enhanced the experience immeasurably. As far as the book itself goes, though it did reveal some waspishness on the author's part, and at times more venom than I think he's admitted to himself, I felt it was a powerful description of a relationship and rang very true to me. The book was also full of marvelous similes and metaphors (a piece of praise that might make Theroux wince--and certainly would Naipaul, who so hated the intrusions of academic analysis of writing). Nonetheless, Theroux's descriptive powers--of people,nature, relationships--deserve to be recognized. I also marveled at Theroux's memory of conversations that took place decades earlier. Yet they sounded completely authentic and I can only assume the author has the audio equivalent of a photographic memory. All in all, I felt the audiobook was one of the most successful translations of book to tape I've heard, and hope this review will counter the negative review in Audiophile and encourage others to "read" and enjoy the book as much as we did. ----------------------------------------------------------------- I should add that I'm the author of many articles that have appeared in The New York Times, The New York Observer, Reader's Digest, and many other publications, and also of two published books that will soon be re-issued by the Author's Guild If possible, please FORWARD THIS REVIEW TO ACTOR DAVID BIRNEY.
Rating:
Summary: Unofficial Biography
Review: This may be the most interesting book that Theroux has ever written because he delves deeply into what makes Naipaul tick. He also reveals much of himself and what he drew from the relationship. This is a story of the mentor turning against his protege. Theroux seems to be saying to Naipaul: you don't want me anymore. Okay, but I'll write a book. He also mentions the official biography of Naipaul. Now the official biography of Naipaul will be much more difficult as the biographer will have to spend time on what Theroux said.
It seems to me that by writing Sir Vidia's Shadow, Theroux will always be Naipaul's shadow. The two will be linked forever. This will bother Naipaul very much, and it will be very amusing to Theroux.
Rating:
Summary: A bit more of the Theroux biography
Review: Regular readers of Paul Theroux, who have found sketchy details of his life in his travelougues, will find "Sir Vidia's Shadow" to be of some help in further illuminating Theroux's life, and his writing. Those looking for the poison pen letter described in many reviews will be less satisfied, I think. Many readers seem to be looking for further evidence of Theroux the Misanthrope: One reviewer notes that Naipaul was probably "his only friend", which is an odd assumption given the number of friends who pop up around the world in Theroux's travel books. Most of this book is, as Theroux himself states, the story of a friendship, probably the most important one in Theroux's professional life. The end of the friendship, and Theroux's disappointment and anger, really occupies a very small part of the final chapter. And yes, I do think that final chapter could have benifitted by some editing out of some of Theroux's more bitter and critical judgements of Naipaul. Both are fine writers- certainly two of the finest of the modern era. Naipaul has, perhaps, somewhat greater ease and fluency with language, and Theroux the greater imagination and openess to other cultures. Both have produced classics as well as less-than-classic work. In his more recent book on Africa, Theroux quotes Nadine Gordimer as saying that the book is really about Theroux, and not Naipaul, and that it was good he wrote. Yes, it's a somewhat self-serving quote, but it's accurate. And there's something universal in the story, something that every reader has probably experienced. Reading it put me in mind of a number of past friendships- close ones- that seemed to end abruptly, and without good reason. Or so it seemed at the time. Regardless, it's still excellent writing of the sort expected from Theroux, and still exemplifies the lessons Naipaul taught him, most importantly: Tell the truth.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting and unusual and wonderful reading
Review: I ordered this book from Amazon a few weeks ago after reading "Half a Life" by V.S. Naipaul. I had read many of Theroux's books - mostly travel and one novel. I found this book riveting and read it straight through this week. I would recommend it to anyone interested in the examination of friendship. Personally, I couldn't have put up with Naipaul's selfishness and inconsiderate behavior. Most people I know wouldn't allow anyone to behave this way for years with us.
But Paul had his reasons. I like Theroux's writing. A good book.
Rating:
Summary: Booker Prize-Worthy
Review: This is a beautiful book. It's like a rare documentary with fascinating footage. And it's very funny, especially the anecdotes, including one involving Salmon Rushdie. It reminded me a lot of Martin Amis' biography, Experience. After reading several of VS Naipul's books, it was thrilling to learn so much about him, which of course, is something he would totally frown on, like the use of the word "totally."
Rating:
Summary: Friendship revisited
Review: This book was given to me for my birthday and I've just finished it reading and is absolutely recommendable for those who sometimes have thought about the strange mechanisms of friendship. We accept the other with its defects and without competitions in between. Theroux, famous author of travel stories, describes his friendship with a spoiled, racist and quick-tempered Naipaul, but the most interesting side of the book is the mentor-pupil experience they built along 30 years. A relationship constructed by letters, visits and calls that give account of the creative process of two famous authors (Naipaul received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2001).
| 
