Romello J. Lovinsky
COL Miller
ERH-205WX-02
12 March 2018
Help Received: “The Man Who Would Be King”
“The Man Who Would Be King” Essay
Word Count: 1039
Kipling’s proposed theme for “The Man Who Would Be King” was the need for morality and ethics in the British Empires colonization. Jeffrey Meyers claims that “The Man Who Would Be King” is critically flawed as a result of Kipling’s hints of support and approval of the imperialistic aims of Peachey and Dravot (1). My interpretation is that within the story Kipling provides ample evidence of the unethical personality traits and actions of both Peachy and Dravot as imperialists, therefore, keeping true to his condemnation of the unethical imperialism of the British.
The readers initial interaction with the personalities of Peachey and Dravot are in the train station scene at the start of the novella. The story begins with Peachey attempting to steal a watch, a watch that belongs to the newsman, who will tell the story from his perspective. Peachey only returns the watch once he discovers that the newsman is a fellow mason. This shows that, if an action does not negatively affect Peachey or Dravot they will do it, they have no concern for others. The watch scene is only the introduction to Peachey and Dravot’s selfishness.
Furthermore, Peachey asks the newsman for a favor. He requests that the man deliver a message to Dravot, who is the man with the red beard, that will be taking a train on the same line in the near future. The man agrees, however, when he delivers the message to Dravot, Dravot once again shows his unfavorable personality; replying with, “Did he say that I was to give you anything? Cause I won’t” (Kipling 4). Even though the man was attempting to do a good deed by delivering the message, Dravot showed no sign of thanks. Any person with a decent character would acknowledge the man’s unselfish assistance, however, Dravot did not.
Continuing on, we reach the scene in which Peachey and Dravot establish their contrak. This contrak prohibits their interaction with women and alcohol. At that time, women and alcohol were give or take the two best pleasures a man could enjoy. The fact that they gave those up for their goal makes this one of the few scenes in which someone might slightly respect Peachey and Dravot. This action exposed their persistence and drive toward their goal which allows the reader to forget for a second the pitfalls of each character. I point out, that even within this scene, Kipling shows no compassion for Peachey and Dravot. I believe this event foreshadowed what was later to come relating to Peachey and Dravot’s failure. Keeping in mind the basis of Peachey and Dravot’s contrak, we continue on to the scene that caused their downfall. Dravot, against the advice of Peachey and several local priests, decides that he will have a wife. He claims, “I said wife not woman”, and that he will not violate the contrak because he is not using this wife for solely pleasure (Kipling 21). The priests continue to advise against it stating, “A god is not permitted to marry the daughter of a man”, yet Dravot proceeds with his plans (Kipling 21). The marriage immediately turns Dravot’s world upside down, beginning with the women exposing that he was not a god by biting him; then his whole society turns against him. In this scene, Kipling attempted to show that constant successful imperialism causes a power-hungry mindset. The ability to stop and think about who your actions affect is gradually lost. Dravot’s main goal was to have a wife so that his legacy would not die with him but continue on in the flesh with a son. What he failed to realize is that his legacy would live on in script if only he could acknowledge his accomplishments as a victory and move on.
Some would say, that in order to defend their claim of Kipling’s support for Peachey and Dravot they simply have to state that Peachey and Dravot did indeed succeeded at becoming kings. However, if you look deeper into the story, you realize that the characters true goal was to increase their wealth and leave a legacy behind. These goals were not accomplished by Peachey or Dravot and they ended the story with less than they started with. Their names will be forgotten, and the only memory of these two individuals will solely be in the mind of the newsman.
In the end, Peachey and Dravot are brought to be punished for their false claims of being gods. Even with the end in sight, Peachey and Dravot continue to show support for each other. Dravot states, “I’ve brought you to this, Peachey” and Peachey replies “Fully and freely do I forgive you” (Kipling 24). Most would think that the mutual forgiveness of the characters is Kipling’s way of showing compassion for Peachey and Dravot; however, I believe that this moment only strengthened the perception of Peachey and Dravot’s selfishness. Because, even after they fail at maintaining their monarch like presence and are being put to death, they continue to believe that their actions were justified. Kings no more, they still lack the basic morals to recognize that their actions against the locals were unjust.
Kipling balanced the need for an intriguing story and the ability to maintain his goal to influence the imperialism of the British Empire. Kipling expressed the need for morality and ethics in the British Empires colonization strategies. “The Man Who Would Be King”, was a story that was interesting enough to keep the attention of the majority of the population, while still expressing his message. After every break in criticism Kipling gave Peachey and Dravot, he would employ a deeper condemnation of their character as well. Therefore, he kept true to his condemnation of the unethical imperialism of Peachey and Dravot who in his story directly represent the British Empire.
Works Cited
Kipling, Rudyard. “The Man Who Would Be King” (Penguin Classic). Penguin Books, 2011.
Meyers, Jeffrey. “The Idea of Morality in The Man Who Would Be King”. Review of “The Man Who Would Be King”, Vol.8, No.4, 1968, pp 711-723.