Naipul, Turner, and Gauguin

I just tried to read an ObWi post by Dr. Science about V.S. Naipul, but couldn't get through it.

Dr. Science begins by extolling the opinions of Hilzoy -- whose opinions normally deserve much respect -- and Ta-Nehisi Coates -- whose opinions, well, . . . .

Dr. Science then goes on to disagree with Hilzoy and Coates, both of whom say that Naipul's "gorgeous" writing mean he deserves to be read, despite the fact that he's a blatant misogynist. Dr. Science, (I think -- as I said, I couldn't finish the piece) doesn't dispute the "gorgeous" writing, but he (?) finds the misogyny more than he (?) can stomach.

Baloney.

How about -- contrary to the opinion of Hilzoy, Coates, Dr. Science, and most of the rest of the English speaking world -- Naipul is not worth reading because he's not a "gorgeous" writer. In fact, he's not even very interesting.

Though I didn't finish reading the post, I'm glad I checked it out. In fact the only reason I'm mentioning it is because the illustrations were excellent. Especially, the spectacular Turner painting and the one "in the style of Gauguin":