The Reluctant Fundamentalist

Shortlisted for the Man Booker Prize 2007. What I really want to know is, what other lousy books were considered for the Booker Prize in 2007, that this one managed to get shortlisted.

It’s not that the book is completely rubbish. It’s actually interesting till about half way. My problems - well I hate the narration style employed by the author (one way conversation with a US tourist, perhaps). Every time he refers to America as Your Country, it’s just aargh.

There are references to India (attacks on the parliament). These are just sad. When did India provoke Pakistan, does anyone seem to recall that? I sure as hell don’t. India the aggressor! damn, I have been waiting for about 20 years for India to be an aggressive force for something.. anything. I am surprised that Mohsin Hamid managed to notice the moment India became an aggressor and interestingly enough the rest of the world missed that eventful day / moment.

The long stretched out talks about Erica. Erica this, Erica that. Chris (Erica’s dead boyfriend) bla bla bla. Not that I had a problem with it. I was just wondering what the hell does this have to do with the story? It would have made a great sub-plot but given the amount he yaps about Erica and the relationship, this seems like it was the only plot. If he didn’t yap so much, the book wouldn’t have been even the 184 pages that it is right now.

The love-making episode where Changez tells Erica to pretend that he (Changez) is Chris, boy that was horrible. There is a difference between kinky role-playing and absurd nonsense – my view.