The Jungle Books

I found myself a bit torn by this book. On one level enjoyed the stories and the characters in them. Both human and non human. But on another level I was a quite offended by the sense of upper class British Imperialism that comes through in Kipling's work. I got a real sense that Kipling felt that the British were actually doing the natives of India a favor by taking over their lands and teaching them how to tame the Jungle.

Viszonyom Kiplinghez még mindig igen ambivalens. Egyfelől zseniális író – olyan mítoszteremtő képességekkel rendelkezik, amitől A Dzsungel könyve a Nagy Irodalmi Univerzumok egyikévé válik, méltó párja Homérosz görögség-víziójának, vagy Tolkien Középföldéjének. Tolla alatt az indiai természeti környezet lélegző, misztikus csodává válik, ami indákat növeszt, hogy az olvasóba kapaszkodjon*. Kipling állatfigurái pedig nem pusztán antropomorfizált négylábúak (vagy nullalábúak, ha feledhetetlen kígyófiguráit is idevesszük), hanem összetéveszthetetlen személyiséggel rendelkező lények, akik mintha fajuk platóni ideáját jelenítenék meg: a magar, a gát krokodilja például show more megtestesíti a krokodilság intézményének valamennyi lényeges toposzát – az már csak a hab a tortán, hogy közben egynémely embertársunkat is felismerjük benne. Szemet gyönyörködtető látni továbbá, Kipling milyen profizmussal helyezi el történeteinek súlypontját, felépítve erőteljes drámai jeleneteit – ahogy például Maugli történetét lezárja, az az angolszász próza egyik nagy ünnepe. Az embernek csaholni támad kedve a tehetetlen dühtől, ha eszébe jut, hogy Mr. Disney miképp herélte ki ezt az egész kozmikus egységet.

Ugyanakkor nem tudok elvonatkoztatni attól, hogy a kiplingi életműből mennyire árad a predesztináció. Van ugye ez a Dzsungel Törvénye – a mindenek felett álló törvény, ami minden lényt beosztott a maga szűk kategóriájába, amiből lehetetlen kitörni. Olyan ez, mint a kasztrendszer – aki sakál, az mindörökre sakál marad, sakáltulajdonságokkal rendelkezik, és sakálként fogják megítélni. Ebben a világban a nemesség a jellem csúcsa, amiben sajátosan összemosódik az erő a szépséggel, a bölcsesség a bátorsággal, és bizony ezt a tulajdonságot az, aki sakálnak született, soha nem tudja megszerezni. Az egyetlen lény, aki képes valamennyire felülemelkedni a Dzsungel Törvényén, az ember. De nem ám akármelyik ember! A bennszülött indiaiak például nem – ők leginkább a bandar-lógok (a szürkemajmok) updatált verzióinak tűnnek. Ám az angol fehérek – azok aztán valakik! Olyan, mintha ők testesítenék meg a Sorsot: ők viszik el a végzetet a végzetes krokodilnak, és őket szolgálja Riki-Tiki-Tévi is – mégpedig boldogan. Mert Kipling szerint az igazán boldog, aki szolgál, feltéve ha igazságos és bölcs ura van – a gyarmatosító sorsa pedig teher, mert muszáj igazságossá és bölccsé válnia. Úgyhogy én is keresek gyorsan magamnak valami gyarmatosítót, mielőtt gyomorfekélyt kapok a saját individualizmusomtól.

(És még pár szó az új kiadásról: a prózai fordítás szerintem hibátlan. A versbetétek is többnyire jók, bár a szlengesítést nem tartottam indokoltnak. Szabó Levente illusztrációi egyszerűségükben gyönyörűek, de leginkább a könyv fizikai jellege okozott örömet: valahogy kényelmes volt olvasni ezt a könyvet, mert mind a szedés, mind a papírminőség dédelgeti a szemet meg az ujjat. Így kell visszafogottan luxuscikket csinálni egy könyvből. Csak a tartalomjegyzék oldalszámozásai csúsztak el kicsit, de ezt – mondjuk – észre sem vettem.)

* De Kipling akkor is fantasztikus, ha nem Indiáról beszél. A kötetben két sarkvidéki elbeszélést is találunk, amik szintén működnek. Olvasva őket pedig óhatatlanul eszembe jutott, hogy Jack London is bizony a kiplingi köpönyegből bújt elő. (No meg a stevensoniból.) show less

eBook

Once again, I'm struck by the savagery that resonates throughout Kipling's writing. It would be so easy to think of The Jungle Book in a more Disney-fied light: talking animals, singing, the rhythmic cadences of a fairy tale or lullaby. But overarching all that is the ever-present reminder that the world of the jungle is a world of nature, red in tooth and claw. Mowgli is raised by wolves and instructed by Baloo for the explicit purpose of survival in a harsh world that actively seeks his death. Kotick is born and raised amidst bloodshed from two distinct sources: other seals and man. "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi" subverts the traditional story of a pet protecting his master by making the masters little more than incidental characters; show more Rikki-Tikki wants to protect them, but his actions are driven by instinct rather than any familial bond with the humans. Even in the less-obviously blood-drenched stories, violence is a powerful force. Toomai's journey to witness the dance of the elephants puts him at great risk of death.

The story I found most interesting, however, was the one which closes the book, "Her Majesty's Servants." The characters of this particular story are the camp animals for an army, but paradoxically, these might be the most innocent characters in the whole book. All their conversation is about war and its methods, but without any real recognition of what it means. These animals have been tamed by man, stripped of their natural instincts, and so, with the exception of the elephant, they don't realize what war means, content merely to follow orders and limit their perspective to the specifics of their duties.

And maybe that's the true lesson of The Jungle Book. Yes, it's violent, endlessly circling and returning to the themes of death and danger, but in the world of the animals, death and danger exists because they are necessary parts of life. Animals must eat, so animals must hunt and kill. But for people, violence is stripped of that which makes it necessary. Wars don't happen for food and survival; they happen for sport and profit.

Or maybe I'm just a filthy hippie. show less

I didn't expect to love this book as much as I did. Well, as much as I loved a good half of it. This isn't a novel, but a collection of 15 stories. Eight of them do involve Mowgli, a young Indian boy orphaned by the evil tiger Shere Khan, raised by wolves and who can count as friends and protectors Bagheera the black panther, Baloo the bear and Kaa the rock python. I've actually never seen the famous Disney film made from those stories, but that might have helped make the reading experience all the more fresh and delightful. What particularly struck me was the close observation of nature and animals evident right from the first sentence. If I were rating the Mowgli stories alone, I'd rank this book a five.

But there are seven other show more stories, and these I felt more mixed about. I did love "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi" about a brave mongoose versus cobras every bit as much as the Mowgli stories. I really liked two stories of the arctic, "The White Seal" about an Alaskan seal trying to find a sanctuary from men seeking to kill seals for fur and "Quiquern" about Canadian Inuits and their dogs searching for food. I liked "The Miracle of Purun Bhagat" and thought "Toomai of the Elephants" Okay.

But I didn't like "The Undertakers" at all and hated "Her Majesty's Servants." One of the reasons I didn't expect to like Kipling much at all is his reputation as an imperialist and racist. He's notoriously the author of the poem "The White Man's Burden." (And just because you're the first doesn't mean you're the second. Arthur Conan Doyle struck me as uncritical of imperialism but it was clear from his stories he was no racist--even believed in racial intermarriage. Kipling's views are quite different judging from the introduction to the edition I read.) Despite Kipling's politics though I found reading this book there were good reasons why Indian authors such as Arundhati Roy, V.S. Naipaul and Salman Rushdie find Kipling impressive and even influential. Kipling can be a wonderful storyteller. Rushdie has said Kipling's writing has "the power simultaneously to infuriate and to entrance." Mostly I was entranced. But a few times, and especially in "Her Majesty's Servants," I thought the dark side of Kipling, and his unapologetic imperialism and certainty everyone had their place and should obediently stay in it, was at its worst. show less

Don't let Disney put you off this -- it's neither sentimental nor soppy. This is an imaginative and sensitive collection of short stories, which do nothing less than imagine the animal kingdom as not the polar opposite to human society but as a parallel society with their own laws and customs. Anyone with an interest in mythology or cultural traditions will find a lot to like in this book. Neither do you have to be a fan of British colonialism: Kipling does not seem to take some of the simplistic attitudes towards India or the British empire that some (but not all) members of the British Raj seemed to take.

In short -- if, like me, you had somewhat negative preconceptions of Kipling's work, it's well worth putting them aside and trying show more reading it. You will probably find it quite different to what you were expecting. show less

The Mowgli stories are great fun and suitably mythic. "Mang the Bat" is a great potential band name.

The other stories are beyond tedious. A mongoose kills a snake, a seal finds a new island, and some war horses chat to each other at night. My edition comes with the Second Jungle Book, which I had no desire to read.

If you've only experienced Disney's version of the Mowgli stories, the books will show you a whole new world. The jungle is a dark and often violent place. Kipling's adventure tales are also commentaries on what he saw in the world of his time, and adults will find them as enthralling as their children.

Many editions of these tales are heavily abridged...always to their detriment, in my opinion. My parents gave me this edition when I was 11 and it's remained my favorite. Whichever version you read, make sure it's a complete one as the stories of Rikki-Tikki-Tavi, Toomai and the others are just as good a read as the more famous Mowgli adventures.