In a Free State (1971)
A fairly hefty caveat on this one: I accidentally ordered the "novel" version of In a Free State, which consists only of the central eponymous story from what was initially a collection of three stories and two fragments. I can't really justify why I persisted with this given it's not the actual Booker-winning version. Apologies in advance, and let me know if I should catch up on the full length edition!
Who wrote it?
Sir Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul (1932-2018, active from 1957), or V.S. to his mates. You know him, right? Oh, OK then. Born Trinidad & Tobago, educated at Oxford, Nobel Prize winner, Knight of the Realm, and general literary legend. Perhaps best known for his breakthrough novel, A House for Mr. Biswas.
What's it about
A road trip through "Africa" featuring two fairly awful Brits, a colonial official and his colleague's wife. The backdrop is a violent coup by the president to unseat the King, the latter the preference of the colonists.
The road trip largely consists of the pair alternating between racist bickering and gazing at beautiful landscapes, while in the background things are very much falling apart - for the King, the colonists, the impoverished local population, and - once again in a Booker winner - the Empire.
What I liked
It felt like a timely read, and while some of it feels of its time, it's also a reminder of the fact that the passing fifty years haven't exactly done much to improve western understanding of "Africa."
The writing is of course superb. The landscape is brought to life with a beautiful simplicity and you really feel immersed in the sights, sounds and smells of the action.
Heavy-hitting. The deepest, most profound of the Booker winners to date.
Atmospheric and impressively unsettling.
Some wry smiles here and there.
What I didn't like
While there was much to admire here, there was far less to enjoy. It's as heavy-going as it is heavy-hitting.
The characters are hard to like; horrible without much in the way of redeeming charisma.
There's an unrelenting bleakness about the whole thing - claustrophobic despite the open spaces described, pervaded by a sense of doom and inevitable (and unending?) tragedy. While this is ultimately essential to the themes of the novel, it doesn't make for a whole lot of fun.
Inevitably some of the racism (and sexism, and other general unpleasantness) is difficult to read. Necessary brutality, again, but brutal nonetheless.
I didn't like the fact that I bought and read the wrong edition of the book. But I only have myself to blame for that.
Food & drink pairings
Not Port and Lemon, apparently
This book feels curiously sparse when it comes to food & drink related fun. Perhaps unsurprising.
Fun facts
Saul Bellow was one of the judges this year, announcing the Prize’s arrival as a “heavyweight” on the awards calendar. Bellow was seemingly more than aware of his own massive importance in Booker’s history, as he insisted in being put up at the Ritz for his visit, and then proceeded to moan when his room didn’t have a view of Green Park. The hardship!
As I've referenced before, this was the year when the Booker moved to rewarding books written in the current rather than former year, and resulted in no books from 1970 getting a shot at winning at the time.
This seems to be the first of many times when the Booker was accused of giving the award to the author rather than the novel. Bellow apparently even admitted as much. This always strikes me as a shame for these sort of prizes - if you want to reward authors, invent a lifetime achievement award. This should be for the best novel of the year.
...or in this one's Booker winning form, not actually a novel. As far as I'm aware this was the only book to win that was a collection of largely unrelated stories, rather than a traditional novel. As such it's doubly stupid that I read the wrong version. I just can't help but gravitating towards conventional forms these days...
Four Booker winners (admittedly one awarded later), three of them addressing in one form or other the decline of Empire. I'm spotting a theme somewhere here...
Vanquished Foes
Thomas Kilroy (The Big Chapel)
Doris Lessing (Briefing for a Descent into Hell)
Mordecai Richler (St. Urbain's Horseman)
Derek Robinson (Goshawk Squadron)
Elizabeth Taylor (Mrs. Palfrey at the Claremont)
Guess what? Once again, I've read NONE of these. Have you? Should I? Should anything else have been nominated that was written in 1971?
Context
In 1971:
Idi Amin takes power in Uganda via a coup against Milton Obote
Birth of Bangladesh in territory formerly part of Pakistan
Democratic Republic of the Congo is renamed Zaire
Kamuzu Banda of Malawi becomes the first Black president to visit South Africa
Nixon declares War on Drugs in the US
UK government increases troop deployment in Northern Ireland
Post Office Tower bombing in London
Britain begins negotiations to join the EEC
UK & Ireland switch to decimal currency
Qatar, Oman, others gain independence from the UK
Disney World, Florida opens its gates
Led Zeppelin IV
First ever One Day International cricket match
Charles Manson sentenced to death
Foundation of Starbucks
Life Lessons
Maybe don't go and live in a country if you hate everything about it except the nice views and the cheap hook-ups
Also, don't go on a long road trip with someone who you don't like at all
Colonialism was awful, racism was and is awful.
Oh god everything is awful, people are awful, and we're all doomed whatever happens.
Score
6.5
Objectively this is definitely worth more, even in the reduced form in which I read it. But I'm ranking these at least primarily on how much I enjoyed them, and much as it was a beautifully written and thought-provoking read, I definitely admired it more than I enjoyed it.
Ranking to date:
Troubles - J.G. Farrell (1970, "Lost Booker") - 8.5
The Elected Member - Bernice Rubens (1970) - 7
In a Free State* - V.S. Naipaul (1971) - 6.5
Something to Answer For - P. H. Newby (1969) - 5.5
*Read in later condensed edition.
Next up
The absolutely fascinating sounding "G." by John Berger, from 1972.
