Editors Reads Verdict
Coetzee's great allegorical novel is deliberately placeless and timeless — it could be any empire at any frontier — and this universality is precisely its force: a meditation on complicity, torture, and the impossibility of remaining innocent within systems of power.
What We Loved
- The allegorical precision is extraordinary — every element of the novel serves the central argument about complicity and empire without the machinery being visible
- The magistrate is one of literature's great conscience figures — decent, compromised, and incapable of the full action his decency would seem to require
- It rewards re-reading as the complicity theme deepens: what seemed like background becomes foreground on the second pass
- At 156 pages it is short enough to be concentrated and long enough to be inhabited — the compression feels like a formal argument in itself
Minor Drawbacks
- The deliberate placelessness can feel distancing for readers who need historical specificity to engage with political fiction
- The gender politics around the barbarian girl are deliberately uncomfortable in ways that some readers find Coetzee is exploiting rather than examining
- Readers wanting a specific historical context — South Africa, colonialism, any particular empire — will need to supply it themselves; the novel will not do it for them
Key Takeaways
- → Complicity with empire does not require active cruelty — it requires only the decision to continue to benefit while looking away from what makes the benefits possible
- → Torture reveals nothing about its victims but everything about the system that practises it — it is a technique for the production of guilt, not the extraction of truth
- → The barbarians at the frontier exist primarily in the imperial imagination — they are the necessary threat that justifies the apparatus of control
- → A man who understands injustice and refuses to participate in its worst expressions is not therefore innocent of the injustice
- → The moment of choosing — when a conscience figure is forced to act rather than merely think — is when the limits of liberal decency become fully visible
| Author | J.M. Coetzee |
|---|---|
| Publisher | Penguin Books |
| Pages | 156 |
| Published | September 30, 1982 |
| Language | English |
| Genre | Literary Fiction, Allegory, Political Fiction |
| Difficulty | Intermediate |
| Best For | Readers drawn to allegorical fiction with political and philosophical weight, those interested in the mechanics of empire and conscience, and anyone willing to read a short novel with the density and difficulty of a much longer one. |
The Magistrate and the Empire
The novel is set nowhere and everywhere: a frontier outpost of an empire that has no name, in a landscape that could be Central Asian, African, or North American. The magistrate who narrates has administered this outpost for decades, keeping a workable peace with the nomadic people beyond the frontier — people the Empire calls barbarians — through a combination of trade, tact, and mutual tolerance. He is not a heroic figure. He is a comfortable one: a man who has benefited from the Empire’s protection without much examining what that protection costs the people on its margins.
Colonel Joll arrives from the Third Bureau, the Empire’s secret police, with orders to find evidence of a barbarian conspiracy. He interrogates prisoners, none of whom know anything about a conspiracy because there is no conspiracy, and extracts confessions through torture that are then used to justify further incursions into barbarian territory. The magistrate watches this happen and does not stop it. His passivity at this stage is Coetzee’s first and most important point: the decent man who understands what is happening and does nothing is not meaningfully distinguishable, in his consequences, from the man who does it. The magistrate’s later rebellion — when he does finally act — does not retroactively clean the earlier compliance.
The Barbarian Girl
The magistrate takes in a young barbarian woman who was blinded and had her ankles broken by Joll’s interrogations. He houses her, feeds her, and eventually makes her his companion in a relationship whose nature he cannot clearly articulate even to himself. He is drawn to the marks of her torture — he repeatedly examines her damaged eyes, massages her scarred ankles — and Coetzee is deliberately making this uncomfortable. The magistrate does not know why he wants to tend to the damage that was done to her, and neither do we, and the uncertainty is the point.
The relationship enacts the novel’s central paradox at the level of the personal. The magistrate wants to atone, to make good, to be a different kind of imperial subject than the ones who broke her. But his ability to take her in, to give her shelter and attention, is itself a function of the position the Empire has given him: he has resources to spend because the Empire has provided them. His tenderness is real and it is also inseparable from the power he represents. When he eventually takes her back to her people — a journey that constitutes the novel’s moral turning point — he discovers that the gesture of return does not restore her to herself and does not restore him to innocence. Both of them are marked by what the Empire did, in different ways that the magistrate cannot bridge however many months he spends trying.
The Allegory
Coetzee refuses to name the empire, the frontier, the barbarians, or the era, and this refusal is the novel’s argument. The specific case — apartheid South Africa, British India, the Roman frontier, the American West — is not what he is writing about. He is writing about the structure that all these cases share: the imperial centre, the frontier that must be secured, the native population that must be named a threat before it can be treated as one, and the administrator who understands what is happening and cannot quite bring himself to stop it.
The barbarians of the title are never clearly seen. We see the frontier, the soldiers, the prisoners, the torture apparatus. We never see the barbarian threat that supposedly justifies all of this, because — as the novel gradually makes clear — there is no barbarian threat. The barbarians are a story the Empire tells itself to explain why it needs Colonel Joll and his techniques. The Cavafy poem Coetzee takes his title from ends with the citizens asking what will happen now that the barbarians have failed to arrive, and answering that the barbarians were a kind of solution. Without them, something must be invented. This is the logic the magistrate has been serving his whole life, and the novel’s achievement is to make that service visible — not through polemic, but through the slow revelation of what a decent man looks like when he finally stops looking away.
Our rating: 4.2/5 — A short, concentrated, and formally perfect allegory about empire and complicity — the kind of novel that reveals more of itself on each reading and whose central argument has lost none of its force.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is "Waiting for the Barbarians" about?
A magistrate in an unnamed empire at the edge of its territory has kept an uneasy peace with the barbarians beyond the frontier; when the Empire sends a colonel to extract confessions, the magistrate's complicity in the imperial project becomes something he can no longer suppress.
Who should read "Waiting for the Barbarians"?
Readers drawn to allegorical fiction with political and philosophical weight, those interested in the mechanics of empire and conscience, and anyone willing to read a short novel with the density and difficulty of a much longer one.
What are the key takeaways from "Waiting for the Barbarians"?
Complicity with empire does not require active cruelty — it requires only the decision to continue to benefit while looking away from what makes the benefits possible Torture reveals nothing about its victims but everything about the system that practises it — it is a technique for the production of guilt, not the extraction of truth The barbarians at the frontier exist primarily in the imperial imagination — they are the necessary threat that justifies the apparatus of control A man who understands injustice and refuses to participate in its worst expressions is not therefore innocent of the injustice The moment of choosing — when a conscience figure is forced to act rather than merely think — is when the limits of liberal decency become fully visible
Is "Waiting for the Barbarians" worth reading?
Coetzee's great allegorical novel is deliberately placeless and timeless — it could be any empire at any frontier — and this universality is precisely its force: a meditation on complicity, torture, and the impossibility of remaining innocent within systems of power.
Ready to Read Waiting for the Barbarians?
Check the current price on Amazon.
Check Price on Amazon (paid link)Prices and availability are subject to change. See Amazon for current price.
Review last updated: