Thursday, March 6, 2008

Kipling: An Equivocator?

Sophie Ryan

Professor Bump

Victorian Literature

6 March 2008

P2

Kipling: An Equivocator?

Much of what Rudyard Kipling wrote, and that for which he is most famous, documents or is inspired by his Indian experience. Kipling’s works reveal a great deal of love for India’s beauty and tranquility, as well as his inner love of its inhabitants. But, Kipling is also regarded by many as an ethno centrist promoter of England’s imperialist reign over India. He saw the English’s place as more of a care-taker position; the English represented guardians who brought the Indian people into civilization. Kipling’s stories are relatively free of English superiority airs of which Kipling is so often associated. However, some of his other works offer a more direct assertion of British imperial superiority. Kipling was a truly great writer, today his legacy is received with mixed emotions across the globe; he is labeled a creative genius on one spectrum and an authoritarian jingoist on the other. I believe him to be a product of his environment; he loved his Indian home while he also felt strong ties to his British heritage. As a result, he must filter his feelings through his social paradigm, resulting in many of his controversial or criticized works.

Kipling’s life began in India in 1865 when he was born to British, mildly affluent parents, who were Anglo-Indian. But at six years old he left India for England only to return eleven years later. As was the custom in ex-patriot families, the children were sent of to live with foster parents back in England. Kipling remained in the home for five years, which he horrifyingly details in Baa Baa, Black Sheep. He recalls his foster Mother, pseudo-named “Aunty Rosa,” declaring “That means two beatings. One at school and one here. That one will hurt most.”[1] [2] Simulation of child abuse at home Aunty Rosa’s punishment was given after three days of captivity in his bedroom. Kipling then finished his stay in Britain at a low-grade, inexpensive boarding school. There he experienced continued teasing and physical harassment. Keeping in mind Kipling’s childhood British memories it becomes hard to understand why this man so ferociously pronounced his British roots, often implying that the English experience surpassed that of its Indian counterpart. Especially interesting, is the fact that his stays in India were the most memorable and enjoyable times of his life. Seymour-Smith argues in his account of Kipling’s life that Kipling’s mistreatment by the English institution may have made him yearn for its acceptance which left him “no alternative but to adapt to these [British imperialistic] ways.”[3]

Again the irony in Kipling’s “assumption that Indians are generally inferior [to white Englishmen]”[4] becomes apparent upon reading his description of the return to India in his memoir. “After these [three or four days], my English years fell away, nor ever, I think, came back in full strength.”[5] This segway demonstrates Kipling’s love and appreciation for India and his deep personal connection for this country while also displaying his displaced attitude towards his heritage, or perhaps his confusion thereof. [6] Wood engraving of Bombay. He dubs Bombay the “queen of cities”[7] in the 19th C. Kipling’s young adult life developed in this country during his seven years as a journalist. He became intertwined with India’s culture and fell in love with her beautiful countryside. He documents his favorite country getaway Simla describing it as “pure joy – every golden hour was counted.”[8] His second Indian sojourn also marked the beginning of his fame as a writer. He published several short stories and upon his return to England, was already being applauded as a genius author.

These positive feelings and praise of India again become marred by his ethno centrist leanings. Just after exemplifying the jewels of India at Simla, he recounts his unfortunate trip back to town. His servant, whom he derogatorily refers to as a “coolie,”[9] becomes involved in a tiff with several other “coolies” and, to remedy the matter, Kipling “did not wish to be haled before any little Hill Rajah, knowing that the coolies would unitedly [sic] swear that I had directed the outrage.”[10] Additionally, some of Kipling’s most well-known poems appear haughtily imperialistic such as “Recessional” and “The White Man’s Burden.” The former acts as a prayer to God, asking him to never forget the sacrifices made by imperialists whose countries sacrificed so much to improve the lot of another. Many would argue, quite justly, that Britain did not seek to colonize India on moral grounds, but for profit. “The White Man’s Burden” carries this same theme of the sacrifice of colonization. This second poem does acknowledge the profit involved stating “to seek another’s profit, and work another’s gain.”[11] The poem continues on to underscore the sacrifices and accomplishments of the “white man colonizer” such as ending wars and fighting famines. This second poem is especially controversial because it directly and clearly defines the British imperial takeover as The White Man’s Burden, definitely hot-button words today. 12]Modern interpretation on Kipling’s “The White Man’s Burden” When interpreting Kipling’s take on India, it is important to remember his social environment and the standards of the time as well. Political correctness was inexistent, and many of his comments which may seem unsympathetic and appalling today, could have been commonly accepted in upper-class Anglo-Indian circles. Additionally, many of his popular tales such as The Jungle Books depict India as an exciting land where anything can happen. Mowgli, a lost boy, is compassionately taken in by a family of wolves. Perhaps this tale reveals Kipling’s inner, although ironic, appreciation for the Indian culture. The Disney remake may be a tad cheesy, but it directly expresses The Jungle Book’s thematic aim – to show India’s friendly, compassionate side. The following clip clearly demonstrates this sentiment. 13 A video revealing what friends are for in The Jungle Book movie

Kipling’s modern-day depiction is not as positive as the preceding movie may seem. He is often criticized as a Britain-obsessed jingoist. Public distaste towards his expansionist visions increased after World War Two, and in today’s world, where each word a person utters is scanned for political correctness, some of Kipling’s writings surely do not sit well with many people. The following clip clearly displays the negative attitudes associated with Kipling’s legacy and counter-reactions towards it. [14] A rapper performance This performance reveals exactly how many people feel about colonization: guilty. The rapper describes his heritage as a burden, rather than a privilege, as being white was in Kipling’s Africa. Society has shifted racial paradigms upside down since the Victorian Era. Now, minorities are encouraged to celebrate their diversity, and speak about their past burdens, such as slavery or oppression by a foreign power, such as the case of India. Kipling does the same thing in his poems; he celebrates his Anglo heritage and speaks about his own personal burden. Do not read me wrong, I am not defending his position, but simply trying to sympathize with is view point. This dramatic change in the social race perspective makes it extremely difficult for the modern reader to interpret writers such as Kipling because we cannot understand the cultural norms of his era.

Converse to modern reactions towards Kipling, he immediately became a well-known writer during his day. Many esteem that upon Lord Tennyson’s death, Kipling took his place in the public skyline of writers. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature in 1907, becoming the first Brit and youngest recipient of the award. Surely such an honor would not be bestowed upon an unworthy candidate. In India he is still extremely disliked although tides are changing. India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, remarked that Kim was his all-time favorite book and Kipling’s birth place was turned into a museum which hi-lights his works.

Kipling’s treatment of India and its inhabitants paint a conflicting story. The man does not consider India his home, or the origin of his heritage but still retains a love so deep for this country that it appears to trump the importance of England at times. He describes it magnificently in books yet often decries its inhabitants for their lack of civility which he believes England restores to this country of heathens. Are his criticisms of India and his praise of Britain’s imperialistic presence simply the ruminations of an ethno centrist? Or does he legitimately believe that the Indians benefit from British presence? These questions are difficult to answer and are still in open debate today. Seymour-Smith concisely addresses this dilemma saying “His belief that Indians were inferior was undermined by his belief that they were not, and his belief that they were not was undermined by his belief that they were.”[15] It appears to me that Kipling’s imperialistic mindset was simply a product of his generation, and that he truly sided with the Indian culture. He was born into an imperialistic society, yet he managed to shy away from complete rejection and degradation of India, which might have been easy considering his environment. Instead he created beautiful literature which underscored much of the positive that India had/has to offer. It also appears to me that he truly felt that his country’s involvement in colonization was a positive event. He fell in love with India and became a world-renowned writer by sharing his love for this country with the entire world.

Word Count

Count w/ quotes: 1, 544

Count w/o quotes: 1, 417

URL: http://sophievlit.blogspot.com/


[1] Rudyard Kipling, Something of Myself and other Autobiographical Stories (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 160.

[2] http://filmfanatic.org/reviews/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/ChildAbuse.JPG

[3] Martin Seymour-Smith, Rudyard Kipling (Great Britain: Queen Anne Press, 1989), 55.

[4] Seymour-Smith, 62.

[5] Kipling, 25.

[6] http://www.lib.lsu.edu/special/exhibits/india/px5d10.jpg

[7] Arley Munson, Kipling’s India (New York: Doubleday, Page and Co., 1915), 5.

[8] Kipling, 35.

[9] Kipling, 36.

[10] Kipling, 36.

[11] Jay Broadus Hubbell and John Owen Beaty, An Introduction to Poetry (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1922), 92.

[12] http://stephen.macek.faculty.noctrl.edu/images/UncleImperialist.jpg

[13] http://youtube.com/watch?v=dHenV6qzX_M

[14] http://youtube.com/watch?v=1QzoIPdM3Xc&feature=related

[15] Seymour-Smith, 63.

Monday, March 3, 2008

The Animal Estate

I found the RSPCA description interesting in that the society intended not only to promote the well-being of animals, but to also promote social improvement. “the connection between cruelty to animals and general resistance to social discipline could not have seemed clearer.”[1] Ritvo’s account paints the RSPCA as associating animal pain with ills of society –often a product of an “abuser [who] was a rough member of the urban proletariat.”[2] The organization was able to “redefine the social location of concern for animals”[3] in order to make its goals more easily attainable. “This genre of kindness to animals was a code for full and responsible acceptance of the obligations of society.” [4]It made defending animals fashionable and an obligation for anyone of good moral standing.
[5] RSPCA today, international influence.
Today, this the SPCA does not focus as much on human improvement (in some states they are allowed to enforce laws), but instead on providing resources for animals in need such as vaccines, rescue help after natural disasters and pet shelters. Now there is less social pressure on animal owners and “private citizens to implement the law”[6] to be considered an educated and socially acceptable member of society as Ritvo describes in the Victorian Era. The RSPCA’s Annual Report[7] described cases in which the society had found and prosecuted animal abuse in order that people would “perceive themselves as embattled participants in the struggle – even as potential victims – rather than just benevolent onlookers.”[8] The RSPCA hoped to “rouse the public conscience”[9] to persuade its readers to act against animal cruelty.
I believe that the social accountability the SPCA promoted in the Victorian Era should be used today to urge people to act against continued animal cruelty. Agreed, the Annual Report did appear somewhat propaganda-like with its dramatic tales of abuse towards “poor animals,”[10] but its means were effective in engaging people to act upon their new-found knowledge of cruelty towards animals. Today, when it comes to animals, people are more concerned with using their pets as accessories instead of worrying about where food and products such as mascara come from.[11]Animal Testing
I speak the truth, I am guilty myself. There are even “pet celebrity sites” such as lepaws.com, clearly depicting the relatively low sense of compassion for animals in our world today. The owner’s might enjoy the attention and money, but the animals surely do not enjoy practicing over and over again for scenes which are shot over and over again.[12] Celebrity Dog Photo

On a side note…
The SPCA’s purposes appeared to be founded on an almost religious theme as Ritvo states that the society promoted the “salvation of human souls” and “maintenance of social order”[13] and that people should “actively suppress vicious practices.”[14] It encouraged people to “take the road less traveled” and to “be a good Samaritan.” and help the lowly when no one else would. Any other thoughts??
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Samaritan.jpg)Good Samaritan Photo
[1] Harriet Ritvo, The Animal Estate (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987), 153.
[2] Ritvo, 138.
[3] Ritvo, 129.
[4] Ritvo, 132.
[5] http://members.iinet.net.au/~asrspca/RSPCA_logo.gif
[6] Ritvo, 145.
[7] Ritvo, 136.
[8] Ritvo, 141.
[9] Ritvo, 161.
[10] Ritvo, 143.
[11] http://www.uncaged.co.uk/pgtests.htm
[12] http://www.lepawsagency.com/html/ourTalent.asp?size=small#
[13] Ritvo, 132.
[14] Ritvo, 144.