A revolution in a small Caribbean island exposes deviant sexuality, and gender and racial hatred among its principal characters. They truly are lost souls without hope of redemption.Jimmy Ahmed is the unlikely bi-sexual, mixed-breed revolutionary, who hates England for having made him into a plaything and who hides out in a foreign-sponsored farm on his native island waiting for the moment to spring his revolution. My problem with Jimmy is that he does not appear to have charisma that will inspire a wide revolutionary following—in fact, there is no evidence of a following, more the opposite, with recruits leaving the farm—except for Jane the conflicted Englishwoman and Bryant his jealous young male lover. And Jimmy’s ruthlessness is only directed towards women—he is not your regular Che Guavara who orchestrates lightning raids and moves about steaming jungles with a motley band of armed guerrillas. Roche the former South African hero who endured torture and wrote a book about it is also somewhat impotent, his relationship with Jane ending, his farm project on the island languishing. And Jane herself, the succubus, cold to Roche, attracted to Jimmy and to his deviant sexuality, is not sure if her place belongs on the island or back in England.Most of the story happens in the minds of these characters, and the revolution, when it does erupt, happens off-stage and is a damp squib, quickly put out by the authorities and the police (who are fed by the islanders – so where are the guerrillas and where is their support base?), and the foreign investors who are eager to protect their investment. And Jimmy is left isolated in his farm, seemingly immune from arrest, with no followers, thirsting to avenge himself on Jane and Roche who represent the colonial yoke that thwarts true change on the island. Among the locals, the establishment of the state of Israel around that time seems to be their only sign of hope; they believe that Africa’s and, by extension, their island’s turn is next – how, they do not know, or seem to care about.I wondered if this story was a metaphor for the author’s own trajectory from a Caribbean island to fame in England as a writer, where he has won every conceivable literary prize but where he still refers to himself as being in exile. Jimmy stands out as the neutered colonial outpost while Jane and Roche represent the equally improvident mother country, unable to provide any more and therefore needing to pay for the sins of the past. I was amused to discover little-used words like “dirtiness,” “youngish,” “racialist,” “that that,” “had had,” and “straiter” – colonial words that I had once used and have now forgotten.The style is intellectual, much of the plot is revealed through discussions between the expatriates and the wealthy locals (who have compromised their principles and increased their waistlines or obtained landed immigrant status in Canada), and through character introspections. I also found the descriptions of the island vivid but excessive and they intruded on the pacing.On the other hand, whenever Naipaul speaks in the patois of the locals, it reveals much and is very incisive.I have been a big fan of Naipaul and have enjoyed his earlier works and his non-fiction travel writings. Yet I have had trouble with his “middle passage” books like this one and even his most recent ones. Perhaps a colonial writer at some point needs to shuck the yoke of his origins and move onto other themes.
This is the first Naipaul book I have read and it was a bracing experience - not exactly enjoyable but compelling and thought-provoking (a cinematic analogy would be a Michael Haneke film perhaps, in whcih the reader is also complicit in the misdeeds being described). The book's general theme is the post-colonial era of revolutionary ferment in the Caribbean in the 70s, when political movements still harboured hopes of a radical transformation of society along leftist lines. The tone is overwhelmingly acrid, though, and this asperity hangs over the proceedings like the bauxite dust over the city or the US helicopters that mysteriously appear during the insurrection like the much-cited 'corbeau carrion'. There is a charismatic local leader (Jimmy) who was lauded in the West for his idealism and writings, and is now back in his own land, and a white idealist (Roche) who runs a communal land project (which is being used by the guerrillas as a base),and works for the local multinational, and has a history of liberal struggle in Africa, and his mistress (Jane), who was Jimmy's publisher's publicist when he was in London - she seems like a cipher for white fantasies of black sexual power and the least convincing protagonist. There is a lot of dialogue but there is a very strong sense of place evoked, and of an atmosphere of suppressed violence and danger, which finally erupts. Naipaul clearly has little time for white liberals, and the two here get treated fairly badly (especially the woman), but neither does he romanticise in any way the locals, who are also depicted as venal, vicious and unable to break free from the dominance of the imposed imperial culture and structures. The spectre of the corporate-military power of the US hovers in the background, though the characters do not speak much of it.
What do You think about Guerrillas (1990)?
This book is terrible. I really believe this author does not understand women at all, because the way he writes the female character Jane is awful, both in quality of writing and in terms of believability. She is completely unrealistic and I think he uses the word "schoolgirl" twice in every paragraph that describes her (bad writing!). This book is supposed to be based on Wuthering Heights, but I shudder to even think about comparing the two. Wuthering Heights is a brilliant, amazing, stimulating masterpiece and this is... a vapid piece of trash. There is nothing redeeming about it and you even feel dirty after reading it. Unless you have to read this for a postcolonial literature class, run far far away from it.
—Sarah Nicole
TWs for this book:Racism, racial slurs, sexual assault, rape, violence, misogyny ~~~~~~~~This book is so tense it's almost boring. All of the characters are outsiders in a colonized country (which is to say has been and continues to be systemically ruined by white people who manipulate it's resources). There are a few people who are both original inhabitants of the island and also wealthy because of their complicity with the colonizers, this makes them outsiders among their own people and also among the white American and British businessmen who run the bauxite mine. The main characters are wholly unlikeable and their everyday interactions with each other are both intensely uneventful and intensely uncomfortable. The climax of this book is predictably unpredictable and shocking in it's inanity, however it is unsettling and does punctuate something, though I don't really know what. There is no resolution to this book.I do really like certain aspects of this (style, plot development, etc.) but feel that the possibility of the narrator and Naipaul overlapping is likely and therefore makes me kind of upset. I dislike to like it. I read this because of Jamie Stewart and I'm glad I did because I've never really like-hated a book or thought a book could be written this way and inspire weird and uncomfortable feelings as well as admiration in equal measure. I'm glad this was written. (I think????)
—Emily
Guerrillas by V. S. Naipaul is a novel about an unnamed Caribbean country that undergoes a revolution. It seems like it would be Naipaul's home, Trinidad, but I don't know enough about the country to know for certain, but the Caribbean is full of little countries with large poor populations and natural resources controlled by the ruling elite or foreign investors, so there are several countries that could be models. Perhaps, the lack of detail on this point isa strength of the book. The political situation feels vague to me as does the machinations of the characters that are followed as the revolution slowly gains momentum and spills over into their lives. The characters themselves almost seem to be symbols or types that are seen in these kinds of conflict: John Roche, South African resistance fighter, Jane , naive Englishwoman who seems to be playing around knowing that she can leave at any time, Jimmy Ahmed mulatto leader of the revolution. Its a book that lingers on after completion.
—Patrick McCoy
