Midnight's Children is considered to be Rushdie's masterpiece; it won the Booker Prize, and then, in 1993, it won the 'Booker of Bookers', ie the best book to have won the Booker Prize in the first 25 years of the award. In addition to this, Rushdie's reputation is not built upon his literary merits so much as the surrounding controversy of another book, The Satanic Verses, which all but condemned him to years of hiding and constant moving about in an effort to escape fundamentalist Muslim assassination-attempts.
The premise for this novel is amazing. At the stroke of midnight on August 15th, 1947, India achieved independence and became a valid country, free from the shackles of Britain. One thousand and one children were born in the hour from midnight to 1am, one thousand and one children with magical powers, the potency of which increases the closer the child was born to midnight.
The narrator, Saleem Sinai, was one of two children born on the exact stroke of midnight, and throughout the novel various allusions to yin and yang, good and evil, up and down, et cetera are made between Saleem and Shiva, the other child, but unfortunately nothing really comes from this. Although mentioned often and with great vehemence on the part of the narrator, Shiva never really came across as a 'bad guy', or even someone that should be worried about at all.
The story meanders through thirty odd years of life before Saleem's birth, detailing the lives and idiosyncracies of his parent's and grandparent's adventures, which, admittedly, are described with great sweeping motions and tantalizing literary strokes. Sentences marvel, paragraphs sing with wit or beauty, but...what was the point? After Saleem is born, events take an incredibly epic turn, as the implications of the children of midnight are revealed, but then, the narrator just sort of forgets about it and rambles on about things that, given the immensely intruiging concept of the children, just doesn't spark any interest.
The narrator is an interesting writer. He repeats reiterates recapitulates words in threes, often, and that works. He used parentheses artfully, and well. But the narrator foreshadows everything and anything, so that we are always reading about events that will come to pass, soon or otherwise, and in cryptic ways, 'He kept himself in the background of our lives, always, except twice...once when he left us; once when he returned to destroy the world by accident'. It is an exceptionally annoying literary technique, serving only to make the reader wish that events would hurry up so that the portentous-sounding episodes will occur, but...even they are marred by fore-shadowing and never really live up to the promises, anyway.
The last one hundred and fifty pages drag, seemingly without cohesion, in an effort to combine the plot-threads, to actually make the children a part of the story - and, disappointingly, they really aren't very predominant - but it doesn't work. Then, in a whirlwind twenty pages, everything is tied up neatly, the children are dealt with, and the book ends. The fantastic premise never really lived up to its promise, and the book suffers.
Is Midnight's Children a failure? No. As a story, it is enjoyable, written well, and at times, beautiful. Certain passages are crafted with amazing skill, and the narrator is a pleasant enough fellow. But the concept of the midnight's children should have been ditched - the story would have worked well enough without them because they never really played a part - and the book would have been greater as the spectre of great things to come would not have existed.
