Oyas 1

Priscilla Oyas
Andrea Vasconcellos
English 100H
30 October 2014
Judgement: The Most Common Ability Amongst Humans
In The Night Watchmans Occurrence Book, V.S. Naipaul attempts to achieve a
feat that is present in few literary works. He seeks to redefine a well-known social role. A Night
Watchman may be viewed as a modern day security guard. The United States Department of Labour
outlines a guards role as one that . . . protects property from theft or damage, or persons from
hazards or interference. Duties involve serving at a fixed post, making rounds on foot or by motor
vehicle, or escorting persons or property. This worker may help visitors and customers by
answering questions and giving directions (99). Though numerous literary devices are utilized in
this endeavour, most striking is the use of humour in this short story. Specifically, how V.S. Naipaul
employs humour as the pivot that links together the independent events of the story, and as the tool
that exposes the characters personalities.
The Night Watchmans Occurrence Book, is written in an unconventional manner.
Though it is not uncommon for literary works to be presented as diary entries, the authors creation
of a diary format that is shared between two characters is rare and may be considered outlandish.
The author uses this entry style as an opportunity to create a sense of anticipation as to what will
ensue from the exchange between these two characters who have very different personalities. As a
result, this anticipation allows humour to be introduced into the tone of story from an early stage.
The reader is immediately made aware of this relationship within the first nine sentences of the

Oyas 2

story, where they are introduced to the new Night Watchman, Charles Ethelbert Hillyard, and the
hotel manager, W.A.G Inskip, through their written communication in the occurrence book.
Each entry in the occurrence book consists of a main event, and the author aims to
incorporate humour into each of these described proceedings. In Hillyards fifth entry, Naipaul
highlights that on:
November 24. 11 P.M. N.W. Hillyard take over duty with one Torch, 1 Bar Key, 2
Fridge Keys, 23 cartoons Beer, all intact At 2 A.M. Mr. Wills come back in the bar
and take 4 Carib and some bread, he cut his hand trying to cut the bread, so please
dont worry about the stains on the carpet sir. At 6 A.M. Mr. Wills come back for
some soda water. It didnt have any so he take a ginger beer instead. Sir you see it is
my intention to do this job good sir I cant see how Night Watchman Cavander could
fall asleep on this job sir. (156)
In the above record, humour is expressed in three main ways, Hillyards incorrect
spelling and grammar, his ill-placed reassurances and his commentary on the incidents. Though the
humour is apparent, independently, this entry does not have the same effect as it does when read
comprehensively with the others. When placed chronologically alongside both the entries of
Hillyard and Inskip, the humour escalates and intensifies, thus forming a cascade of events that
progressively becomes more comical. In essence, humour is what links all the individual events and
emphasizes their unique qualities.
In addition, the humour from the collective entries allows the authors main idea and opinion
on the particular subject to be revealed to the reader without compromising the events contribution
to the plot. This therefore turns humour into an intrinsic aspect of The Night Watchmans

Oyas 3

Occurrence Book, making it the backbone of the plot. Naipaul takes advantage of this concept and
manipulates it to create bizarre situations that not only contribute to the storyline, but that also
reveal detailed information on the characters and their personalities.
The humorous tone of the story permits Hillyards commentaries to serve as the main source
of information on the characters. Though extensively detailed, Naipaul intended Hillyards reports
to omit specific facts when describing an occurrence, allowing room for the reader to raise
questions as to the accuracy of the passed judgements. There are twenty-two characters in total in
the story, four of which- Mr. Wills, Mrs. Roscoe, Paul and Manager Inskip, are inadvertent
antagonists to the only protagonist, Charles Hillyard.
The author adopts a facetious approach when addressing the socially sensitive topics
associated with each character, and he specifically does so through Hillyards choice of language.
For instance, rather than openly describe Mr. Wills as a seasoned alcoholic, Naipaul makes a note of
the fact that it was [nothing] unusual. Mr Wills was helpless, [and] I dont see how anybody could
drink so much, eighteen one man alone, this work enough to turn anybody Seventh Day Adventist
(157). Hillyards surprise and slight aversion at Mr. Wills habits comes across as amusing partly
because of the frank nature in which it is communicated, but also because of the inappropriateness
of the comment being written in an occurrence book.
Amidst the humour found in the entries approaching climax of the story, Naipaul
unexpectedly challenges the reader to see if they will identify Hillyards mannerisms in their own
thinking. Prior to these final entries, the reader has seen Night Watchman Hillyard judge the guests
at the C-Hotel based on little to no knowledge of their true personalities, and at times, on few pieces
information of an event. Deviously, the author designs a character that gives the reader an
opportunity to think and draw up their own conclusions and opinions about, Mrs. Minnie Roscoe.

Oyas 4

When introducing Mrs. Roscoe, Naipaul only reveals what her actions are whilst at the
hotel. The author purposefully omits Night Watchman Hillyards opinion of her in the description,
only highlighting her brief absences for short periods of time. In the guards fourteenth entry, Mrs.
Roscoes first interactions with the other hotel guests are outlined. Unexpurgated, the reader sees
her leave the bar with Mr Wills initially and over time, though unexplained, she would reappear
with Paul, Mr. Wills friend. Additionally, in Hillyards following entry, the reader sees Mrs. Roscoe
running to Mr. Inskip in an attempt to escape from a newly introduced character, Malcom.
Unconsciously, the reader judges Mrs. Roscoe based solely on this information, and draws
the conclusion that she is a promiscuous woman, who often partakes of immoral, or in less severe
terms, licentious behaviour. This same quality of uncontrollable judgment that Naipaul highlighted
in Hillyard that the reader found hilarious, is also found in the reader. Essentially, the author is
mocking the reader that they are simply laughing at themselves by laughing at Hillyard, whilst
using Minnie Roscoe as proof.
The author then later confirms this judgmental characteristic in the reader twice more. First
when he leads the reader to assume that Malcom is another man who besides Paul, Mr. Wills and
Mr. Inskip has a sexual relationship with Minnie Roscoe. This confirmation is apparent as the only
information given about Paul is that he is a big red man and he [is as] sober as a judge and he [is
as] mad as a drunkard (Naipaul 162). The second instance is when Hillyard states that he [feels]
the day of reckoning is at hand (Naipaul 162), when he finally gives the reader his own opinion of
Minnie Roscoe and her activities. By finding this cessation of Hillyards thoughts funny, the reader
is indirectly agreeing with his conclusions of Minnies personality.
However, before the reader is able to fully comprehend this imposed epiphany, the comical
aspect of the story is swiftly reinforced through Night Watchman Hillyards inability to recognise or

Oyas 5

prevent a robbery from occurring. The guards somewhat irreverent attitude is humorously
communicated to the reader through his flippant account of the incident where he states,
Firearms discharge 2 times in the back yard I dont know sir, I thinking it would
be better for me to go back to some other sort of job. At 3 I hear somebody shout
Thief, and I see a man running out of the back, and Mr London, Room 9, say he
miss 80 cents and a pack of cigarettes1 dont know when the people in this place
does sleep. (Naipaul 160 -161)
The author began by creating a dramatic scenario so as to establish an opening by which
details about the characters involved would be revealed. By describing a situation that appears
dangerous with the use of guns and a visual of an escaping figure, anticipation builds up in the
reader and in the characters. By having a climatic point of the story centred around the robbery of
mundane and inexpensive objects, Naipaul creates a sense of disbelief both at the culprits
desperation and at the Night Watchman who was unable to prevent such a small scale crime. This
once again exhibits the stark mismatch between Charles Hillyard and the role of a guard.
The farcical humour in the aforementioned entry revealed most about Hillyard. In that
moment, he was presented as a man who is aware of his responsibilities. This is evident as he does
not dwell on the prior actions of Mrs. Roscoe or her counterparts, but instead tries to salvage the
more pressing matter that he involuntarily facilitated by distracting himself from his work.
Encouragingly, Charles Hillyard begins to develop through the course of the short story. At
the start, the reader is met with a bright, excited man who is eager to please his new employer and
excel at his new job. However, by the end of the story, Hillyard is comically identical to the exNight Watchman Cavander. For instance, Hillyard was initially very respectful and only added

Oyas 6

positive comments when replying to Mr. Inskip, yet as he became increasingly involved in the
guests lives and the pressure began to take its toll, he began losing his patience with Mr. Inskip as
well.
As a result, Hillyards reports became more informal and eventually, he began incorporating
his own personal opinion of Mr. Inskip into his entries. The most notable application of this was
when Naipaul had Hillyard remind the manager that the good Lord sees all and will have His
revenge sir all I want is a little quiet night work and all I getting is abuse (161- 162). After
condemning the manager to moral judgement and retribution by Gods hand, he ensures that he still
refers to Mr. Inskip respectfully, despite the inappropriateness of the comment. The irony
surrounding Hillyards speech adds to the overall humour of the situation, which in this instance
also serves to reveal Hillyards own personal ideals and his religious beliefs.
In addition, Naipaul continues to disclose to the reader deeper aspects of Hillyard from a
different angle. The author mocks him. A demonstration is observed in the first few entries where
Hillyard is unable to spell the word carton even after he was corrected in writing by Mr. Inskip. The
levity arises when the spelling of Heineken, a word from a foreign dictionary is spelled correctly
each time without a single mistake. Despite this, the use of humour in this form gives rise to a sense
of empathy that develops in the reader, which stems from an attachment that was forged through
laughter. In particular, distress is shared between the reader and Night Watchman Hillyard when
Naipaul points out that nothing I writing you liking I aint educated and because of this
everybody think they could insult me (160). The genuine emotion expressed by Hillyard in this
statement, implores the reader to look past the humour, and find his true personality.
The authors introduction of a sombre tone was to further amplify Hillyards quality as an
honest man. This was exhibited through the use of humour once more when Hillyard explains

Oyas 7

simply and respectfully that Sir, nothing unusual means everything usual (Naipaul 160). The
slightly impudent reply to Manager Inskip showcases that underneath his misgivings, Hillyard does
in fact have more common sense than he or the manager realises. Both the reader and Hillyard
received closure for the Night Watchmans mistreatment when the manager also experienced some
discomfort. This was conveyed through Hillyards unique speech, where he employed the use of
onomatopoeias when describing Mr. Inskips assault. The childlike description of what Hillyard
heard was the vector that conveyed the feelings of satisfaction he experienced from his oppressors
assault.
Despite Naipaul mischievously giving his opinion on the cardinal vices, through Hillyard, he
taught the reader a key lesson that trying to please others comes at a cost to ones self. This moral is
reiterated in the layout of the entries, where Hillyards emotional journey is displayed, his final
entry bringing forth an understanding as to how ex Night Watchman Cavander came to be as
impersonal as he appeared in his reports. In the last entry Night Watchman Hillyard clearly was not
the same person that the reader met seven days prior. Though his transformation appeared comical
on the surface, Hillyard had been reduced to nothing more than the padlock on the bar door
hanging on only by a little piece of wood (Naipaul 162). He was unable to achieve his goal and as
such made for a sad tale that was perfectly shrouded in humour.

Oyas 8

Works Cited
Naipaul, Vidiadhar. S. The Night Watchmans Occurrence Book. Points of View: An
Anthology of Short Stories. Ed. James Moffett and Kenneth R. McElheny. New York: Penguin
Group, 1995. 155- 163. Print.
United States. Dept. of Labour. SCA Directory of Occupations. SCA Directory of
Occupations Fifth Edition. United States Department of Labour. US Dept. of Labour, N.p. Web. 21
Oct. 2014.