Read the following 3
stories: “The White Seal,” “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi,” “Toomai of the Elephants”
Answer TWO of the
following:
Q1: How do the heroes of
these stories, such as Little Toomai, Kotick, and even Rikki-Tikki-Tavi relate
to Mowgli? What characteristics do they all share, and why might Kipling choose
them as the heroes of his animal fables set in the British empire ? You might choose a specific tale to illustrate
this.
Q2: “The White Seal,”
written in 1890, was a specific response to the rampant commercial hunting of
seals in the Northern Pacific. How might this story—and to a lesser extent,
“Toomai” and “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi”—be written to raise awareness for British
readers (and especially, young British readers, who might grow up to
make a difference)?
Q3: Do colonialist (or
even racist) views sometimes cloud Kipling’s stories and depiction of the
jungle world? Where do we see this, and could this be simply a record of how
people at the time thought and spoke? Is it satiric? Or does it reflect the
author’s views of racial hierarchies?
Q4: What is the role of
man in each of the three stories? Is man still the king of the jungle, its
ultimate protector or destroyer? Or is man seen more like the opening chapter
of the book, “the weakest and most defenseless of all living things” (7)? Why
is this significant for Kipling’s message of nature vs. civilization in The
Jungle Books?
Ashley Bean
ReplyDelete2. A main point I picked up on in “The White Seal” is that one person can make a difference, no matter the odds or the voices telling them otherwise. This story may give children the courage to speak up, or try to change, if something wrong is happening. Just because it has been that way forever, such as the seals being corralled and killed, doesn’t make it right. All three stories illustrate this point as well – Rikki-Tikki saved an entire family from three different snakes all on his own, and Toomai believed in the dance of the elephants even though it was kind of a joke among the adults.
4. I think man is maintaining the view from the first of the book, because in each story man is below animal in strength. In “The White Seal” they seem to be above the seals since they are hunted, but with Kotick’s determination they escaped man. Rikki-Tikki saved the humans three times, and two times the man tried to kill the snake but Rikki-Tikki had already killed it. In Toomai’s case, he had no part in being taken to the elephants’ dance, he just happened to be along for the ride. He was celebrated in the end, when really he didn’t do anything. The animals in the story seem to have more intelligence and wisdom, where the humans seem a bit ignorant.
Mason Horanzy
ReplyDeleteQ2: It seems rather obvious that Kipling had a negative view on the seal hunts of that era. He is successfully able to create an emotional attachment between the reader and Kotick. This attachment enables us to understand Kotick's emotions towards the seal hunters. Because we sympathize with Kotick, it is especially disturbing when Kotick sees his best friends being skinned. This effectively creates a disturbing and off putting feeling that shows the gruesome reality of seal hunting. This would definitely have an impact on younger, more impressionable readers.
Q4: It seems that Man's role varies depending on the story. The seal hunters in "The White Seal" are obviously the heartless and dominant antagonists. On the other hand, the humans in "Rikki Tikki Tavi" are loving, sympathetic, and helpless. It is also worth noting that the humans in "Rikki Tikki Tavi" are peaceful unless provoked, much unlike the seal hunters. I can't help but wonder whether the differences between the human characters in these two stories is purely to help develop plot, or did Kipling mean to say that seals are naturally more prone to be a victim of man while a mongoose is protective by nature.
Karlyn Hedges
ReplyDeleteQ1. In each of the stories, the "hero" is young and different from others. They are able to "see" things that other, older characters are unable to see. They have a different point of view and therefore a different understanding of the world. Kotick, the young white seal, questions the way things are and wants to change things. Because he is young with an innocent worldview, he believes that it's possible, whereas the older seals have all just accepted their fate.
Q4. In most of the stories, man is revered, and being like man is seen as the ultimate goal. In "Rikki Tikki Tavi," it is apparently THE mongoose dream to get to live in a house and live like a human, and in this story humans are portrayed as good and sympathetic characters. However, in "The White Seal," men are the evil hunters, despised by the seals. They do not aspire to be like men but rather to be far away from them.
Q2. These stories definitely show us that, just because one person who is older says something, it doesn't mean that it is right. It's an encouragement to go against the grain of society - especially in the face of adversity - and make the necessary changes to preserve the life of as many people as you can instead of just some. Basically, just because one person believes a certain way (and they may be in a position of power or just a higher rank) it does not mean their decision making skills are perfect or law and that questioning these decisions helps everyone win.
ReplyDeleteQ3. The stories are definitely satiric in their nature of "racism." Kipling isn't trying to make points on race or class systems, and that would be an entirely surface read of any of the stories. Each story is actually a clear representation of questioning authority and protecting those that are different than you. While it's hard for us to actually know the rules of the jungle, it does make some of the content come across as a little barbaric. However, this is not to be read in a way that leads to favor of upper class or a specific race - it's to poke fun at the thought that anyone thinks these details matter.
Q2: “The White Seal” pretty much begs the reader to consider things from the perspective of a seal. While the animal behavior depicted in “The White Seal” isn’t very realistic, it does succeed in making the animals seem human enough to evoke sympathy. The other two stories also do this, with Rikki-Tikki’s intelligent behavior and the actions of the elephants in “Toomai” that would normally be expected only of humans, such as dancing. “The White Seal” and “Toomai” are meant to be more inspiring to younger viewers in that they challenge the wisdom of the elders. The adults didn’t believe that Toomai could see elephants dance and the older seals had pretty much accepted their fate while Kotick refused to give up. The younger generation in both stories brought new ideas to the table that not only one-upped older ideas, but in the case of “The White Seal” actually saved lives.
ReplyDeleteQ4: In “Toomai” man was somewhat of a protector (in a sick, twisted way), taking care of the elephants while also enslaving t over them like a king. In “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi”, man was the protected. In “The White Seal”, man was the destroyer.
The relationship between nature and mankind is just like any other relationship in that it is ever-changing and varies depending on the individuals involved and how they interact with each other. More than likely, a lot of people in Kipling’s time had a hard time grasping the idea that they had not, in fact, conquered all of nature. In “Toomai” and “The White Seal”, man was a king. Man caught elephants and bent these giant, powerful creatures to their will. Man also invaded and slaughtered countless seals with virtually no resistance for a very long time. However, in “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi”, the dynamic changes in that man is weak but precious and therefore worth fighting for. It could be argued that Kipling believes that in order to coexist with nature (because it will never be conquered) mankind must be both weak and strong. We must be strong enough to care for our animal friends, and weak enough to be cared for in turn. To be too strong would create an imbalance of power and instill a cruelty in mankind that could create destruction and conflict.
Q1: I loved "The White Seal" story, especially because of Kotick. Much like Mowgli, Kotick is different. He is intelligent, young, and can see what others cannot; the little white seal "[is] the only one who asked questions" (75) and dreams that life could be better elsewhere. Mowgli and Kotick share an important kind of innocence that breaths new life into British values, challenging class values and traditions.
ReplyDeleteQ2: "The White Seal" offers a portrait of Kotick that is so amiable you cannot help but develop a sort of companionship with the seal. As I read this story I found myself rooting for him to find a land without humans, which - coincidentally - is a world without me. I think young British readers would have had a similar reaction, sparking the first inklings of environmental awareness and seal conservation.
Bria Gambrell
ReplyDeleteQ1: The heroes of the stories all seem to believe in themselves and even better, things that are bigger than them. For example, in The White Seal, Kotick believes that he can find a way to save his “young people” by determining himself. Although all these characters may be young, they all share a drive that can be seen in todays youth as well. I though it was interesting how all of Kipling’s heroes are all small, young and innocent. It really shows that no matter the size, anyone can be a hero. Also, it acts as an awesome metaphor for the people of the British Empire who looked down upon other cultures and races and belittled them.
Q4: The human race is shown in different lights in these stories. In Mogwli’s story, humans are represented through the Bandar-log who seem to be outcasts in the jungle society. In The White Seal, humans are destroyers who have no regard for other life forms outside of their own. Then there’s the Rikki-Tikki-Tavi story where humans are revered and Rikki-Tikki aspires to live in a big house with them. It seems like Kipling wants to show what humans are capable of, both good and bad, but also remain critical in the ways the British Empire is in comparison to all of these stories.
Bria Gambrell
Yes, the theme of innocence is big here, going back to Romantic ideas we've seen before; he's also critical of the 'middle-class' complacency which fuels the Empire, since those who benefit from India--and other lands--are content to enjoy what they have even at others' expense. Most of Kipling's 'small' heroes are not.
Delete