Naipaul 19

Assignment: Among the Believers - Analysis according to

Dissayanake and Wickramagamage.

Submitted to: Madam Sofia Hussain.

Submitted by: Group 6

Aqsa Rehman

Tooba Baig

Muneeba Abbas

Shamsa Ishaque

Shumaila Masood

Nazma Hassan

Date of Submission: 16. April. 2012

 Naipaul 20

IV- Indonesia Usurpations: Mental Training in Bandung

(Naipaul 361-70)

Shamsa Ishaque

1299 M.A - (Eng) F/10

Summary
In this chapter Naipaul has discussed his journey. He gave his thoughts which he observed in
Bandung. Bandung had a radical reputation. It was one of the centers of the Islamic revival in
Indonesia. Many of Prasojo’s Jakarta friends had gone there for the holiday weekend, to attend a
three day Islamic “mental-training” course at the mosque of the Institute of the Technology.

The course was given by a man famous among Indonesian Muslims, Mr. Imaduddin, an
electrical engineer and an instructor at the institute.

When they reached at the mosque they saw that the cylindrical tower of the mosque was
“modern”. It was past seven, and in the open paved spaces between the mosque and its ancillary
buildings, groups from the mental training class, boys and girls were waiting for the evening
session to begin.

Imaduddin was telephoned, and someone led us to his house. Before we could get out of the car,
Imaduddin himself came out of his house to greet us, a man of medium height, broad shouldered,
wide faced, smiling open; and he swept us inside. It was the house of a university lecturer with
plain chairs, shelves but alswith an Indonesian feature; two girls, relatives or servants sitting on
the floor at the far end of the room. They rose just after we came in and went away, no doubt to
prepare the tea of welcome.

The tea of welcome came, in china cups, not glasses. The food of welcome was biscuits, of two
kinds, in jars. This was not the hospitality of the village.

The mental training had been going for an hour when I got back. The class was in the shed like
clinic building attached to the mosque. The floor was tiled; the green blackboard was written on
already; the lights were fluorescent. The trainees sat on folded metal chairs with broad shiny
backs there were more girls and boys, and the girls sat on the right, the boys on left. The girls
wore head scarves are head covers in pretty colors yellow and green and lilac and pink and
white. Every trainee carried his name on green card. The instructor was small moustache young
man in a flowered shirt. Imaduddin was sitting at the back of the room. He told me when I went
and sat beside him that we were witnessing an exercise in communication.

There were three sessions in the mental training four or five trainees were sent out side and the
instructor, a tape recorder in his hand read out a story an account of motor accident to a young
man. One of the students outside, a girl was then called in the young man began to tell her the
 Naipaul 21

story. She asked questions he became confused; the class laughed the trainees were used to the
puppet shows; they had the instincts of actors.

The mental training class became more and more like a puppet show; and the hilarity increased
as the story was passed on more and more distorted from one trainee to the next.

Now it was the time for the serious part and like good trainees, who had their fun and were now
willing to find virtue in that fun, the trainees settled down and told the instructor what they had
learned from the exercise. They had learnt important things: The value of inquiry, rational
analysis.

In the second session they were asked to sit in a group of five to play new game. They were
given envelopes. Each envelope contained variously shaped pieces of paper and the point of the
game was to make squares with those pieces of paper. No single envelope contained a complete
square, but the pieces had been distributed in such a way that a group of five, using all the pieces
it had received could make five squares. Imaduddin said, they have to cooperate without talking.
No one is allowed to take a piece of paper from anyone in his group but he may accept what is
given. One by one comment came. And it was amazing what they had got out of the little game
how for it had taken them along the way of Islam.

The instructor wrote the comments on the green blackboard they had learnt five things, there
being five Islamic principles” cooperation indispensable for the common goal. Those who give-
up cannot achieve. You have to give others without asking. Knowing each other is also
indispensable perseverance”

In the last session Imaduddin had and the session by reading Iqbal poem because it is more
emotional.

Analysis
V.S Naipaul was born in Trinidad in 1932. He went to England on a scholarship in 1950. After
four years at oxford he begins to write and since then he has followed no other profession. He is
the author of more then 25 books of fiction and non fiction and the recipient of the numerous
honors including the Nobel prize in 2001 the booker prize in 1971 and knighthood for services to
literature in 1990. He lives in Wiltshire, England.

Naipaul uses many writing strategies in his writing as ethnographic details, historical reference,
authentic details and strategy of colonial gaze.

As we see that in this chapter many ethnographic details are found as in this chapter prasojo and
Naipaul were going to institute, they saw a girl with langsat complection the color of the langsat
fruit was considered the perfect color for an Indonesian woman (Naipaul 362)
 Naipaul 22

Naipaul gives physical description to make his work real and authentic as in mental training he
saw the girls wearing head scarves in pretty colors yellow and green and lilac and pink and
purple and white (Naipaul 365)

And other important strategy in his work is historical reference as when Imaduddin was in jail he
had met and talked with doctor Subandrio who had been foreign minister at the time of the army
take over in 1965 three days before the execution Queen Elizabeth of England had made an
appeal for his life and he had been reprieved (Naipaul 364)

He also gives authentic details like in second session trainees were asked what they have learnt
from the game they learnt five things cooperation in dispensable for common goal. Those who
give up easily cannot achieve. You have to give others without asking. Knowing each other is
also indispensable perseverance (Naipaul 367).

Another strategy is colonial gaze as in the third session we see that Imaduddin said the poem was
the emotional and he seemed about to sob Islam as anguish, hell, heaven, redemption (Naipaul
368)

To conclude we can say that training experience was perfect for trainees they learnt many
important things about Islam.

(Naipaul 370-8)

Shumaila Masood

1288 M.A- (Eng) F/10

Summary

Many Muslims came for their mental training at the institute of technology. This course was taught
by Imaduddin who served as an instructor. His father was a religious teacher during Dutch time
then writer tells about his own father who was the Principal and writer was involved in the
Muslim army. Communists, socialists and nationalists were also there in such revolutionary
army.

After independence, he went back to school established by revolutionary government and stayed
there until 1953. In 1952 Dr. Hatta who was the vice-president and talked about the development
of country and writer was inspired by him then he decided to move towards Bandung . Now his
mother sold his ring and he went to Jakarta. Writer with his four friends reached here at night
and they stayed here in the house of another friend who already lived in Jakarta. House was like
the private house of Sutan Sjahrir who was prime minister of Indonesia. On the same day, they
left Jakara and went to Bandung i.e. the capital of Indonesia.

But when Imaduddin enter at the Institute of Technology on first Friday, he had a great shock.
 Naipaul 23

There was not any mosque and professors were teaching during prayer time so he took
permission from professor to offer prayer because it would be very painful for him not to go for
prayer on Friday as he was brought up in a strict Muslim family.

In1963, Bandung institute sent him to the United states in order to get a high degree .He spend
three years in Iowa ,then in Chicago ,then at Cornell, then went back to Europe and then to
Mecca .He also went to Malaysia ,there he became involved with the Muslim movement whereas
others in Indonesia were worried about radical developments in the Bandung institute .For more
mental training ,Imaduddin travelled to Libya and England as well which provide a great
modernity to old fashioned mullah's teachings.

For Imaduddin, as a Muslim and Sumatran, Indonesia was a place to be cleansed. His faith was so
great that he could separate his country from its history and traditions .Later writer tells us about
the condition of Jakarta that land is not owned by the people. System of rule breakdown because
fifth caliph was interested in dynasty so there is need of a man behind the structure, there should
be true Muslims .Now Imaduddin tried to prepare the new generation to replace old values.

Analysis

Naipaul gives so many references from historical records in his work .He has given so much of
documentation and details in the terms of economic ,mineralogical, botanical, agricultural and
ethnography. There are many examples in text.

When Writer says "Imaduddin’s father did his graduation from Islamic Al-Azher
university"(Naipaul376) .Here we see biographical element and when he says my father was a
religious teacher and was principal attached to a religious teacher ,again biographical
representation is here .Later on ,he says’’ During the revolution, the war against the Dutch ,I was
involved in Muslim army (Naipaul376 ).Here we see how artistically Naipaul meshed
characterization which is an element of fiction and historical perspectives.

“After we gained independence ,I went back to high school .In 1947,government opened
Secondary school so I went to this school and I stayed there until1953" (Naipaul 376). Here we
see journalistic techniques of gathering and presenting the figures, facts and dates represented in
Naipaul’s writing and mixture of autobiographical element and historical perspectives as well.

Later on, writer says "I got highest marks and asked my father to send me to Bandung",

He said “I don’t have the money" and then my mother sold one of her ring then I went to Jakarta
(Naipaul 376) so much economic detail is elaborated.

We also see geographical detail in this text as well when it is said" you could not find a mosque
around Institute of technology ,you have to walk three kilometers down to village to find a
mosque and professors were giving lectures during prayer time"(Naipaul 378 )So Naipaul’s eye
witness experience is also shown ,how minutely he has observed each and every aspect of that
 Naipaul 24

area .In this way, we can say Naipaul’s writing is also included in third category of Travel
writing represented by Dissayanake and Wickramagamage that is "intellectual analytic".

Philosophical commentary is also found in Naipaul’s writing when it is said in text" one idea
came into my mind of having a mosque close to the campus" .So it is clear his philosophical
ideas are brought out through autobiographical instances.

In 1963, after 10 years he came to Bandung with 500 rupiah Bandung institute sent Imaduddin to
United States to get a high degree then he went to different countries here we see a mixture of
economic and biographical detail

Then he said," I cried in Mecca the first time I entered the mosque there, the place with black
stone I cried and I also cried when I was about to leave" (Naipaul379). Here writer goes into
personal and emotional displace so here we find second category which Naipaul discussed in his
writing that is "experiential" Imaduddin stayed for two years Malaysia until 1973, biographical
element is again found here he became involve with Muslim youth movement. Others in
Indonesia were nervous about the development in Bandung institute so whatever writer assumed
about others he depict in his writings. His assumptions are represented here narrative is also
replete with confessional statements with philosophical commentaries.

Imaduddin travelled to Libya and England for his maintain training he went to Bandung to study
electrical engineering but there was no mosque again writer has mashed biographical, ecological
and geographical elements so with the representation of philosophical ideas Nepal also
represents agricultural and botanical view by using the words cultivation and land when he says"
if you go to Jakarta you could find what is happening here land is not owned by people I could
not cultivate the land".

Writer said" I asked a question from Imamuddin," is there an Islamic state where that has
happened I will tell you this story when prophet and his companions migrated to Madina the
prophet of bilal a stretch of land for cultivation during the time of Bilal could not cultivate all the
lands omer took part of the land and gave it to another. Why did that system of rule break down
it was broken by fifth caliph because he was into sted in having a dynasty". (Naipaul378)

He represents his philosophical ideas by saying there must be true Muslims so Nepal wants to
convince his readers and invokes some form of narrative authority by such kind of descriptions
as he has written in text. Imaduddin said "I am interested in educating the youngsters because I
believe that what we need write now is a true Muslim". (Naipaul 377)

So it is concluded that Nepal aim is to convince the readers that’s why he has given so much of
documentation in various terms.
 Naipaul 25

IV- Indonesia Usurpations: The Interchangeable Revolutions.

(Naipaul 379-87)

Nazma Hassan

1136 M.A - (Eng) F/09

In this chapter Naipaul used many travel techniques to make his work more authentic, he used
intellectual analytic category of writing. In this chapter Naipual used sharply his analytical skill
and fictional elements as well, and he gave historical back ground of Indonesia and Muslims of
Indonesia. He gave his objective view and proved as well by giving us solid evidence by coding
the conversation of Indonesian native. In this chapter he highlighted the internal situation of
Indonesia in late 20th century. In the very beginning he used word Islamic Sanctified rage- rage
about faith, political rage (Naipaul 379). He used these words to show that Muslims are
fundamental and suffering due to their religious problems.Throughout in Among the Believers
Naipaul gives the point of views of those Muslims who have not that much strong faith and
shows abnormality about their country and Islam.

In this chapter Naipaul met with Behzad about whom Naipaul said that he was sensitive man and
was ready to reflect his great convulsions. Naipaul tells that Behzad was a communist and not
like Muslims but his communism was like a Shia faith of Iran (Naipaul 379). Further Naipaul
gave a historical reference in this chapter about Shia Sunni's conflict that rage about injustice; a
rage rooted in the overthrow by the Arabs of old Persian empire in seventh century (Naipaul
379).He gave his objective views about Muslims that good Muslims believed that the best time
in the world was the time of the Prophet and the first four ,good caliphs (Naipaul 379) ; he gave
Bhezad's views who believed that the best time was in Russia between 1917 and 1953 when
Darkness had been dispelled an unjust society had been overthrown (Behzad 379) .Naipaul
observes the situation of Muslim’s country during his journey and he told the feelings of only
those who had rage against their country due to poverty, bad political conditions of Indonesia.
He met with a businessman in Jakarta but who was a Muslim from Sulawesi here again Naipaul
gives historical reference to prove is objectives about Muslims that in Sulawasi where had been a
strong Muslim separatist movement started in 1950 (Naipaul 380). That business man was upset
due to unjust condition of Indonesia Naipaul codes the views of that native'' We have to kill a lot
of people we have to kill one or two of these Javanese''
(380). He said so because in Indonesian island there was too much injustice there was
unemployment much poverty over there because in Jakarta many communist had hold on
business and other islands of Indonesia were being deprived. Naipaul here tells us about the
frustration decay and hopelessness of Indonesian people that even a well of businessman is upset
and wanted to kill other Indonesian. Naipaul tells his conversation with businessman that he tells
his feelings that poor people one day they will come and burn the Jakarta. It shows the bad
internal position of natives which Naipaul observed.
 Naipaul 26

Naipaul had not good views about Muslim and he made his assumption more authentic by using
very important view of native of Indonesia about Islam that ‘Islam can become cocaine. It makes
you high, you go to that mosque and you got high, and when you get high everything that
happens becomes Allah's will''. He gave historical reference that in 1965 the communist had been
wiped out and many people had been killed in that war. Naipaul tells that in Indonesia there was
rage against communist even there literature had been banded. He gave reference of Indonesian
literature and shows the thought of a common people about Indonesian situations because
literature reflects the sensitive issues of that nation. Naipaul gave many references from the point
of Indonesian writer. He gave reference of (Putu Oka's poem “Life” 387) and has shown the
Indonesian and Muslim lament about the loss of simplicity and brotherhood, further he has
mention the few lines of another poem Sad memories of a Tijandur Peasand by sobron Aidit and
shows the frustration of Indonesia.

In conclusion Naipaul explores the culture and the explosive situation in Indonesia where Islamic
fundamentalism was growing due to poverty. Here in this chapter we see that Naipaul has no
sympathy for religious fervor whatsoever, and he makes no bone about it. He has shown
Indonesia as a poor and fundamental country who is ready to kill each other because of poverty.
Hopelessness and has shown them backward.

Reprise: The Society of Believers - Submission

(Naipaul 391 - 401)

Muneeba Abbas

1327 M.A – (Eng) F/10

Summary:

In this chapter of Naipaul’s travel writing which makes the last part of it, he started this chapter
reflecting the history of Pakistan. He presented the Political scenario of Pakistan. As when the
elections of August and September were annulled and as a result Martial law was imposed in the
country. Martial law was very strict in nature, as a result newspapers were censored and there
were public whippings. The journalists were arrested. Naipaul also commented that a country
struggling so much but still there was a Pakistani scientist who won the Nobel Prize but Naipaul
criticize that the scientist belonged to the Ahmedi sect. Then he goes back to locating the history
when Iqbal said in 1930 that the purpose of struggling for a separate state by Muslims was
wholly based on Islam. The Naipaul narrates about his visit to his friend Nusrat, who happened
to be a journalist of “Morning News”. Nusrat was always looking for some material for his
newspaper. Naipaul further elucidates how hardworking Nusrat was and he also loved his job
 Naipaul 27

and was a man of faith. Naipaul then comments on Nusrat who believed that he was not a good
Muslim because for him Islam and afterlife was most important thing in life.

Then as the story progresses Naipaul tells us that Nusrat wanted to get a degree from America in
Mass Media and Communication. Then Naipaul describes how he took a taxi to get to the office
of ‘Morning Newspaper’. He then gives the detailed description of the whole scenario; the small
shops and the locality. Naipaul then criticizes that the passage to Newspaper office was not well
maintained but was rather like an unimportant Government office, as a sweeper was sweeping
the concrete steps at the side of the editorial building and he paused while he picked his way up.
He gives the detailed description of the entire building that it was a new building and there was a
room full of dusty files. Then he tells that there was a girl sitting on a desk and she wasn’t veiled
and it seemed to him quite strange. That girl called at Nusrat’s place for him. Later he mentions
that Morning Newspaper republished an Arab article which was about the Great Daughter of
Great Propjet (P.B.U.H). The article was published by an editor named Ghouri and he was a very
sick man but was only in his late 40’s. The publication matter as described by Naipaul was now
closed but for Nusrat it wasn’t. As it was Nusrat who had passed the article from Arabs. Naipaul
states that for weeks and months Nusrat had lived with dangers. Naipaul then narrates his
experience of prayer, as he states that when he wore the traditional cap while offering prayer and
it fell during Sajda so he said that God knows that he didn’t come prepared to pray. He also
mentions that prayer can be accepted without the cap as it’s the intention which matters.

Analysis:

Naipaul, in this part, has discussed about the political condition of Pakistan with reference to the
conception of Islam in the West. This is one of the strategies of Naipaul’s writing that he shows
the Western prejudices against Islamic tradition. In the very first paragraph, by showing the
historical reference of the unrest, there was a talk about elections and political unrest was going
on. But elections were cancelled and martial law was tightened. As a result, many of the
journalists were arrested. (Naipaul 391)

Now, from this depiction of political system, he has shown this reality that Islam was practiced
nowhere in Pakistan as it was being practiced in the other religious countries. He has used
historical reference as well by giving the reference of Iqbal’s speech that the purpose of Pakistani
struggle was on the basis of Islam. He went to see his friend Nusrat in some newspaper office.
He has also given the physical description of Nusrat which is another important strategy of
Naipaul’s writing. He said “I remembered his abrupt way of speaking, his round cheeks, and his
walrus moustache”. (Naipaul 392)

Now, with reference of Nusrat, he wants to show the reality that people are concerned about
Islam but they do not show it in their actions.
 Naipaul 28

He had shown that in Pakistan, there were different sects like Shea community. He has shown
how Shea community is considered as “other”. This is another important technique that he shows
different prejudices within one country.

He has shown the reality by depicting what was the conception of Shea Muslims about Prophet
(PBUH) and his grandson through the article in the newspaper.

This is what the strategy called Narrative Authority that by referring to the different journalistic
articles, he has depicted the reality so that the readers cannot doubt him.

Now I’ll mention what was the offending matter that the newspaper had published. To
understand this point, it is important to go over a little Islamic history. For the Shea Muslims,
Ali, the Prophet’s son-in-law, should be the first caliph to Prophet. Ali had two sons, the first
was poisoned and the second died in a battle. The second son, Hussain, had a daughter, Ali’s
granddaughter and Prophet’s great granddaughter. The offending article was about her.

This article was published by Ghauri, and for this reason, newspaper was banned.

Now, Naipaul discussed that when the newspaper was re-opened, it published the picture of an
Indonesian lady. The picture was very revealing. Naipaul has depicted the conception of Islamic
society about the women.

Naipaul has used very satirical tone depicting what is the status of women in Islamic society.
This also shows the Western prejudices against Islamic tradition.

He has used dialogues as well that is an important characteristic of Fiction which means that he
has juxtaposed fiction in travel writing.

While concluding, I want to mention another important technique that is his own assumptions
projecting in his writings. Nusrat tells him that once he went to a friend’s sister marriage and
there he offered a prayer without covering his head. And from some dialogues of Nusrat, he
wants to show that the faith is necessary for the prayers, not the caps. ‘The prayer can be
accepted even without the cap, if one’s intention is to pray.’ (Naipaul 400)

Thus to conclude, we can deduce that Naipaul incorporated various strategies, holding the
attention of his readers. From his experience, he presents such a realistic view that the entire
picture comes infront of the reader. From his account, we can say that his travelogue is authentic
as he gives references from history, politics, journalism, and religion.
 Naipaul 29

Reprise: The Society of Believers – Islamic Winter

(Naipaul, 401- 415)

Aqsa Rehman

1256 M.A-(Eng) F/10

Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul, (born 17 August 1932) is an Indo-Trinidadian-British writer who

is known for his novels focusing on the legacy of the British Empire's colonialism. Naipaul won
the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2001. He has also written works of non-fiction, such as essays
and travel writings.

There is a general view that the travel writings are based upon true and faithful representations of
the traveler’s experiences but in reality it is not so. The travelers write according to their own
plans and strategies. According to Dissayanake and Wickramagamage there are tree kinds of
travel writings; 1) Information-oriented, 2) Experiential and 3) Intellectual-Analytic.

V.S Naipaul’s writings fit under the category of ‘intellectual-analytical.’ We will correlate V.S
Naipaul’s writings with his fiction. Both are inextricably woven and meshed together.
Dissayanake and Wickramagamage term his style of writing as ‘vulcanization’ in which his
travel and fictional elements are coalesced.

We will analyze his work Among the Believers which is a travelogue in 1979 through Islamic
countries, not Saudi Arabia, but the countries of the ‘converted peoples.’ In these travels Naipaul
talks to a cross section of the society: people from drivers, students, guides, government officials
to people of power like Ayatollah Khalkhali and Anwar Ibrahim (during his student politics
days). Naipaul then synthesizes his experiences into a commentary on the history of the people,
their faith and the impact of their faith on their way of life. This book written in the early 80′s
offers a perceptive and prescient analysis of the impact of Islam on the politics and society of
these countries.

We will discuss the very last chapter of this book ‘Islamic Winter’ in which he for most of the
part talks about Iran, its people, region, political and social conditions. According to Dissayanake
and Wickramagamage, Naipaul has three formal aspects of writing; his assumptions, narrative
authority and travel writing strategies which are important to understand his personal views of
what his writing strive for. The strategies further consist of: 1) journalistic techniques, 2)
ethnographic reporting, including landscape, geographic and human observations, 3) history, 4)
autobiographical features and 5) philosophical enquiry.

We will give a short summary of the chapter before getting into the deep analysis. In this chapter
Naipaul gives the description of his journey where he is leaving Pakistan for Tehran. He tells
about the people of Pakistan at the airport, the people at Tehran airport and the working people
there who are more interested in other businesses than their duties. After getting into the
 Naipaul 30

country’s observations and discussions he gives a filthy and dirty description of the places in
Tehran and getting deeper about the place he tells about the people and political situation in the
country. The Iran hostage crisis is also referred during the discussion of elections for an
Assembly of Experts. A revolutionary activity for the victims of flood in Khuzestan is also
compared with the Iran Revolutionary activity, and both are shown as useless. Further more he
talks about the relationship of Behzad with his girl-friend and their breakup due to some political
and social miss match. The poor, dissatisfied and frustrated condition of Behzad is shown from
his thoughts, plans and ideas about his life, country and scope of his work.

Starting with the analysis we observe that in the very start of this chapter Naipaul gives us a view
of U.K, Tehran and Karachi airport. He uses a cynical tone when he says “Pakistani migrants and
their families leaving the land of faith for the land of money” (Naipaul 402). Here he has a
philosophic aspect as well because he talks about faith being left for money, presenting a
degraded position of Islam. Islam is the foundation of this country, so by talking about the
faithful people like this he is highlighting the attitude of people with their religion, country and
future planning, which is carrying them away from a practical Muslim country because it did not
come up to their expectations. He also represents the economic conditions of Muslim society by
saying that they were carrying the goods of Europe and Japan in a mocking tone. He does not
consider the native people to be able to produce their own goods.

His narrative authority provides a sense of objective reality to convince the reader. He gives
acuity of observation through this. He portrays the women having children on the airport having
veils; a typical view of the women is presented. He gives a view of the office where he is being
called for visa and passport checking; there he observes “there was a lot of talk” (Naipaul 402)
which shows the people not willing to work in a proper and organized way for which he later
comments that he thought to be forgotten by the officer.

He gives a filthy and dirty imagery of the places for example when he says “the wastes of
Baluchistan and Iran had been brown and black” (Naipaul 402) and when he fetches his bag from
the room in the airport, he says “I took the bag outside and put it down on the wet floor”
(Naipaul 403) which goes on with a sarcastic tone saying “a man was cleaning … this seemed
surprising: that people were still doing jobs, maintaining things” (Naipaul 403). This shows the
prejudices and assumptions of the writer, if he got surprised, then definitely he would have some
prior knowledge and view about the place which shocked him for such an action. Here the
assumptions of the writer are making him to write in the way he wants and present his own
mentality and thoughts about the people of faith. We do not see any constructive imagery made
by him about the country or people even if he sees some thing he portrays it in a mocking and
sarcastic tone.

By looking at the title of the book Among the Believers – An Islamic journey, what we think is
that it is a true and faithful representation of the Muslim people by the writer, but by reaching the
end of the book we have come to know that it is not an Islamic journey but a planned and
 Naipaul 31

assumed journey of Naipaul to present Muslims in a way that justify the European prejudices
against them. He gives a pessimistic view of his Islamic journey as he says: “I was stunned,
passive. The six month journey I had done had been a series of gambles; what had come my way
had come my way. And I had hardly slept” (Naipaul 403) He gives a view full of hurdles and
tensions throughout the journey which has astounded him. He degrades the government rules and
policies of Pakistan when he tells about the suggestion to go back to Karachi because he does not
have a visa by an Iranian girl who was PIA’s representative which is portrayed as a problematic
airline, “the flight had brought a few problems” (Naipaul 403). Every now and then he presents
his biased observations and experiences in a pessimistic way, as a set rule and system of the
country and without any hope of betterment.

He continuously goes on with a sarcastic tone while talking about the place like when he reaches
Tehran he sees a man dusting off the streets “the same traffic jams, the same exhaust haze, …,
man using a twig broom … again surprising, this evidence of municipal life going on, apparently
separate from the events that made the news” (Naipaul 405-6) Another perspective of this
observation is that he ironically presents the news channels for giving the inaccurate reports,
which are mostly according to their own personal interests and not merely based on objective
and truthful reporting.

He gives a historical background of elections for an Assembly of Experts, people who would
work out an Islamic constitution. Khomeini at that time was an Iranian religious leader and
politician, and leader of the 1979 Iranian Revolution which saw the overthrow of Mohammad
Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran. Following the revolution, Khomeini became the
country's Supreme Leader -- a position created in the constitution as the highest ranking political
and religious authority of the nation — until his death. He asked people to vote the clergy and so
they did. In between all these voting the American embassy has been seized and this was termed
as Iran hostage crisis, it was a diplomatic crisis between Iran and the United States where 52
Americans were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981, after a
group of Islamist students and militants took over the American Embassy in Tehran in support of
the Iranian Revolution. Naipaul tells about the poster of Khomeini on the glass front door of the
hotel. He writes about him: “His old-man’s eyes held victory. No frown, no gesture of defiance,
no clenched fist: the hands were the hands of the man of peace, the man at peace” (Naipaul 408).

Naipaul describes the condition of the hotel where he goes where his room was not properly
cleaned with no stationary, no directory etc. He uses the ethnographic strategy to define people
as mere objects, alienated, detached and frustrated by portraying the character of the waiter who
comes to him and Naipaul gives hundred rials to him which does not make him happy at all. He
then asks Naipaul to give him something for headache. Here the author comments “it was that,
the medication and the attention, rather than the rials that he wanted” (Naipaul 407). He further
tells the disturbed and deteriorated lives of people as he says “no one was having tea or coffee”
(Naipaul 407). He represents a “figure of extravagant despair,” (Naipaul 407) of a man drooping
over his arms, apparently asleep but was actually having cold which he discovers later. He shows
 Naipaul 32

the people suffering in one way or the other. He shows a deep and dark image of the society
where there is no hope for health or for financial stability. He further tells about that man
pleading him for another job and so in the end he had to hide from him.

The writer describes the atmosphere of the people inside the hotel. They gathered in the dining
room and listened to the speeches made at the mass prayer rallies in Tehran University. People
were worried about the education of their children and were looking towards foreign institutes to
make their children’s future better, as the writer gives an example of the man with whom he
discusses the universities of India. This shows the theme of frustration and insecurity among the
people in their own country based on their religion. Indeed, Naipaul satires upon the Islamic
society for not being at peace, contentment and satisfaction even though their religion is based
upon revolution, they are still looking towards other non-Islamic countries for their better future
whether it is their economic security or educational matter.

Naipaul presents the gloomy picture of Tehran even after the revolution had taken place. He talks
about the inactive political party who won elections but the conditions in the country were still
static. The place was like a camping site for many people living there. He highlights the area
having incomplete constructions and still not being worked on. The economic condition is
painted in a satiric tone, the writer says that the goods in the market were imported and the
money in Tehran was the money of its oil.

The writer goes to the Friday prayer meeting with his interpreter and guide, Behzad. He observes
the revolutionary activity by the people while collecting supplies for flood victims of Khuzestan.
He sees the bread and other food items being filled up in the trucks without any care with other
goods like blanket and clothes. It was not taken into account whether those food items will reach
in its usable form to the victims or not. He ironically says “the bread didn’t matter. The gesture
and excitement mattered” (Naipaul 411). He actually relates it with the excitement and
revolutionary activity of Iran hostage crisis, and criticizes the enthusiasm of the society for any
work without a purpose as he uses the comment of Behzad, “this is not a religious occasion. It is
a political occasion” (Naipaul 411).

Later in the chapter Naipaul describes the relation of Behzad with his girlfriend. He mentions a
tabooed issue in a Muslim society as such relations are not openly accepted and discussed there.
He tells about the impracticality of Islam while talking about the card game being played by
Behzad and his girl friend in the train for which the guard comes to them and ask to stop the
game, as it was the month of Ramadan. Behzad gets angry over him because he was a
communist and criticizes his own people by calling them the slaves of the oppressor class.
Naipaul then defines the relation which is merely based on materialistic approach and not
sincerity and trust by telling about the breakup between Behzad and his girl friend. After wards
he takes the theme of poverty, desolation and frustration by telling about Behzad that he had no
job even after doing a course of 5 years. He lives in an upper-class apartment but is not satisfied
with his condition and wants to go for another field which would have some scope.
 Naipaul 33

Conclusion: Naipaul has used the ‘colonial gaze’ to observe, textualize and represent the
Islamic society. The assumptions of the writer are creating his observations and constructing
what he had seen. He uses many strategies to write about the Muslim society but the main
purposes to textualize them are to tell that:

1. Islam was used by aggrieved people who do not know where to look for solutions, and
2. Islam, in an intrinsic and structural way, provides no political solution to these people.

(Naipaul 415-430)

Tooba Baig

1309 M.A-(Eng) F/10

Summary:

Behzad went to the kitchen to make tea, from inside the kitchen he told that there was a strike in
the country (Iran) and there was “no heating oil. No heating oil in Iran” (Naipaul 415).  There
was a strike on mass level and “was no heating for twenty-four hours.”

Behzad talked about the divorced couple who had started living together yet again and use to
have parties every night, that loud music was a big disturbance for Behzad who was always
caught up with so many things to work out specially the “political activity”, it made him only
think but never let out with any result. Behzad talked about the low living conditions of the
people (working class), it was for him very painful for how the expectations of the people from
the government were all thrashed like it was 60 years before at the time of Qajar Kings.

 The two talked over the incidents that took place recently and also about Khomeini. He accepted
the idea of Khomeini being a true revolutionary leader, belonging to the “petit bourgeoisie”
class. But, he in his view lived two lives, “before and after the revolution” (Naipaul 416). Behzad
also showed his guest the picture of the executions of the “left-wing people”. They talked over
the murder of Hoveida and the possibilities and assumptions of Khalkhalli or “A young man, in
his thirties” being Hoveida’s murderer.

Behzad and Naipaul talked about Behzad’s girl friend and his Muslim family. Behzad the
pointing at a booklet with the portrait of Stalin started talking about bringing socialism to Iran
like Stalin did. Behzad enjoyed the idea of killing: “We, too, have to do a lot of killing. A lot…
We have to kill all the bourgeoisie. All the bourgeoisie of the oppressor class.” (Naipaul 420).

The scene shifts to “The Royal Tehran Hilton, high up in the north of the city, and with snow on
the ground, was now the Tehran Hilton International” (Naipaul 421). The “real life had come to
hotels like the Hilton, and it had been given by the journalists and television teams who had
 Naipaul 34

flown in for the American-embassy story…” (Naipaul 421). Naipaul then describes his first visit
to the building holding hostages after “more than three months” (Naipaul 422). The “one-week
bargain sale”, the “fairground experience: book stalls, food stall (mainly buns), tea stalls…”,
“picture stall” along with the variety of banners carrying slogans in Persian and English have
been discussed. On his way to the hotel from his second visit to the embassy, Naipaul came
across “a small boy sitting on the pavement not far from plastic sacks of store rubbish. He had lit
a fire in the middle of the pavement, using rubbish from the sacks” (Naipaul 424). How it
distracted people but nobody could or did nothing. He not knowing the language was unable to
do at least what locals tried at: asking the boy for what happened though getting no reply other
then the height his hysteria was gaining. Naipaul, been put out by the boy with the fire, missed
the big event of the day: “Sixty thousand Mujahidin students…gathered in the university
grounds…One year after the revolution Tehran was still drifting” (Naipaul 425).

The American-embassy that had attracted “hundreds of journalists to Tehran had … shattered the
local English-language press” (Naipaul 425). The local press had disappeared almost suddenly
whereas Tehran Times had shrunk, making or providing no business and “busyness”. Mr. Parvez,
the editor of the paper revealed his doubts, his tensions and his financial problems to Naipaul by
saying “they might hold the hostages for a year” and “I haven’t touched a rial”. Mr. Jaffery, a
colleague of Mr. Parvez, in the good days of their work was able to give a little time Naipaul.
During this little chat “Mr. Jaffery revealed his deeper longings”. His longing for “the society of
believers”. The society which had come to Iran. But it had not developed as a society following
the rules, it “had not” yet brought “law and institutions” but “anarchy, hysteria and this empty
office” (Naipaul 427-8). People like Mr. Jaffery were the part of the “complex”, “materialist”
and “modernist” “hard rule” system but talks in opposition. Similarly Mr. Parvez, a good Muslim
A good Shia, whose paper is always “full of criticism of materialist civilization”, his son was
studying in the United States. Divided he was. “With one part of his mind he was foe the faith,
and opposed to all that stood outside it;…he wished to continue to belong to himself. With
another part of his mind he recognized the world outside as paramount, part of the future of his
sons. It was in that division…that the Islamic revolution had begun in Iran.” (Naipaul
429).                                                                                                          

Conclusion: people in Iran and elsewhere should understand that they need to make peace with
the world that they know that exists beyond the faith. It is not Islam that had brought the change
rather due to “the spread of universal civilization.” (Naipaul 429).

Analysis:

Discussing the conditions of Muslims, based on his assumptions, Naipaul, with the help of his
“ideal” character Behzad, had depicted with authoritative documentation, proofs, geographical,
ethnographical and “actual” historical context, the people and situation of Iran he witnessed.
 Naipaul 35

Naipaul’s eyewitness in this part of his fiction, is contemptuous of his own surroundings. He has
portrayed the westernized living style of Muslims of Iran. Through Behzad he has given the
example of the divorced couple who had “began living together again” (Naipaul 416). He has
defined the couple in terms of their “modernist” and “materialist” life style (having parties every
night) and the leaders in Marxist point of view whose control over the country had led the poor
turn poorer and working class with low living standards. Through this he has tried to assert his
falsified perceptions in an artistic way. V.S. Naipaul has documented his ‘assumptions’ and his
‘perceptions’ with the help of historical contexts and journalistic technique, hence empowering
his narrative authority. The writer has kept his tone cynical and sarcastic throughout the
presentation of his “Society of Believers”, presenting the futilitarian point of view of his
character. Naipaul has satirized over the actions of the Muslims. The destructive, war like
imagery created by Naipaul through the words of Behzad played an important role in
maintaining his ‘colonial gaze’ by textualization. It is not only the sarcastic tone that calls
Muslims ‘elusive’, or the imagery of ‘decadence’ or his special ‘eye-witness’ that plays its part
in fact it is the interrogative technique that he has used which has helped to fulfill his motif of
portrayal. The motif of portrayal has been to label Muslims all over the world as pessimists,
elusive, otiose, indolent, illusory and the like.

Naipaul has not only used the journalistic technique and the historical context to justify his false
perceptions rather he beautifully comments in the fictional manner which strengthens his
narration. Naipaul therefore comments on certain thoughts and actions of his characters. The
mental agony of his character like in the case of Behzad where he complains that he can
concentrate on nothing because of the loud music, character’s emotional state and his character’s
critical notes like Behzad’s on the Revolutionary Khomeini, adds to the satire. The westernized
life style of Muslims: divorced but living together, having parties, listening to music and playing
it loud (disturbing others), having relationships with Na Mehrams, having boyfriends and
girlfriends, studying abroad, leaving “the land of faith” has helped Naipaul to place Muslims of
Iran and the Muslim world under the theme of dissolution of faith. He has depicted a society
which is being ruled by the West.

The narrative also included little ethnographic and geographic details. Naipaul has used the
historical Iranian Revolution to promote the idea of Muslims as “fundamentalists” and the
believers of “faith”. But this has been done to satire on the Muslims that how they substitute
politics by Religion. The writer having the narrative authority has in an ironic way satirized upon
the respectable figure “mullah” (Naipaul 418) as he calls one, since he has presented one as a
murderer, “You know who actually killed Hoveida? It was a mullah, one of these men with
beards and turbans. A young man in his thirties, he is known” (Naipaul 418). He has supported
through his various fictionalizing techniques the dark irony and the theme of frustration and
dissolution that he portrays. The story of Tehran has also been supported by drifting political and
socio-economic condition. The writer further proceeds with reference to ecological condition of
the city the change in climate, also has mentioned the renewal and renaming of The Royal
 Naipaul 36

Tehran Hilton to Tehran Hilton International. Naipaul has now discussed how the American-
embassy issue has led everything into a disaster on local grounds. Yet there remained some
individuals detached from the highly crucial and lamentable scenario, of the Americans been
taken hostages. He has depicted that how across the street from the embassy “there was a
fairground atmosphere”, “book stalls, food stalls, tea stalls” (Naipaul 422). (Without any “and”
in between. Stylistically: no ‘and’ emphasis upon the idea of more in line therefore stressing his
point of irrationality even more). This, he has satirized as peoples irrationality where as in reality
it was the only way to survive, that was to earn, especially in the contemporary conditions when
all business was lost or reduced. He has also derided upon the cynicism and frustration of people
resulting in hysteria. This he has explained through the boy whom he himself eye-witnessed,
burning fire and tearing his clothes off. The colonial gaze and the search for self and truth has
made Naipaul not only to state and comment but also to interrogate time and often the atrocities
and savage activities like the mass gathering of students in the university grounds that resulted in
“fighting with sticks and knives and stones” (Naipaul 425), (Stylistically: ‘and’ used thrice here
emphasis upon the intensity and the nature of the fight), at the time of revolution. This being his
‘assumed perception’, his colonial-gaze not an objective observation. In addition to the savage
activities and the westernized life style of Muslims, Naipaul also satirizes the faith of Muslims
and their contradictory believe systems. For under the veil of Mr. Parvez he criticizes whole lot
of the Muslim world to be divided in to two parts, apparently having faith within and criticizing
the materialistic society but inwardly conforming to the new belief system of modernization,
globalization and materialism.

Travel and fiction narratives were produced in a parallel manner, but they are now fused,
vulcanized together. This text represents this new ‘genre’ paradigm which has strong auto
biographical components and relies heavily on the use of memory as valid travel paradigm.
Naipaul through this text tried to motivate the world to come to the common ground, to confirm
Muslims as pessimists, cynics, elusive, decayed, fallacious, defeatist and misanthropes. For he
also asserted his belief that it has never been Islam that brought peace to the world neither the
life that Islam enjoys has come to it from within but rather it has be a gift to it by the idea and
spread of “universal civilization”.
 Naipaul 37

Bibliography:

Naipaul, V.S. Among the Believers: An Islamic Journey. New York: Vintage books, 1982.

Santiago, Serafin Roldan. V.S Naipaul’s Vulcanization of Traven Writing and Fiction
Paradigms.

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/2/