I came to this book much as Naipaul came to the South, curious and eager to see what was in store for me. I think both of us were surprised. I was surprised that someone as worldly as I think Naipaul is would begin a turn in the South expecting racial disharmony and faceoffs. I think he was surprised to find, by talking to many people black and white, that this isn't so and also that religion is a robust influence there. He doesn't say he was going to see the black South. He explains he'd never been there and wanted to visit. He states early on that he began his trip without a focus, a direction or theme to investigate. My impression, however, is that he seems to have begun with some preconceived ideas, especially about the give and take between the races. I believe the fact that he made Tuskegee Institute in Alabama a dedicated destination points directly to his interest in the race issue. To me it's not as true a picture of Alabama as Birmingham would be or, say, Montgomery or maybe Selma. All three would provide the accurate perspectives on race a relative backwater like Tuskegee wouldn't. He did mention visting Huntsville in Alabama, but it's not truly representative, either. Knowing this about Alabama, I began to be conscious of the double deception this kind of traveling investigation allows. Those he interviewed knew who he was and that maybe he'd use what they had to say and also that Naipaul himself chose what to include. Because the South is steeped in race, he never gets very far away from it. But gradually he begins to realize what a powerful force religion is in the region. And there's a wonderful chapter on Nashville and music, though he seems to have put too much importance on the traditional country music of earlier decades, not realizing the music's changing faster than clogging feet. And in North Carolina he spends the final chapter visiting the old tobacco culture. It's especially there and in Mississippi that he saw the "immense Southern past" we carry in us and the importance of memory and the ties to previous generations. He wisely doesn't try to describe this but records the words of those he interviewed. Yet he maybe finds that the myths of the South and the myth of the Lost Cause and the worship of defeat and the loss of the world before the Civil War isn't apparent anymore. You can find them, find those perspectives if you want to. Then you can write about them. What you do is enter the South with these preconceived notions already in place so that you're ready to see them. I sound as if I don't like the book, but I do. I like it a lot. It's terribly interesting, especially to a Southerner, what someone unfamiliar with the region and culture will think. It's a wonderful book full of intelligent observations. I don't agree with everything he says and wish he hadn't toured with some of his wisdom already received. It's also important to keep in mind the trip and book date from the late 1980s, a long time ago in this age of information. It also predates the huge Hispanic influx, a rush of culture that has deeply changed and continues to change the South. Some things he gets absolutely right. At the beginning of Chapter 7 is a section in which he writes about the oppressive summer heat and the brief relief a thunderstorm provides. It may be the best writing in a book very well written. That was the preconceived notion I brought to the book, that Naipaul's prose would flow like magic. It does.
I've long admired Naipaul's prose and the keen observational ability he brings to his travel writing. This book from the late 1980's is about a few months spent in the American South, traveling through the Carolinas, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee. This was at a time when the "New South" was emerging and the generations of the Civil Rights struggle were still around. Naipaul covers these trends, mostly through a series of interviews that include politicians, preachers, teachers, farmers, poets, and a number of ordinary people both black and white.As an Indian raised in Trinidad but thoroughly British, he floats through these communities in ways that someone more obviously either black or white would not have. He writes with a deep curiosity and desire to understand everyone. Most interesting in this regard are his efforts to understand "rednecks."He realizes early in the trip that the American southeast has many similarities to Trinidad and the Caribbean culture he was raised in. This is not something I seen brought to such clarity before. It is his opinion that the great difference between the South and the islands is that when slavery ended in the islands that the white planter class mostly departed, returning to Europe, which allowed the island cultures to develop black leadership much earlier. Also, the American South had an entire class of poor and working class whites which were largely absent in the islands. This had set up an on-going conflict between poor whites and poor blacks for limited resources, especially as the agricultural economy that had sustained the region was collapsing.Naipaul also traveled in Muslim countries, trying to understand the religion and its adherents. I've read and deeply admired one of those books. He begins to realize on this trip that the fundamentalism of the American South also has many points of similarity to Islamic fundamentalism. I doubt many were making this connection in the 1980's. Overall the book is not as well-structured as some of his others (There seems to be too much material). And some of the observations are, of course, now dated. But I also enjoyed seeing this familiar region through different eyes.
Do You like book A Turn In The South (2003)?
Thoroughly enjoyed this book and appreciated Naipul's approach as well. He speaks to people in different parts of the South in an earnest and honest effort to better understand what makes the south The South. He's curious about racism, religion, red necks, politics, music, the Klu Klux Klan, the Civil War, the Civil Rights Movement, plantations, slavery, economics and how they all come together. As an author, he is conscious of needing to continually ask new questions. He wants to get beneath the surface story and gear what his interviewees have to share. He reflects often on the similarities and differences between the experience of blacks in the South and his own. Naipul is an Indian from Trimidad, these moments are enlightening and perhaps the highlights of the book. I'm happy to have come to this book twenty years after my family first moved to the South and ten years after leaving it. It was an illuminating read.
—Christine
This wasn't in any way the book I expected to read when I picked it up -- but that didn't make it any less interesting (and, sadly, occasionally boring; this was a very complex book! *grin*). A fascinating look at race and religion -- as seen by Trinidadian Naipaul -- in the late 80s. Not the "Southern culture" books I'm used to reading, but, once you've slogged through the chapters about Tallahassee and Tuskegee (which were the weakest, least interesting bits, unfortunately), an overall compelling read.
—A.
My husband, who loves all things Naipaul, has been recommending this for a while. I've been dragging my feet because Naipaul novels haven't grabbed me. PLUS, my spouse and I tend not to cross over on favorite living authors. I'm about 1/3 of the way into this and am loving it. Naipaul's experiences/observations about the South, it's history, legacy, character are excellent. He has an outsider's (non-US born) view and relates some of his encounters back to the social/racial strata in his native Trinidad, as well as South America, which is a refreshing change from a European centered reference point. Can't wait to get back to it. I finished this quite a while ago...can't remember when. Not so good at updating status here....
—Kathi
