This essay illustrates a “negative cosmopolitanism” in V. S. Naipaul’s work. Both defenders and critics of cosmopolitanism readily identify the concept with the European philosophical tradition. Arguing that European thinkers do not have a patent on cosmopolitanism, I contend that the anomalies, dissonances, and ruptures that define colonial modernity can open up a “negative cosmopolitanism,” which locates the potential for ethical engagement in what seems like the waste products of history. For Naipaul, cosmopolitanism designates not a volitional, character-strengthening endeavor but, rather, a painful process of self-negation. Traversing a world profoundly shaped by colonialism, the writer and his characters are at a loss to make sense of their historical lineage and their place in a rapidly changing landscape. Through a reading of The Loss of El Dorado (1969) and A Bend in the River (1979), I demonstrate that it is finally the failure of connection or solidarity that motivates Naipaul’s attentiveness to the other.

You do not currently have access to this content.