V.S. NAIPAUL’S IN A FREE STATE: A CONFLICT
BETWEEN IDEALITY AND REALITY
Prof. Rakam Singh Sandhu1, Pooja2
Dean, Faculty of Education K. U. Kurukshetra
Research Scholar Department English Gurukulkangari University, Uttrakhand
ABSTRACT
Literature is an expression and it shares the feelings and emotions of a particular person with a group. Most
probably, the writers or the authors write out for there on experiences in their on life. The experience may be a
tragic one or a comic one. Around 80 per cent of the literature is own with the thread of life in which creativity
acts as colors to make it beautiful. In a Free State by V.S. Nainpaul is hailed as a great book by a great author.
Indubitably, the work deserved all the praise and attention from readers and critics alike, particularly after
getting Booker Prize for it in the year 1971. It was a period when the author lived in Wiltshire, England and his
literary pursuits were interrupted by travels abroad assignment as a journalist. Among the books written during
that period, his main concerns remain the nature of freedom, commitment and authenticity in relation to
experience and giving purpose to life. Quite interestingly, the ideas are questioned by real-life situations.
Hence, it is a conflict between certitude and flux, ideal and real.
Key Words: Nature Of Freedom, Conflict Between Ideality And Reality, Commitment And
Authenticity In Relation To Experience.
I. INTRODUCTION
In a Free State is concerned with the marvelous collection of postcolonial short-stories. It is highly skilled in the
novelist‟s craftsmanship. The book displays three striking features: the paradox of seeking freedom in a strange
land; the cultural anomie and a conflict between different ideologies. In a way, it is a reverse edition of A
Passage to India by E.M. Forster. Like in his other novels, V.S. Naipaul offers his readers sour-sweet
experiences of modern wanderers and hence stirs them into profound thinking. But all the activity, no matter
how different from reader to reader, from culture to culture, takes place under the cover of simple and uniquely
ironical language employed by the author. It is a classic analysis between the two theories, i.e. first, the entire
world is home to us and second, we strive for our own house or home. In the process we move away from our
ancestral home, our roots and find a home away from home. However, the search remains unfulfilled and one is
forced to make undesirable compromises, lose his self-esteem and personal identity, and yet compelled to
exhibit some sort of satisfaction and achievement to others.
The focus is usually on individuals, their hopes, desires, fears, and problems of freedom and human nature.
These novel are rich in psychology, in awareness of how insecurity is transformed into violence and tyranny.
The novels like In a Free State, Guerrillas and A Bend in the River certainly remind us of the events portrayed
977 | P a g e
by William Gilding in Lord of Files and Joseph Conrad‟s Heart of Darkness. Given the topic at hand, it would
be particularly more relevant to dwell upon In A Free State. In this connection, it could be observed that prima
facie it seems to be dealing with a single plot in accordance with the title of the book alone. However, it is
actually more like a collection of stories as quoted earlier. For this purpose, it could be recalled that it is a book
having three stories flanked by a prologue and an epilogue on either side.
Primarily, all five stories focus on uprooted individuals in a situation where society has become disorganized or
„free‟ and, like most of Nainpaul‟s fiction, the narrative easily lends itself to being allegorized as representative
of the nation, the post-imperial and contemporary world. (2.) It is essentially about experiences of being out of
place. In this sense, it reminds us of Mary Douglas‟ Conception of matter out of place from her essay „Purity
and Danger‟s. The stories are all about people who find themselves at places where they feel, or made to feel,
that they do not belong. The stories too are about boundaries, purity, pollution, incommensurability and just
plain strangeness. The presence of an English tramp on a Greek ferry causes uproar, an Indian servant tries to
come to terms with his new life in London reflects upon his ruins of life, two white Britons in Uganda drive
from the capital to their compound in the south as post-independence upheaval all around throws their presence
in the country into relief, and finally in Epilogue, an Asian businessman travelling through Milan and Cairo
reflects upon cruelty and Empire.
Some of the stories are more uncomfortable than others. But here is the real motive of the author coming to the
fore. He wants to please the reader but at the same time, he wants to convey the hard message through his
chilling and depressing stories. He can be pardoned for the simple reason that going soft on certain matters
would not have helped the cause. His head-on approach justifies the words of Franz Kafka, who averred, „I think
we ought to read only the kind of books that wound and stab us‟. In terms of title, we find that the title of the
book perse is quite fertile and suggestive one, having many critical puzzles attached to it. Immediately, it seems
to refer to a state that is politically free, such as the independent, post colonial nation states where the characters
in the story come and in which the title novella is set: respectively, India and Trinidad, and a conglomerate of
African nations. However, this „freedom‟ or „free state‟ turns out to be largely theoretical and ironic, since most
of the countries even after getting independence are the playthings of colonial powers. Other connotations of the
title include an independent nation or condition where the law, rules and regulations are absent from general life.
More commonly, the title has been taken to refer freedom as psychological state, of mind and that causes
anguish, abandonment and the loss of personal attachments. Alternatively, it has been suggested that in his
choice of the title, Nainpaul is drawing upon a scientific metaphor namely the idea of the free floating
movement of sub-atomic particles (electrons) around a nucleus (3). The same principle applies to the structure
of the book. We find that In A Free State is an assemblage of unblended, discrete elements. We have two stories
and a novel loosely joined by a prologue and epilogue. It all seems to be not revolving around any nucleus and
therefore fail to cohere as single work.
Nainpaul‟s own life seems to be in a „Free State‟ or constant flux akin to many of the characters populating his
works. In this regard, the author confessed in an interview during the year of book‟s publication that with each
novel he found it harder and harder to do the artificial side of making u big narratives and simply decided to let
the book fall into its component parts. Though the individual sections of the book are each set in a 1960s
postcolonial world and feature common themes of displacement and transplantation to alien cultures. They also
978 | P a g e
in their diverse speaking voices, geographical setting, and narrative techniques have to randomness of
component parts left to lie where they fall thus vindicating the intention of the author. In A Free State explores
the multifarious meanings of freedom. Firstly, it is the freedom of natural world which has no divine purpose
but paradoxically natural world which has no divine purpose but
paradoxically revealing the cycles of
creation and decay. In other words, if there is no essential good or evil, no divine purpose, then we are
essentially free to give life what meaning we wish, to pursue or not to pursue, what goals we wish. But this
creates terrifying responsibilities as our freedom is limited by circumstances, possibilities and fears. In the
social context, to be in a „free state‟ is to be isolated, alienated, not part of the group and therefore prey for
others. Thus, Freedomor FreeStatenot only creates a crisis or purpose and responsibility but also brings dangers
of insecurity and ruin. The tramp in „prologue‟ is a perfect example for it. Again, we find that freedom from
moral rights and wrongs have its own dangers as Bobby learns while attempting to seduce African men.
Similarly, freedom from established manners produces such absurdities as Santoshpurchase a green suit. A free
or independent state can be chaotic, disordered, violent nation, in the midst of civil or tribal wars and thus
freedom can result in tyranny.
In A Free Stateprobes such contradictions, beginning with the threatened situation of the tramp, the financial
and emotional insecurity of Santosh and the West Indian narrator in “Tell Me who To Kill‟, a civil war in
independent African state or Nainpual‟s own exercise of moral choice in protesting against the humiliation of
Egyptian children and himself being humiliated by it. We can observe that modern chaos is palpable every
where and writ large on each page of the book. Now let‟s analyse all three stories along with their prologue and
epilogue in a sequential manner as presented by the author.
So, Prologue, The Tramp at Piraeus(1-14) happens to be the opening chapter of the book. The chapter has its
own significance at it sets the tone for the things to follow. Here author is travelling by a steamer from Greece to
Egypt, i.e., Piraes to Alexandria and the steamer (ship) is a microcosm of mankind, a ship of fools, an epitome
of how the world works and what drives society. (Katherine Anne Porter‟s novel „Ship of Fools‟ (1966) is a well
known modern example using this medieval image). The first paragraph immediately establishes themes and
perspective. „There wasn‟t enough room for everybody‟ introduces a feeling of people engaged in competition,
of irritability and struggle‟ (2). The second paragraph emphasizes the smallness of the space, the limited
resources and the role of groups of people in completion for comforts: „Many of the chairs in small smokingroom and a good deal of floor space had been seized by overnight passengers from Italy.‟ (1)
Soon afterward, we are introduced to the casualties of freedom including Egyptian Greeks who had been
expelled from Egyptian Greeks who had been expelled from Egypt and the „tramp‟, an Englishman, who from a
distance looks like a romantic wanderer of an earlier generation‟ but who is in reality an impoverished, old man,
alone and rightly afraid of others. He easily take on a representative quality, representative of the loss of
European, especially British privileges after the withdrawal of imperial power, the end of generations of
romantic travel as the world becomes more dangerous without protection. He is also in his potential of being a
victim typical of those alone, those without wealth, status, a group to protect them. He begins looking for
company and brags to a co passenger, a Yougoslavian youth on Greek steamer, crossing from Piraeus to
Alexandria: “I‟ve been to Egypt six or seven times. Gone around the worldabout a dozen of times. . . .I‟ve been
traveling for thirty eight year. . . . Between you and me, there is a cut above the Australians. But what‟s
979 | P a g e
nationality these days? I, myself, I think myself as a citizen of the world” (3). Such reporting of conversation is
common to Nainpaul‟s journalism and increasingly to his fiction as is the author‟s intervention to offer an
interpretation: „He had not wanted a company; he wanted only the camouflage and protection of company. The
tramp knew he was odd‟ (4). He is also rather vain, another of Nainpaul‟s pathetic rebels, who lacking the
means to be truly free, needed to assert himself against others and thus attract victimization, Nainpaul with his
sense of self protection „feared to be involved with him‟.
Next we are introduced to a group consisting of Lebanese, Egyptians and Germans, which „had its own
cohesion‟. It is unclear exactly what the tramp did (possibly he was seasick or had trouble with his bowls), but
soon a Lebanese who shared his cabin threatens to kill the tramp. Here we learn that in this supposedly
international world people are still associated with their nationality: „the man from Beirut‟, „the Egyptian
student‟, the English pig‟. Only Hans, „the Austrian boy‟, has got a name. We also observe that the prologue
itself is ordered into distinct pats marked by additional space on the page after each part. The first section
concludes:‟ the tramp knew he was odd‟. The second ends with „I feared to be involved with him. Far below, the
Greek refugees sat or lay in the sun‟ (12)
Each section is rounded or breaks off, as a short story in itself, with a striking phrase or description: looking like
a man who had been made very angry.‟ The fourth section opens with the striking abrupt „I will kill him‟ (13)
and concludes with „he was finished‟. The final eight paragraphs of the fourth section begin with „The.‟ They
gain their cinema like force from a series of abrupt shots in which focus shifts back and forth between „the
Egyptian‟ and „The Tramp,‟ the latter undisturbed by the forger‟s annoyance at his presence. It was to be like a
tiger hunt, where bait is laid out and the hunter and spectators watch from the security of the platform.‟ The
notion and metaphor of life as hunting has become central of the Naipaul‟s view of the world, where the strong
detect weakness, a stray cut off from the herd is a victim, someone to rob, enslave, coerce, and play with as apt
example of poor tramp. The innocent, old and wretched English tramp is the protagonist who represents the
dilemma and plight of modern man. He happens to be not only a globetrotter but an authentic witness to the
degenerating human values too. The same tramp was made a laughing stock and brutally assaulted by two of the
Lebanese and Hans, an Austrian bully. The incident was passively witnessed by the people on board. He cried
for help but no one came forward.
We are reminded of the fact that old roles have become dangerous as power has changed and order is unstable.
The ship in the prologue is symbolic of this new disorder where relationships, identity, dignity, depend on what
one achieves by one‟s own means or by the group to which one belongs. No one really governs; the law is the
law of jungle. The tramp, however, refuses to accept being victimized; he becomes a dangerous trapped tiger
and salvages victory and a kind of dignity from the situation. He is humiliated and in danger, but he makes it too
dangerous for his hunters to make the kill and they are the ones who suffer most. He is mishandled, brutally
thrown to the ground and on one helps him. The story reveals that he has locked himself in one of the cabin
lavatories and skipped his lunch too. He threatens to set ablaze the cabin if the tormentors try to enter. The
hunters back off and have to spend the night sleeping in the dining room. Ironically, once the ship docks at the
end of the journey in Alexandria, all the groupings and power equations change: “Long before the immigration
officials came on board we queued to meet them. Germans detached themselves from Arabs, Hans from
Lebanese, the Lebanese from Spanish girls. . . . Hans mountainous with his own rucksack, saw him and did not
980 | P a g e
see him. The Lebanese, shaved and rested after night in the dining room, didn‟t see him. That passion was over”
(13-14).
Finally, the frightened tramp reappears and there is no nervousness in his movements. But no one now interested
in hunting him. The tramp represents the dangers of being in Free State and could be said to show the
consequences of rebellion, both its dangers—dangers which will continue in future—and the way the ship
shows as to how groups from and change, how people use others. The ending lines portray the ultimate truth that
parochial feelings and hate for others is not a stable trait of mankind. In fact, the author himself did not intend to
put it in that way. He lifts the argument above and beyond geographical circumstances, beyond material success
and social position (4). The emotions of jealousy, hate and anger are self-destructing passions and they are led
by our pretensions and have not substantial value. It all highlights the fact that majority of the people are
opportunists, self-centered, shortsighted and lead their dubious life based on certain weak principles. What the
author is saying that neither customs,colour nor culture seem able to quiet that impulse to destruction, that
murderous wantonness that is so much part of our psychological makeup.
„One out of Many‟ (15-53) is the first of the three stories and the most distinctive piece in the collection. The
bitter-taste humour makes the reader laugh first and immediately feel guilty of himself. The title signifies the
loss of one‟s own identity and thus becomingapart of crowd or one out of many. Most importantly, the
protagonist, Santosh, like many others is bound to follow the diktats of the face and make sad compromise in a
desperate bid to assert himself in one way or another by taking a decision to leave one‟s home, culture and
comfort, the excited transition to a brave new world.
It eloquently chronicles the protagonist‟s journey to a new life in the United States. Here, the journey of
Santhosh, and immigrant landing in the United States for the first time begins long before he sees the statue of
liberty and ends long after he qualifies for his first passport. He is a poorly-educated servant to a diplomat,
andNainpaul beautifully relates his home, his culture, and his community. Santhosh leaves India with his master
to go to Washington D.C., in search, as we all are, of opportunities and of the land of plenty. However, this
journey not only destroys his painful idealism but also raises important questions about identity, both cultural
and personal. The opening lines of the story narrate: “I AM NOW an American citizen and I live in Washington,
capital of the world. Many people, both here and India, will feel that I have done well. But….(15).
The narrator realizes the futility of his adventure to land on American soil. He feels that many people could now
rate him as a successful and triumphant person but only he knows exactly the gravity of the blunder he had
made. While narrating his own story, Santosh becomes nostalgic and his broodings continue and he laments on
having no real alternative at home. All the identity and income he has had so far are only due to his connection
as a servant with his employer. He dare not return to his hometown and work as a coolie to run his family. His
feelings are palpable in the following textual lines: Observes the workings of the fate. The respect and the
security I enjoyed was due to the importance of my employer….I saw myself having returned to my village in
hills, to my wife and children there, not just for a holiday but for good. I saw myself becoming a porter again
during the tourist season, racing after the buses as they arrived art the station and shouting with forty of fifty
others for luggage (16).
981 | P a g e
The problem is further compounded by the fact that Santosh and his employer are made to suffer abominably on
account of poor value of Indian currency in America. Santosh lives almost in a cupboard and inadvertently
blows several weeks salary just buying a snack. He is shown highly concerned about his pocket: “But I had been
thinking in rupees and paying in dollars. In less than an hour I had spent nine days‟ pay” (26). His life has
become far removed from reality. He has a sinking feeling of suffocation and artificiality. Everything he finds
unreal and sorrowful. Artificial line and the make-believe world are very much part of his life in
thatWashington‟s cramped apartment: “The illuminated ceiling was decorated with stars of different sizes; the
colors were grey and blue and gold. Below the imitation sky I felt like a prisoner” (21). Ironically, his master too
has developed a streak of affectation and he expectes a great deal of transformation on the part of Santosh.
Some unrealistic burden is forced upon Santosh to crush his individuality as his employer suggests: “Santosh, in
Bombay, it didn‟t matter what you did. Over here you represent your country….Look at it like this, Santosh.
Over here you don‟t only represent your country, you represent me” (20).
Later on he gets to meet a restaurant proprietor who offers him an apparent fortune as a salary. sohe works for
him and deserts the former employer. Under the circumstances he is haunted by the fear that his master will find
him out and, being an illegal migrant to America, he will be deported to India. He feels burdened by his secrets.
Once he had none; now he has so many. Fortunately, the situation is salvaged by him on the advice of new
master, Priya, by means of getting married to the Negro woman whom he had once seduced and avoided for
long out of shame at his behavior.The story further reveals that Santosh, ill-educated, painfully naïve to
American ways, learns much about the United States, befriending a black woman, experiencing the Washington
race riots, and sadly, becoming more and more alienated from this world he thought he would embrace so
perfectly. The narrator‟s views on Negroes are loaded with prejudice and a sense of guilt: “It is written on our
books, both holy and not so holy, that it is decent and wrong for a man of our blood to embrace a hubshi
woman. To be dishonored in this life, to be born as a cat or monkey or a hubshi in next!” (29) The contrast of
Indian society with the American way of life leaves Santosh alienated, but also presents to the reader the
dilemma of cross-culture assimilation. Should one assimilate into a different culture? Is it possible to truly
accept yourself when you identity depends on a community thousands of miles away?
In view of many critics, „One out of Many‟ is not an overgeneralization and never tries to represent an entire
immigrant population, nor does it makes a political statement in that explicit sense. It‟s simply the story of
Santosh, his journey, what he finds and does not find, in the land or riches, in America. Nevertheless, it is akin
to the life of many illegal immigrants sneaking into foreign countries, facing innumerable hassles. It would not
be an exaggeration if we declare that the novel written in 1971 was very relevant to the contemporary world and
it has become even more relevant in modern times. Hence, the story, though of an individuals has got a
universal and timeless appeal. The author once again underlines the fact that every thing is in disarray or
anarchy or Free State Where individuals are mere numbers or „one out of many‟.In the philosophical sense, we
find that the story is a beautiful portrayal of conflict between the Will to assert and Submission before fate, and
a unique touch of Hindu philosophy towards life. The freedom or Free State acquires a different meaning
altogether when he says: “Then I looked in the mirror and decide to be free. All that freedom has brought me is
the knowledge that I have a face and body, that I must feed this body and clothe this body for a certain humber
of years.
Then it will be over” (53). The ending of the story bears a close resemblance to the previous one
982 | P a g e
where the rage and hostility towards an English tramp is portrayed as a passion, and finally all the things fall
into insignificance and the emotion of detachment descends upon fellow travelers lebelled with multiple
nationalities. The protagonist, Santosh, is free to follow his dreams but crowded by harsh realities all around.
We find the quote of J.J. Rousseau quite apt to the context that reads, „The man is born free but everywhere he is
in chains‟.
Tell Me Who to Kill‟ (54-98) is the second story in the book which continues to highlight the same leitmotif,
i.e., alienation where emotional weight is carried by strangers to foreign lands and a cultural anomie galore. In
this story, we have benevolent and tyrannical Indian brother on the verge of fighting to maintain the old culture.
The narrator‟s conscience is ceaselessly flooded by varying emotions. The inner landscape keeps on changing
quite rapidly. At the outset, the narrator is found depressed by his own state but he hates to witness the
recurrence of the same with his younger brother, Dayo. He wants to see him a professional. He is wailing to
sacrifice his own comforts for his happiness.
„I don‟t care about myself. I have no life.‟ (57)
„Ordinary for me but for my brother it was not going to be like that.‟(60)
The narrator also laments over the fact that there is a wide chasm between the lifestyle of rich and poor people.
However, soon he becomes philosophical and he take it in his own stride as a fatalist would have done: “We all
come out of the same pot, but some people move ahead and some people get left behind. Some people get left
behind so far they don‟t know and they stop caring” (60). Further, it is learnt that the elder brother is more
sensitive and responsible. He knows quite clearly the value of education and is ready to shoulder the
responsibility as the head of the family, though being the fourth child and second son of his illiterate parents. He
is highly critical of the newly rich people, like his uncle‟s family, who do not like other people to rise in life. His
brother, Dayo studies at Uncle Stephen‟s home where the nephew and nieces are inimical towards him. The bias
and fragility of relations is further highlighted thus” “Stephen‟s family don‟t give Dayo any credit for learning,
but I can see how much the boy improve on two years and how he develop a new wayof talking” (70).Dayo is
sent to England and the brother anxious about his progress in Aeronautical Engineering course. However, the
narrator is disheartened to note that all his ambitions and sacrifice have been rendered useless by the causal
attitude of Dayo towards studies. The smart labourer boy now smokes only good cigarettes. The narrator is
crestfallen and utterly frustrated as his words suggest to us: “I too have nowhere to go and I walk now, like
Dayo, where the tourists walk.” (91) “All afternoon as I walk feel I like a free man. I scorn everything I See and
when I tire myself out with walking, and the afternoon gone, I still scorn. I scorn the bus, the conductor, the
street” (92). He has malice towards one and all, and painfully enough are unable to locate and determine the real
enemy. His confusion and frustration is reflected thus: “Who hurt me? Who spoil my life? Tell me who to bear
back…Tell me who to kill” (98).
Finally, the narrator resigns and the conflict between Eros and Thanatosis resolved where Thanatos prevails
over Erosand the narrator resigns before fate and remarks: “And for all this time I am dead man. I have my own
place to go back to. Frank will take me there when this is over” (98).
983 | P a g e
Hence, the story leaves us in a gloomy mood. The story highlights the fact hat individual aspirations, no matter
how genuine they are, matter little in the present superstructure of society and global order. Freedom is only a
mirage and an unattainable goal for mankind. So, the title In a Free Stateagain proves to be ironical.
„In A Free State‟(99-239) happens to be the longest as well as the title story of the book. It is about the newly
independent African country where two of the local tribes, i.e. Flemings and Walloons, are at war against each
other. The situation is chaotic and alarming for natives and foreigners alike. The opening of the story is thus: “In
this country in Africa there was a president and there was also a king. They belonged to different tribes. The
enmity of the tribes was old, and with independence their anxieties about another became acute. The king and
the president intrigued with the local representatives of white governments” (99). This story in the book exactly
describes the rapid deterioration that occurred in Africa after colonial rule ended. Bobby and Linda are among
the last Europeans in Africa who attempt to save themselves from prevailing danger and chaos while moving by
road towards their compound located far away. Bobby and Linda‟s husband are English and are working for the
Ugandan king as technical advisor for radio communication. They are both very interesting characters. Bobby is
blind to anything negative about Africa and remarks that Africa has saved him and given a cause for life. On the
other hand, Linda gives the impression that Africa ruined her life and already sizes up the situation as dangerous
and hopeless. As a whole, the contemporary times are so bad that life means nothing and people mean nothing
to anyone. Human life has gone to insignificance and futility.
Despondency looms large over the horizon. Bobby‟s reaction to Linda‟s snobbishness tells it all when he says:
„There are millions like you. And millions like Martin. You are nothing‟ (220). Ideally, the army is expected to
play the role of a peace maker. However, the role of the army is dubious and partisan where logic and
accountability lacks in their deeds. Their unprofessional approach promotes instability instead of restoring
peace, law and order in the disturbed areas. The following lines indicate the role of the army in a bad light:
Carter says there‟s a four o‟ clock curfew in the southern collectorate, Bobby. The army‟s rampaging somewhat
apparently. That‟s what African armies are for,‟ Carter said.‟ They are intended for civilian use.‟(131)”
“Army is one move this morning‟, the colonel said. „Not a time to be on road, when our army is no move. I
always give them a wide berth myself. (199)
“If you run into the army, play dead. (203 & 227)”
It is on wonder then that Bobby brutally thrashed by the army men. His wrists are crushed and fractured under
boots. Somehow he escapes and moves along. He also observes that the villages are burnt down and roads
continue to be empty. The story clearly displays the fact that Bobby and Linda possess same prejudices about
Africa but Linda is open about it whereas Bobby hides it under a veneer of patronizing tolerance. He is
representative of „White Man‟s Burden‟ theory, In fact, he wants to pose himself as neutral and a wisher of
illiterate Africans but at the same time wants to enjoy the privileged status among them. Amidst such a chaos,
irrespective of their nationality, motives, leanings and prejudices, the people are swept away by the irreversible
torrent of rage, violence and anarchy in that African country.The story beautifully portrays the conflict between
the human aspirations and failings, yearnings for independence versus subjugating others. In a philosophical
984 | P a g e
sense, the story is representative of inherent conflict faces by an individual, state and society. Hence, its
universal appeal makes it a monumental work to study and meditate.
„Epilogue from a Journal: The Circus at Luxor‟ (240-247) is the concluding section of the novel. The author
declares in the opening of the epilogue that he was going to Egypt, this time by air, and he broke his journey at
Milan for certain business reasons. Thereafter, he left for Egypt and observed the Chinese circus at Luxor.
However, the most important episode in the epilogue happens to be the hotel scene wherein the Egyptian boys
are whipped and they are experimentally and repeatedly mocked at by the affluent and mischievous group of
Italians. Here we find that the story which began with a tramp and the author‟s journey towards Egypt is again
continued by air via Milan to Egypt and thus comes a full circle. The theme of the better-off being mere
spectators of events and a sport is repeated in the Epilogue. in the Prologue, Naipaul is a watcher, the writer as
an uncommitted observer of the lives of others; someone who regardless of how he feels will not get involved.
However, in the Epilogue, when her risks commitment, grabs the whip, upbraids the Egyptian whose job is to
use the whip to keep the restaurant free from beggars, he is seen as a foolish foreigner, someone emotionally
disturbed, and who can do nothing to change the local society, the tourists and they ways of the world.
And Still, among the tourists in the rest-house and among the Egyptian drivers standing about their cars and
minibuses, there is no disturbance. Only the man with the whip and the children scrabbling in the sand are
frantic. The Italians are cool. The man is cerise jersey is opening another packet of sandwiches (244).It reminds
the author of the tragic incident happening with old English tramp at Piraes. He intervenes and takes the camelwhip from the man and throws it on the sand. The author shout angrily that he will report the matter to Cairo,
but there is little reaction from onlookers including the car driver hired by the author, only the whip-man pleads
for mercy, in Arabic. The callousness of the people is a setback for the author. On this his statement is: “I felt
exposed, futile, and wanted only to be back at my table. When I got back I took up my sandwich. It had
happened quickly; there had been no disturbance” (245). The incident not only portrays the indifference and
callousness of the people towards others but also highlights the fact that the tendency for rebellion for a noble
cause is fact becoming an obsolete thing. A majority of the people are blind to the fact that they too could have a
similar fate. Many of them are ingenious and therefore remain in a heard to remain safe. The story is not meant
for any individual specific; rather, it has many posers that are of universal value and relevance for modern
mankind. Quite aptly, Naipaul acts a modern philosopher who exposes the fragilities of human nature in a
universal sense.
The novel has surely served it purpose well as intended by the author. It raises certain basic issues concerning
mankind and all the characters populating the novel are shown aspiring to attain freedom despite all pervasive
chaos and despondency As a result the modern chaos is palpable that the plight of uprooted former colonial
becomes a metaphor for modern restlessness, and homelessness and exile are perceived as a contemporary state
of mind, afflicting all. To be in a free state is thus to be abroad and adrift in modern world. (5) It also highlights
the plight of Indian Diaspora around the world. The struggle against all odds is symbolic of indomitable human
spirit. The tramp, the author, and Bobby are representatives of this phenomenon. Though the novel has dark
theme yet it provokes u to revolt, move forward and se the things in order. As far as the writing technique is
concerned, Naipaul‟s writing craft is flawless and beautiful. He has an eye for detail and sequential description
rendered by him makes the scenes and events vivid before us like a kaleidoscope.
985 | P a g e
To Sum up, It can be said that from the Plot point of view, in the strictest Aristotelian sense, In A Free State
there is hardly meets the parameters of a novel because it has neither a proper beginning, middle and end nor the
unity of time, place and action. Rather, its loose and episode plot lends it a touch of piquaresque novel. To be
precise, we can state that it is a novel only in the nominal sense but actually happens to be a collection of short
stories. The critics could have easily termed it an artistic failure. However, the author must be credited for his
genius who, despite so many handicaps, makes use of multiple stories to present a more balanced perspective
than a straightforward novel would have allowed. The subject is the one he has made his own and his prose is up
to its usual high standard. There could be little surprise when it won the 1971 Booker Prize, and the novel is
counted among the best modern classics.
Work Cited
1.
King, Bruce. Modern Novelists: V.S Naipaul. London: Macmillan, 1993. Print.
2.
Lask, Thomas. Where is the Enemy Web. 25 December 1971. Http. nytimes.com/books/…/naipualfree.html.
3.
Naipaul, V.S. In a Free State. London: Picador, 2001. Print. All the citations are quoted from the same
edition.
4.
Walsh, William. V.S. Naipaul. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1973. Print.
5.
Chandra B. Joshi. V.S. Naipaul: The Voice of Exile (New Delhi: Sterling, 1994) print.
986 | P a g e