Image: Ngsyatowuahg · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons
World·🏆 Entry of the Week

Four Bedrooms for a Family That Is Never in the Country at Once

SU
Sep 6, 2025 · 4 min read

On the road up from the highway there are now eleven houses of a kind that did not exist when I was a child. Concrete frame, two storeys, tiled to about waist height in a colour, steel reinforcement bars left standing out of the roof slab so a third storey can go on later. Four bedrooms is standard. Some have five.

In eight of the eleven, the number of people sleeping there on an ordinary Tuesday is two, and both of them are over sixty.

The rebar sticking out of the roof is the part I keep looking at. It is a promise in structural steel: this is not finished, we are coming back, there will be more of us. It rusts at roughly the rate a working life abroad lasts.

I have written before about what the money does at the household level, and I stand by it — the roofs are real, the school fees are real. This is a different observation and it took me a long time to be able to say it without sounding like I was sneering at people building the best house they could afford. The houses are not too big for the family. They are the right size for a family configuration that the money required to be dismantled.

Work it through. To build the house you need eight to twelve years of Gulf wages. During those years the man is not in it. If two sons go, which is common, the house is built faster and there are now two men not in it. The daughters-in-law may live there, or may be in Kathmandu because the schools are better, which is the second thing the money buys and the second thing that empties the house. What remains is the grandparents, the youngest child if the schooling worked out badly, and four bedrooms.

By the time the house is complete the family that specified it has been dispersed for a decade, and dispersal is not a phase people come back from tidily. The son who has been in Qatar since he was twenty-three is thirty-five. His children are in a Kathmandu school. His wife has a job. He can come back to the village or he can come back to his family, and the house is in the village.

So the house is finished and it is correct and it is empty, and it cannot be sold, because everyone on that road built the same house in the same decade and there is no buyer for the eleventh one, and the price would in any case be an insult against twelve years.

Here is where I want to be careful, because there is a version of this essay that treats these houses as a folly, and I have read it, written by people who have never had to explain to a village why they went. That version is wrong and I want to say why.

The house is not a residence. It is a claim. It says that this family did not leave, it was away — a distinction that carries real weight in a place where the difference between the two determines whether your parents are cared for by neighbours, whether your sister marries locally, whether anyone keeps your land from being encroached. A man in Doha with a four-bedroom house on that road is a member of the village in a way that a man in Doha with no house is not. The building is doing work every single day it stands empty, and the work it is doing is why nobody sensible would build a two-room house instead.

And there is the other thing, which is harder. The house is where he intends to be old. Not next year. At sixty. That is not a fantasy — it is a plan with a long horizon, and plenty of them do come back at sixty, and the house is waiting because it was built at thirty-five when the body still worked. Judging the house by whether anyone sleeps in it this Tuesday is applying the wrong time horizon to a structure explicitly built for a different one.

I believe all of that. I also count the rebar.

Because the plan has a failure mode that the village has now seen enough times to recognise, and it is not the man who never returns. It is the man who returns at sixty to a house his children will not visit, in a village whose school has closed for want of children, and finds that the thing he built as a claim on belonging is now the only part of the belonging left. The house held his place. What it could not do was hold the place.

My mother's neighbour has the largest of the eleven. Five bedrooms, a kitchen she does not use because she cooks in the older building behind it, and a sitting room with a sofa still in its plastic. Her husband died in Malaysia in 2019 and the body came back and the house was not finished, so the funeral was held in the yard, between the two buildings, with the rebar overhead.

She keeps the upstairs swept. I asked her once why, since nobody goes up there, and she said that a house has to be ready, and I understood that she was not talking about guests.

◉ 88 views

Comments

3
AN
anisha_thapa· Sep 7

The rebar is in every village I know. I had always read it as optimism. Reading it as a schedule is worse and I think more accurate.

RO
rohan_k· Sep 10

The claim-on-belonging argument is the part outsiders miss and it is not sentimental — it has cash value in who looks after your parents. Worth saying that the same building is also an asset that cannot be sold, which is a real cost nobody prices.

SU
sumangurungAUTHOR· Sep 10

Nobody prices it because nobody intends to sell. The unsellability is not a defect of the asset, it is the point of it, which took me a long time to accept.