Falsification and authentication in r.k. Narayan’s the guide

Abstract

Though critics by consensus seem to agree with William Walsh that R.K. Narayan’s fastidious art blending exact realism, poetry, melancholy, perception and gaiety is without precedent in English literature, yet doubts persist about his sincerity and authenticity as a writer. For many, Narayan seldom rises above the average and the ordinary to come to terms with the complex human condition. Narayan achieves this, according to Kantak, by exclusion-by being able to say ‘no’ to inviting possibilities which a process of might prove snares to his art. He goes further to call it a triumph of self-denial. 2 contraries to Kantak’s assertion Narayan continues to write, almost in a spirit of playful self-affirmation, fictions that engage the readers almost everywhere. There is however some who see no innovation or progression on his art. A.N. Kaul, while recognizing his significance, feels that Narayan is not only an old world but also an old-fashioned writer, unconcerned with the literary experiments and innovations of modem times. These judgements are rooted in assumptions that fortify by now over-stated case for Narayan’s simplicity and naiveté. This tendency, wide and pervasive as it is, has prevented even well- meaning admirers of Narayan to have a second look at his work. The fusion of a self-affirming sincerity and a self-negating irony, apparently naïve and simple, is so perfect in his art that it tends to make any serious effort at critical evaluation irrelevant.