Rudyard Kipling, a literary colossus built on colonial sand

Today marks the 158thanniversary of Rudyard Kipling's birth. The occasion prompts a comprehensive reflection on his complex legacy, particularly for those who, like me, grew up enchanted by his stories and discovered the disturbing undercurrents of his beliefs much later. Born on December 30, 1865, in Bombay, British India, Kipling's literary contributions are undeniably significant, yet the shadows of his colonial-era prejudices cast a disquieting pall over his work.

Kipling's tales, notably The Jungle Book and Kim, seamlessly incorporated the cultural richness and complexity of India, enchanting readers worldwide. His ability to evoke the essence of the country, its incredible diversity, and the sheer beauty of its landscapes established him as a literary giant. Yet, if ones explores deeper, unsettling revelations about Kipling's beliefs come to the fore.

The same man who penned the mesmerising tales of the jungle also harboured deeply racist views.

Add WION as a Preferred Source

Take The White Man's Burden, for instance. It was a poem that espoused the virtues of colonialism, and a paternalistic attitude that mirrored the prevailing imperialistic ideologies of the time. The very title implies a heavy responsibility that falls upon the shoulders of those of European descent. The use of the word "burden" here suggests a self-imposed duty, portraying the colonial enterprise as a noble sacrifice for the betterment of less developed societies.

It constructs a narrative where the colonisers sees themselves as morally obligated to bring the benefits of Western civilisation to what they perceive as the uncivilised and inferior peoples in the colonised world.

The poem portrays the colonised peoples as "new-caught, sullen peoples, half devil and half child," depicting them as primitive and in need of the guiding hand of the superior white race. The phrase "new-caught" reinforces the notion of these nations as recently captured or acquired territories, in need of the civilising influence of their colonial masters. The poem served as a rallying cry for imperialistic endeavours, and not just the British, providing a seemingly moral foundation for the expansion of colonial powers.

As you can probably tell, it became increasingly challenging for me to reconcile the brilliance of his stories with his jaundiced worldview. As a young Indian reader who read and reread his works to the point of almost memorising passages, this revelation stirred conflicting emotions. How does one celebrate literary brilliance when it is intertwined with ideologies that perpetuated, and continues to perpetuate, oppression of entire peoples?

The colonial-era context in which Kipling lived undoubtedly influenced his perspectives, but it does not absolve him of the responsibility embedded in his words. The celebration of his literary genius must coexist with an acknowledgment of the harm perpetuated by his narratives. This duality prompts a broader conversation about the intersection of art and ideology, forcing us to question the ethical dimensions of celebrating works that endorse racist worldviews.

We have to embrace the discomfort of his prejudiced beliefs while also recognising his undeniable storytelling prowess. Two can (and I feel should) coexist together. It is an exploration of literature that necessitates a discerning gaze, embracing the beauty of the tales and at the same time remaining vigilant against the shadows that mar the canvas.

On this day, let's confront the inherent contradictions of literary appreciation, recognising that art, like life, is multifaceted. Kipling's legacy serves as a reminder that literature is not immune to the flaws of the human condition.