There are sections of insight where Naipaul gets out of the way (like the bit my wife — who is made of sterner stuff than I am — read out to me, a conversation between two Indians in the USA, in which Naipaul, perhaps unoriginally but with some subtlety brings out the unattractiveness of negative freedoms in the immigrant experience - particularly for unsuccessful, non-individualistic persons). But I have never found that suitable compensation for having to deal with the man for the bulk of it.
> From: "Bhaskar Sunkara" <bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com>
>
> Well, Naipaul is Trinidadian (in addition to being a prick and a
> reactionary) not Indian.
In fact one could say that Naipaul the man - and a good part of his writing - is animated predominantly by a need to demonstrate his ‘non Indian’ness.
I have no hesitation if recommending once again Sanjay Subrahmanyam in the LRB: http://l.ravi.be/hTfb3y.
—ravi