Download
1 / 27
400 likes | 1.5k Views
Rudyard Kipling. The man who would be king. General Intro. Rudyard Kipling (1865 – 1936). Born at Bombay , India in 1865; his father the Principal of the newly founded School of Art , Sir Jamjetjee Jejeebhoy . Spent five unhappy years with a foster family in Southsea , England
E N D
Rudyard Kipling The man who would be king
General Intro. Rudyard Kipling (1865 – 1936) • Born at Bombay, India in 1865; his father the Principal of the newly founded School of Art , Sir JamjetjeeJejeebhoy. • Spent five unhappy years with a foster family in Southsea, England • returned to India to become a member of the editorial staff of the Civil and Military Gazette 1982
General Intro. Rudyard Kipling (1865 – 1936) • awarded Nobel prize in 1907, later poet laureate as well as knighthood, which he rejected. • received contrastive views on his works: seen as a chronicler, critic and/or supporter of the Empire
The man who would be king 1888 • It’s a novella about two adventurers in British India who become kings of Kafiristan .The story was inspired by the exploits of James Brook. • The narrator of the story is a British journalist in India-Kipling himself, in all but name. while on a tour of some Indian native states he meets two scruffy adenturers, Daniel Dravot and Peachey Carnehan. He stopped them from blackmailing a minor Rajah. • later they appear in his office and tell him about their plan. They think that India is not bg enough for them anymore.
The man who would be king 1888 • The next day they will go off to Kafiristan to set themselves up as kings. Dravot can pass as a native, and they have twenty rifles. They plan to find a king or chief, help him defeat his enemies then take over for themselves. They ask the narrator for the use of any books or maps of the area–as a favor, because they are fellow freemasons, and because he spoiled their blackmail scheme. • Two years later , Peachey creeps into the narrator's office. He is a broken man, a crippled beggar clad in rags and he tells an amazing story :
The man who would be king 1888 • Dravot and Peachy succeeded in becoming kings , finding the Kafirs , who turn out to be white , mustering an army, taking over villages, and dreaming of building a unified nation. • Kafirs (pagans, not Muslims) were impressed by guns and Dravot's lack of fear of their idols, and acclaimed him as a god, the descendant of Alexander the Great. The Kafirs practiced a form of Masonic ritual, and Dravot's reputation was further cemented when he showed knowledge of Masonic secrets that only the oldest priest remembered.
The man who would be king 1888 • Their schemes were destroyed when Dravot decided to marry a Kafir girl. Terrified at marrying a god, the girl bit Dravot when he tried to kiss her. Seeing him bleed, the priests cried that he was "Neither God nor Devil but a man!" Most of the Kafirs turned against Dravot and Peachey. One chief (whom they have nicknamed "Billy Fish") and a few of his men remained loyal, but the army defected and the two kings were captured.
The man who would be king 1888 • Dravot, wearing his crown, stood on a rope bridge over a gorge while the Kafirs cut the ropes, and he fell to his death. Peachey was crucified between two pine trees. When he survived for a day, the Kafirs considered it a miracle and let him go. He begged his way back to India. • As proof of his tale, Peachey shows the narrator Dravot's head, still wearing the golden crown. He leaves. The next day the narrator sees him crawling along the road in the noon sun, with his hat off and gone mad. The narrator sends him to the local asylum. When he inquires two days later, he learns that he has died of sunstroke ("half an hour bare-headed in the sun at mid-day...").
commentary • In this story , there are difficult journeys, mysterious strangers , battles ,madness ,pagan temples. • Kipling, in other words, not only plays on the reader’s curiosity about the final outcome, but plays up our suspense as to the outcome of the individual steps in the story’s development.
commentary • We can see in this story that one incident is caused by another e.g. the marriage causes the discovery which then causes the ruin of the kings. • We can link up the various episodes into a chain of cause and effect that depends on characters themselves. • The characters began to change and grow in the story and this development of characters proves to be one of the factors leading to their downfall.
commentary • The adventure has gone hand in hand with the development of character. That is , the men were loafers at the beginning but they didn’t die like a loafer e.g. Dravot who was the first character died like a king, even Peachey , the subordinate one, died as a gentleman. • as a paradox , the two loafers become most truly kings in the moment when their false kingship is taken from them. • That is , when external kingship is lost, internal kingship is achieved.
commentary • The power of Peachey and Dravot is that of the king-as-god , not that of king-as-man. • Dravot , the king-as-god , has some human instincts that the mere exercise of godlike power cannot satisfy him. He wants to be the power , to be a god , but he longs to be a man. And this dilemma ruins him at last.
summery • The loafers are impelled by a dream of kingship , a kingship of absolute power , not the regular one. • Such power depends upon their remaining aloof from humanity as gods; yet they are men. • It’s ironical that Dravot finally exercises his godlike power to satisfy his basic human desires and it’s a further irony that he becomes most truly kingly at the moment of his ruin. • The story involves a contrast between kinds of kingship, between kinds of power, external and internal, power over others and power over oneself.
The framework • Form: a tale of adventure within a realistic frame • Structure: • I – narrator and his job as a journalist; • II – Dan and Peachy ask for help in order to go to Kafiristan • III – Peachy re-tells the story • 1. the end, and the beginning of a long journey • 2. military conquest • 3. cultural conquest • 4. extend his Kingdom to the following generation • 5. death
The Story & the Film • The film: a buddy film with Dravot more like a Quixotic figure • The story: “Dravot gives out that him and me were Gods and sons of Alexander, and Passed Grand Masters in the Craft” • The role of the Alexander the great is emphasized • The necklace with Masonic symbol • Wants Roxanne (also the name of Alexander’s wife) to be “my lawful wedded wife”
Dravot and Carnehan: Their Idealism • Sober and well-planned and self-disciplined with a contract ,expressing their English love of legal formalities. • Belong to another period of colonialism: conquering but not getting loots • Dravot dreams of conquered territories to Queen Victoria and being knighted for his services • The “heroic” death
Dravot and Carnehan: as loafers who become imperialist • Their ways of conquering and possession: • being King by “drilling men” • being a God – “the Craft’s the trick” • The sign under the seat, same race (you’re white people • Wants to make an Empire • wants a wife • found to be a man only
Edward Said • Issues of imperialism and colonialism are further analyzed by Edward Said ,in his book Culture and Imperialism. Like Kipling, Said focuses primarily on British and French imperialism - detailing the negative effects and intense egocentric nationalism that inspires it. Said himself has a similar background to Kipling.
Edward Said vs. Kipling • Both grew up with conflicted identities - Said growing up Christian in a Muslim Palestine, and by Kipling being British in India. This commonality gives the two authors shared elements in their writings. Said writes in Culture and Imperialism about outcasts and misfits, those who do not fit into social, ethnic or otherwise traditional groupings, a feeling both authors were acquainted with. The misfits of Kipling's The Man Who Would Be King are Carnehan and Dravot. Throughout the story, the two men are attempting to rise out of that category and become something greater in their eyes, and that - during times when imperialism was commonplace - meant becoming kings in their own right.
The narrator’s position • Realistic and self-belittling description of • His position: a vagabond, too; not alwaysassociated with a King at the moment • “respectable job” in a newspaper office – His job as a journalist, meeting the needs of many kinds of people ,boring • cynical about the “darkness” of Native States, the selfishness of both the Empires and the Kings
Gail Low’s interpretation • the strengths of the tale lies not in its audacious representation of conquest but in its understanding of the impudent processes of imperial mythologizing. • The artist [with an] inquisitive and often deliberately voyeuristic gaze', a figure who fantasizes about crossing cultural boundaries, and a writer who turns others into narrative and commercial profit.”
Two interpretations • The Man Who Would Be King‘ -- provides readers with a clear-sighted exploration of a colonial grammar and syntax of desire; -- it also presents the colonial text as a hoax—a 'scam'—pulled off by enterprising vagabond storytellers.
Modern keyword • In the "Modern" keyword by Chandon Reddy, he writes on the word modern and the concept of modernity and how it has impacted the world by encouraging expansionism and imperialism. These are the same topics that Kipling critiques using fiction. His story has Carnehan and Dravot engaging in imperialism, which was a modern construct during the 19th century. In the text Dravot and his companion deliberate handing over their empire to the Queen of England and they predict they will be honored for their conquest. This shows that in their modernity, imperialism was highly regarded, particularly on the part of the British, and this sentiment encouraged others to partake in imperialism as well, while disregarding the effect it had on native populations.
Lisa Lowe • In "The Intimacies of Four Continents" Lowe discusses the types of intimacy between individuals, nations and cultures, referring to both spacial proximity and to the distinction between the public and private spheres. Carnehan and Dravot experience various forms of intimacy during their adventure. Initially, they experience the relationship between rich and poor with a view from the bottom as loafers. They later develop a level of intimacy with cultures that had never before had contact with white Europeans or outsiders as conquerors on their way to becoming the Kings of Kafiristan.
Lisa Lowe • allowed them to see the world around them from yet another perspective - that of ruler. Like in Lowe's writings, the men are also able to see the racialized division of labor in their empire - with the two whites perceived to be gods whereas the natives were the workers or soldiers. Carnehan and Dravot themselves perpetuated the division and only began to perceive the natives as more than objects once they noticed they looked and acted English. This behavior is consistent with Lowe's analysis that placed the British as viewing the African slave and Chinese Coolie as below that of those of European descent.
Thanks FereshtehGolikani
