Vikas Swarup - Q&A

[Kell]

Q&A
Author: Vikas Swarup
ISBN # 055277250X
Publisher: Black Swan
First Published: 2005
381 pages

Eighteen-year-old Ram Mohammad Thomas is in prison after answering twelve questions correctly on a TV quiz show to win one billion rupees. The producers have arrested him, convinced that he has cheated his way to victory. Twelve extraordinary events in street-kid Ram’s life – how he was found in a dustbin by a priest; came to have three names; fooled a professional hit-man; even fell in love – give him the crucial answers…

I wasn’t convinced that this would be “my kind of book”, but I have never been happier to admit I was wrong. Q&A is both heart-warming and gripping story that takes the reader on a tag-along tour of Ram’s life whilst commenting on religious bigotry, child abuse, poverty, exploitation, espionage and Bollywood culture.

This is one of the most interesting and unusual novels I’ve read in a long time - well worth picking up if you’re looking for something out of the ordinary that explores deeper issues from a different angle.

There is talk of Q&A being adapted for the big screen and I, for one, would definitely go to see it.

Rating: 8

[Freewheeling Andy]

Ah-ha! Here's the review.

I'll just add my tuppence worth:

As Kell says, this is a really good book, all the more interesting for being a fun book with a basically optimistic positive message; and yet it covers some pretty grim ground. There's a brutality and shockingness to the India that appears in the book, yet the book is one of luck and good fortune and "things turning right in the end".

It's a bit Forrest Gump, which annoys me; and perhaps the overarching "everything turns out wonderful" side is irritating.

But it's easy to read, it's actually fun, and I kept wanting to read the next chapter.

The conceit is marvellous, too, as it allows the use of a fairly post-modern structure, flitting around with time, yet it's actually key to telling the story.

The very end, after the last question has been answered, does seem very simplistic, though, and could perhaps have been left more vague.