Kim (1901) by Rudyard Kipling — novel #258

…I am Kim. This is the great world, and I am only Kim. Who is Kim? 

• Kim 
• by Rudyard Kipling
• British lit, Indian lit, historical fiction, picaresque novel
• Published: 1901
• My edition: Project Gutenberg freebook (eBook)
• Setting: 1890s India
• Awards: Kipling won the Nobel Prize in Literature for this and other works
  
• Also by this author (that I’ve read): Rudyard Kipling: Selected Poems

 

Who is Kim? Indeed, that is the question this picaresque novel addresses. The short answer is that Kim is Kimball O’Hara, about 13 years old, the orphaned son of an Irish soldier, living by his wits in the streets of Lahore. His skin is browned by the Sun and no one realizes that he is not a native Indian.

 

In a more philosophical sense, Kim is “the friend of all the world” a nickname that signifies Kim’s skill at making confidants of his fellow habitants, be they Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Jain, Buddhist, Christian, or any of the different castes.

 

Kim befriends an aged Tibetan lama and becomes his chela (disciple). The lama is on a quest to discover the sacred river that will free him, and Kim, from the Wheel of Things. After some time though, Kim’s parentage is discovered by British authorities who enroll him in a proper British school in India. But he remains in contact with the lama. British officers recognize Kim’s unique ability to blend in anywhere in India, and after some years at school, he is employed by the British government as a spy to learn what he can about Russian activities in India. He does so, while at the same time rejoining his lama.

 

But who is Kim? He has been taught he is sahib—literally a term of respect but colloquially a white person or European. But is he?

“No, I am Kim. This is the great world, and I am only Kim. Who is Kim? He considered his identity, a thing he had never done before, till his head swam. He was one insignificant person in all this roaring whirl of India, going southward to he knew not what fate.

The reader, like Kim, cannot discover a simple answer to the question. Kim is many things to many people: chela to the lama, agent to the British, messenger, interpreter, and when he means to be, no one worth noticing. This story is literally and figuratively about Kim’s journey. My favorite parts are when he is traveling with the lama, and the apparent love they have for each other.

 

The lama professes…

“A blessing on thee.” The lama inclined his solemn head. “I have known many men in my so long life, and disciples not a few. But to none among men, if so be thou art woman-born, has my heart gone out as it has to thee—thoughtful, wise, and courteous; but something of a small imp.”

And in turn Kim…

Bit by bit, disconnectedly, each tale called up by some wayside thing, he spoke of all his wanderings up and down Hind [India]; till Kim, who had loved him [the lama] without reason, now loved him for fifty good reasons.

I enjoyed this story for Kipling’s authentic description and insight on India, for the diverse characters, and for the host of little things I learned about the non-western world. And I loved Kim's nickname — the friend of all the world

 

The only detraction was dialogue, and there’s a lot of dialogue. At times, it was difficult to follow the tone. There’s a lot of verbal sparring. I could understand the literal meaning, but was often unsure if it was said in jest or in earnest, complimentary or insulting. Yet, I prefer Kipling's realistic rendition, rather than a false westernized version.

 

As I understand it, Kipling is less the imperial apologist in this novel than in other writings. I can’t confirm it, as I’ve not read enough Kipling to compare. However, I confess that I was more interested in Kim’s time with his beloved lama, than in his time at the British school. But I don’t think it was precisely Kipling’s intent to advocate one over the other. They are after all, separate influences that would define — who is Kim.

 

My rating 3.5/5

 

 

 

Classic #27 of 50 for The Classics Club Challenge – Round IV

 

What is your experience with Rudyard Kipling? He is a diverse writer. What genre do you feel is his best? What should I read next?

 

.

A House for Mr. Biswas by V. S. Naipaul (novel #207)

…he [Mr. Biswas] had thought profoundly and with
despair of the future.

 

Mohun Biswas is the son of Indian immigrants in Trinidad. The story begins with his birth, probably late 1920s, early 1930s. The story doesn’t begin well. A Hindu pundit gives a not very promising prophecy about the child, and it is considered a bad omen that he is born breech with an extra finger.

 

It never gets much better.

 

The story is set in Trinidad, but it feels more like India, as Mr. Biswas and his family keep pretty well within the Indian community in Trinidad. (Mr. Biswas is reportedly based on Naipaul’s father.)

 

I’m not going to spend a lot of time on this review. I didn’t care for this story. There isn’t one admirable person in it. A few are pitiable, like Mr. Biswas, who is never contented, never happy. Life isn’t working out for him, and it’s always someone else’s fault.

 

Blech!

 

Mr. Biswas tries to rise above his lot in life, but he does it so foolishly that it never works out, and it’s hard even to feel too sorry for him. He is married, almost by accident, to a woman he nearly despises and lives with her family, where he is constantly reminded of his worthlessness and dependence on their patronage.

 

He could go to Hanuman House whenever he wished and become lost in the crowd, since he was treated with indifference rather than hostility.

 

He had spent all his life among people without even thinking that he might be afraid of them.

 

He tries several times to build or buy a home of his own. He eventually succeeds, but it is poorly constructed, not worth what he pays, and more than he can afford. He still isn’t happy.

 

Living had always been a preparation, a waiting. And so the years passed; and now there was nothing to wait for.

 

I don’t think I comprehended Naipaul’s message unless it was contempt for his people.

 

This is the first time I’ve read A House for Mr. Biswas. I’ve read one other work by Naipaul, A Bend in the River, which I didn’t love either. I’ve read that Naipaul’s early works were “wistfully comic.” I hope that doesn’t refer to this one. Wistful? Perhaps, but not comic. He does write well. For that, I give A House for Mr. Biswas…

 

 

My rating:  3 out of 5 stars

 

 

 

This novel satisfies Black, Indigenous, Person of Color Author category in the Back to the Classics 2022Challenge.

 

.

Midnight's Children by Salman Rushdie (novel #198)

…above all things, I fear absurdity. ~ Saleem Sinai

 

Midnight’s Children is an allegory, using magical realism, and I think you’d have to call it historical fiction as well. The fictional narrator recalls real events and persons in India, just prior to independence from Great Britain in 1947 and continuing another 30 years.

 

The narrator Saleem Sinai is born at the stroke of midnight August 15, 1947 at the very moment India becomes independent. At the same moment another child is born, whose mother does not survive.

 

At the stroke of the midnight hour, while the world sleeps, India awakens to life and freedom…And beneath the roar of the monster there are two more yells, cries, bellows, the howls of children arriving in the world, their unavailing protests mingling with the din of independence which hangs saffron-and-green in the night sky.

 

Shortly after birth the babies are switched, unbeknownst to the parents. Saleem is raised in affluence while the other, Shiva, lives as an orphan in extreme poverty, a life that should have been Saleem’s.

 

Saleem, and all of India’s Midnight Children, born in the first hour of independence, are endowed with magical powers. The closer their birth to midnight, the greater their powers. Hence Saleem and Shiva are the most powerful, and eventually become enemies. Saleem can communicate telepathically with all the Midnight Children, and hopes to use their collective powers to help the young nation, while Shiva is more personally ambitious.

 

I didn’t love it; I didn’t hate it, but I respect it. I’m certain I’d appreciate this book more if I had better knowledge of Indian history. I thought it was a fascinating premise, and I think it’s probably rather brilliant…just mostly wasted on me. My deficiency, not the authors. I am reminded of John Updike’s first rule of literary criticism: 

 

“Try to understand what the author wished to do, and do not blame him for not achieving what he did not attempt.”

 

I think Rushdie wished to tell the world of India’s struggles in her early life. I think he did that admirably, but it wasn’t particularly compelling for me.

 

My rating 3 ½ out of 5 stars

 

 

.