I still feel it serves no purpose to compare the two. I have opinions about both and am happy to share them instead as I think doing so adds more to the topic at hand On Naipual: He certainly has written a lot and written well. I started reading him long before he got the Nobel and have enjoyed many of his books. Incidentally, I enjoyed the Mystic Masseur, Half-a-Life, A Bend in the river much more than a House for Mr Biswas. Perhaps that was because of the hype around the book and the high expectations with which I approached it . But Naipaul has a stature that few can match. The Nobel prize was certainly a crowning glory and very well deserved. On Desai: She is a very good stroy teller. Will she be another Arundhati Roy who fizzles out after one good book? I hope not because she sure does a heck of a job telling a story. Perhaps I liked the Loss of Inheritance because I could relate to the people and places in the book but it was one of the better books I have read this year. I am not here to put Naipaul down or pull Desai up - not that I could even if I tried. I just think it's stupid and futile to try and take anything away from a good writer - whether its Naipaul or Kiran Desai.