Unmasking Coloniality

Perspective by Incongruity in Naipaul’s Miguel Street

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25159/1753-5387/19079

Keywords:

perspective by incongruity, coloniality of being, decoloniality, Miguel Street, V.S. Naipaul

Abstract

Various debates and contradictions characterise the life and fiction of Sir Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul. While many critics view Naipaul as a prominent figure who perpetuates colonial narratives through his literary oeuvre, this article proposes an alternative perspective, particularly in the context of Miguel Street. To deviate from the lens of colonial racism and clichés, this article employs Kenneth Burke’s concept of “perspective by incongruity” as an alternative reading of the text. In so doing, Miguel Street is thus interpreted as a collection of short stories that unveil the coloniality of existence within Trinidad’s flawed modernity. Perspective by incongruity is a rhetorical resource that unmasks coloniality’s inhumanity by subverting and challenging known pieties in the novel. This article demonstrates how Naipaul uses character portrayals to shock the audience to the tragedy of humanity under coloniality, thus connecting the text to broader social and political realities. Arguably, the success of Miguel Street lies in violating the audience’s expectations and introducing ambiguity into their perceptions. Naipaul inadvertently assumes the metaphorical role of an evangelist who asks the audience to alter their orientations and give them new meanings. As such, the article examines Burke’s rhetorical tool of perspective by incongruity as an alternative lens in interpreting the short stories without seeking to sanitise Naipaul’s debatable legacy.

References

Achebe, C. 1965. English and the African Writer. London: Heinemann Books. https://doi.org/10.2307/2934835. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2934835

Achebe, A. 1966. “The Burden of the Black Writer.” Presence Africaine 21 (59): 135–140. https://doi.org/10.3917/presa.059.0142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/presa.059.0142

Achebe, A. 1988. Hopes and Impediments. New York: Doubleday.

Achebe, C. 2001. Home and Exile. New York: Anchor Books.

Balfour, R. 2010. “Home as Postcolonial Trope in the Fiction of V.S. Naipaul.” Journal of Literary Studies 26 (3): 16–33. https://unisapressjournals.co.za/index.php/jls/article/view/14978. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02564718.2010.495492

Burke, K. 1935. Permanence and Change: An Anatomy of Purpose. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Burke, K. 1954. Permanence and Change: An Anatomy of Purpose. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Cudjoe, S. R. 1988. V. S. Naipaul: A Materialist Reading. Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts Press.

Dabashi, H. 2018. “VS Naipaul: Colonialism in Fact, Fiction, and the Flesh.” Aljazeera, August 13. Accessed June 17, 2020. https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/naipaul-colonialism-fact-fiction-flesh-180813114051602.html.

Dussel, E. D. 2013. Ethics of Liberation: In the Age of Globalization and Exclusion. Durham: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1131d8k. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1131d8k

Eastly, A. 2008. “Naipaul’s Children: Representations of Humor and Ruin in Miguel Street.” Journal of Caribbean Literatures 5 (2): 47–59. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7702&context=facpub.

Fanon, F. 1952. Black Skin, White Masks. London: Pluto Press.

Fanon, F. 1963. The Wretched of the Earth. New York: Grove Weidenfeld.

Fanon, F. 1964. Toward the African Revolution. New York: Grove Press.

Foss, S. K. 1979. “Feminism Confront Catholicism: A Study of the Use of Perspective by Incongruity.” Women’s Studies in Communication 3 (1): 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.1979.11089628. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.1979.11089628

Gikandi, S. 1991. Reading Chinua Achebe: Language and Ideology in Fiction. London: James Currey.

Gordon, L. R. 2007. “Through the Hellish Zone of Nonbeing: Thinking through Fanon, Disaster, and the Damned of the Earth.” In “Reflections on Fanon: Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Social Theory Forum; The Violences of Colonialism and Racism, Inner and Global—Conversations with Frantz Fanon on the Meaning of Human Emancipation,” special issue, Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge 5: 5–12. https://www.okcir.com/product/journal-article-through-the-hellish-zone-of-nonbeing-thinking-through-fanon-disaster-and-the-damned-of-the-earth-by-lewis-r-gordon/.

Gordon, L. R. 2010. “Theory in Black: Teleological Suspensions in Philosophy of Culture.” Qui Parle: Critical Humanities and Social Sciences 18 (2): 193–214. https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.18.2.193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.18.2.193

Grosfoguel, R. 2007. “The Epistemic Decolonial Turn: Beyond Political Economy Paradigms.” Cultural Studies 21 (2/3): 203–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601162514. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601162514

Grosfoguel, R. 2011. “Decolonizing Post-Colonial Studies and Paradigms of Political-Economy: Transmodernity, Decolonial Thinking, and Global Coloniality.” Transmodernity: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World 1 (1). https://doi.org/10.5070/T411000004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5070/T411000004

Grosfoguel, R. 2012. “Decolonising Western Uni-versalisms: Decolonial Pluri-versalism from Aimé Césaire to the Zapatistas.” Transmodernity: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World 1 (3): 88–104. https://doi.org/10.5070/T413012884. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5070/T413012884

Huggan, G. 1994. “V. S. Naipaul and the Political Correctness Debate.” College Literature 21 (3): 200–206.

Hughes, S. H. 1958. Consciousness and Society: The Reorientation of European Social Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

JanMohamed, A. R. 1985. “The Economy of Manichean Allegory: The Function of Racial Difference in Colonialist Literature.” Critical Inquiry 12 (1): 59–87. https://doi.org/10.1086/448321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/448321

Kaur, K. 2023. “Post-Colonial Review of V. S. Naipaul’s Fiction.” Indian Journal of Management and Language 3 (1): 1–5. https://doi.org/10.54105/ijml.A2052.043123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54105/ijml.A2052.043123

Lagji, A. 2021. “Colonial Clowns? The Tragicomedy of V. S. Naipaul’s Miguel Street.” Pacific Coast Philology 56 (2): 211–223. https://doi.org/10.5325/pacicoasphil.56.2.0211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5325/pacicoasphil.56.2.0211

Maldonado-Torres, N. 2007. “On the Coloniality of Being: Contributions to the Development of a Concept.” Cultural Studies 21 (2–3): 240–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601162548. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601162548

Mignolo, W. D. 2013. “Introduction: Coloniality of Power and De-colonial Thinking.” In Globalization and the Decolonial Option, edited by Walter D. Mignolo and Arturo Escobar, 1–21. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315868448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315868448

Naipaul, V. S. 1959. Miguel Street. London: Andre Deutsch.

Naipaul, V. S. 2001. The Middle Passage. London: Picador.

Ogungbesan, K. 1974. “Politics and the African Writer.” African Studies Review 17 (1): 43–53. https://doi.org/10.2307/523576. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/523576

Said, E. 1978. Orientalism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Selby, G. 2002. “Mocking the Sacred: Frederick Douglass’s ‘Slaveholder’s Sermon’ and the Antebellum Debate over Religion and Slavery.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 88 (3): 326–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630209384380. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630209384380

Shilliam, R. 2015. The Black Pacific: Anti-colonial Struggles and Oceanic Connections. London: Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474218788. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474218788

Slemon, S. 1987. “Monuments of Empire: Allegory/Counter-Discourse/Post-Colonial Writing.” Kunapi 9 (3): 1–16. https://ro.uow.edu.au/kunapipi/vol9/iss3/3.

Swidene, P., ed. 1984. The English Novel of History and Society, 1940–80: Richard Hughes, Henry Green, Anthony Powell, Angus Wilson, Kingsley Amis, V. S. Naipaul. Studies in 20th Century Literature. London: The Macmillan Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-17512-3_6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-17512-3_6

Thieme, J. 1981. “Calypso Allusions in Naipaul’s Miguel Street.” Kunapipi 3 (2): 18–32. https://ro.uow.edu.au/kunapipi/vol3/iss2/5.

Tirivangana, A. 2015. “An African-Centred Critique of Miguel Street.” Accessed June 2, 2019. https://www.thepatriot.co.zw/old_posts/an-africa-centred-critique-of-miguel-street-part-two-a-critical-analysis-of-the-setting-and-narrative-structure/.

Stavans, I., ed. 1999. Mutual Impressions: Writers from the Americas Reading One Another. Durham: Duke University Press

Waisanen, D. J. 2009. “A Citizen’s Guide to Democracy in Action: Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert’s Comic Rhetorical Criticism.” Southern Journal of Communication 74 (2): 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10417940802428212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10417940802428212

wa Thiongʼo, N. 1997. Writers in Politics: A Re-engagement with Issues of Literature and Society. London: James Currey. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781800100527. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781800100527

Walsh, W. 1970. A Manifold Voice. London: Chatto and Windus.

Whedbee, K. 2001. “Perspective by Incongruity in Norman Thomas’s ‘Some Wrong Roads to Peace.’” Western Journal of Communication 65 (1): 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310109374691. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310109374691

Downloads

Published

2025-07-22

How to Cite

Sibanda, Brian. 2025. “Unmasking Coloniality: Perspective by Incongruity in Naipaul’s Miguel Street”. Journal of Literary Studies 41 (July):17 pages. https://doi.org/10.25159/1753-5387/19079.

Issue

Section

Articles