Complete Works of Rudyard Kipling (Illustrated)

by Rudyard Kipling

  In such stories as “ 007,” “ The Ship that Found Herself,” and “ The Devil and the Deep Sea,” the author cannot, owing to the nature of the subject, escape writing in a merely professional language; and so hosts of words become unintelligible to the ordinary reader. Nevertheless, we cannot but acknowledge that Kipling has succeeded in giving a highly poetical presentment of the great spectacle of modern machinery, and that perhaps it might be worth while to learn the technical words in order to be capable of enjoying this kind of contemporary romance.

  In 1900 L’Humanite Nouvelle — the splendid French review of Science, Art, and Letters — published the following :

  “M. Rudyard Kipling ne se preserve pas des ses amis. II a bien ecrit a G. F.

  Monkshood une lettre dans laquelle sa modestie offensee (son orgueil s’offense- rait peut-etre a meilleur droit) par le panegyrique de 236 pages que vient de lui consacrer ce dernier, proteste, mais elle proteste un peu faiblement. Aussi M. Monkshood a-t-il passe outre. D’ailleurs, sauf en ce qui regarde le bon renom de M. Kipling, et lui-meme est seul juge de ce qu’il lui plait qu’on fasse de lui, il eut ete regrettable que M. Monkshood brulat son manuscrit. J’en cite quelques passages :

  “1 Rudyard Kipling ne s’appartient pas, comme vous ou moi nous nous appar- tenons. II fait corps avec le pays. II y a des milliers de gens qui ecrivent, il y en a des douzaines qui savent ecrire, mais il n’y a qu’un Rudyard Kipling.1 Voici un peu de critique d’apres Taine Apres avoir concede que Rudyard Kipling a de la commiseration pour l’lrlandais, de 1’estime pour TEcossais, M. Monkshood ajoute: 1 Mais le plus profond de son cceur est anglais,’ etablissant ainsi que M. Kipling — qui n’eut cru, a voir l’homme, ou a lire 1’ecrivain! — est l’incarnation meme de la race anglaise ou anglo-saxonne, car le critique ne precise pas. II a hate de conclure : ‘ D’ailleurs, c’est l’opinion enracinee de Kipling que la plus belle chose qui se soit jamais produite dans le monde, c’est l’avenement de l’Anglais. Et il y a quelques pages ecrites dans l’historie qui pourront peut-etre lui donner raison.’ Mais voici un passage de critique purement litteraire : 1 Que dirai- je du poeme Le Drapeau anglais? Seulement ceci : Voila une ceuvre qui inspire, qui n’est pas theatrale, qui est concrete, qui n’est pas anemique, qui est brave, qui n’est pas boursuflue, qui est bonne, belle, vraie. Mais par dessus tout, c’est litteraire.’

  “Je trouve un charme infini a cette derniere phrase. Mais il faut resister au plaisir de citer M. Monkshood. Je note seulement, que d’apres son critique, les ceuvres de M. Kipling ne plaisent pas aux femmes (j’avais cru le contraire) parce que d’abord 1 il ne croit pas a la superiority de la femme sur se despote brutal qu’est l’homme ‘; qu’en second lieu 1 il ne croit pas que les femmes aient fait 1’Empire Britannique, bati des docks et invente des cuirasses’; et parce qu’enfin * il ne parle pas d’intrigues adulteres joliment.’ M. Monkshood a Tironie un peu lourde.

  “Une derniere constatation a propos de son livre : j’ai observe avec soulagement que, dans toute Tceuvre de Kipling, il y a deux volumes qui laissent froid son panegyriste. Ce sont justement les admirables contes de la Jungle.”

  Mr. Rudyard Kipling’s happy poem, “ Pan in Vermont,” was issued by the publishers of “ The Seven Seas.” At first the edition was one of twenty-five copies only. Now very rare.

  “Pan in Vermont “ is a spring song, or Renouveau. It bears at its head the quaint epigraph :

  “About the 15th of this month you may expect our Mr. , with the usual spring seed, etc., catalogues. — Florists’ Announcement.”

  The poem opens :

  “It’s forty in the shade to-day, the spouting eaves declare; The boulders rise above the drift, the southern slopes are bare; Hub-deep in slush Apollo’s car swings north along the Zodiac. Good lack, the spring is back, and Pan is on the road.”

  The second stanza carries further the conceit of spring (by personification, Pan), quickening the wintry earth, and leads the reader to a really comical fancy.

  Every man who has carried home a seedsman’s catalogue will understand the next few verses, such as :

  “What though his phlox and hollyhocks ere half a month demised? What though his ampelopsis clambered not as advertised? Though every seed was guaranteed and every standard true, Forget, forgive, they did not live! Believe, and buy anew.”

  SOME RECENT WORDS UPON KIPLING.

  Quoted from Barry Pain.

  If you read a translation of Kipling into French — however conscientious the translation may be — you will find that the original has gained nothing in the process, but, on the contrary, has lost a good deal. De Maupassant has frequently been translated into English, and never satisfactorily. How can one translate the tale 4 4 Bel-ami” into English? One cannot even get past the title without spoiling something. How are you to render into French without missing a shade, “ No more you can’t pauperise them as ‘asn’t things to begin with. They’re bloomin’ well pauped “?

  But here we come to a point which is at first sight puzzling. A male or female duffer writes stories and attains vast popularity. A man of genius, like Kipling, writes stories and also attains vast popularity. In the first case the public is quite wrong : in the second it is quite right. How does this happen?

  In the first place, the duffer’s public is not the same as Kipling’s public throughout, though, as some readers are extraordinarily omnivorous, it may be in part the same. Secondly, a great

  consensus of enthusiastic critical approval, such as Kipling received, has its weight.

  In the eighties Kipling wrote for the Allahabad Pioneer work which reached this country early in the following decade. Critics have spoken of the easy cynicism of “ Plain Tales from the Hills.” Some of them — if it very much matters — may be cynical, but that they had a common quality, easily acquired by a writer, cannot be said. One would need only to quote a page or two from “ Beyond the Pale “or “ The Madness of Private Ortheris” to prove it. This and the succeeding volumes raised the position of the short story. It was with Kipling that many readers began to see that the short story had its own special art — the art of suggestion.

  “No, I ain’t mammysick, because my uncle brung me up, but I’m sick for London again; sick for the sounds of ‘er, an’ the sights of ‘er, and the stinks of ‘er; orange-peel and hasphalte an’ gas comin’ in over Vaux’all Bridge. Sick for the rail goin’ down to Box ‘111, with your gal on your knee an’ a new clay pipe in your face. That, an’ the Stran’ lights where you knows ev’ryone, an’ the copper that takes you up is a old friend that tuk you up before, when you was a little, scritchy boy lyin’ loose between the Temple an’ the Dark Harches.”

  In these few lines of dialogue are suggested much of the psychology and much of the biography of Private Stanley Ortheris, No. 22639, B Company.

  WHEN KIPLING “ GOT THE SACK.”

  Rumour has been busy recently concerning the fee paid to Rudyard Kipling for his series of three articles on the

  doings of our submarine officers, and which were published simultaneously in practically every paper of note in this country, and also in the United States.

  That the cheque was one “worth having” may be taken for granted, and this is a reminder that Kipling’s first venture in journalism was a ghastly failure.

  The affair happened in America. Kipling, then quite unknown to fame, had applied for work on the San Francisco Examiner.

  He was given a trial assignment, and returning to the office later he proceeded to write up his “ story “ in his own quaint and inimitable style.

  We know enough of Kipling now to be sure that his copy was a perfect piece of work of its kind, but the sub-editor failed altogether to appreciate its peculiar virtues.

  “Rot! “ he exclaimed, as he slashed his blue pencil furiously through para-

  graph after paragraph. “ Rot! “ again; and again more blue pencil. Finally he gave it up as a bad job, and handed the story over to another reporter to be rewritten.


  Then, swinging round his chair, he said : “ Mr. Kipling, you need not show up for work to-morrow. You have no idea how to get news, and when it comes to writing a story you make about as poor a show at it as is possible. You’ll excuse my bluntness, but the Examiner is not a kindergarten.”

  EXTRACT FROM SHANE LESLIE’S BOOK.

  “What do they know of England who only England know?” is a phrase of Kipling which would have puzzled all Victorian premiers except Disraeli. To Disraeli England and the East were

  equally congenial, and he eventually merged the English with the Indian Crown. Kipling’s burst into fame came with the rough times of the Boer War, when prophets were needed to say smooth things. In 1888 Moreton Frewen forwarded some of Kipling’s work to England, and received word that it was * not up to the standard of the Daily Telegraph.’

  AN AEROPLANE JOKE.

  Here is an entirely new story about Rudyard Kipling.

  Apropos of his recent series of articles on the work of our submarine heroes, a friend of his suggested that he should write a companion series on the doings of our gallant airmen.

  “Perhaps! Some day! “ was Kipling’s non-committal reply.

  “Oh, but you must,” insisted his friend. “ Let’s see whether we can’t hit on a good title.”

  “Well,” answered Rudyard after a moment or two’s cogitation, u what do you think of ‘Plane Tales from the Sky ‘? “

  The very witty pens of Punch — still “ going strong,” though seventy years old — have presented us with some most delightful Kipling parodies and paraphrases : always kindly, always well- informed, always the criticism of one who had read, and read well, the subject of his criticism and had studied the best method of satirising him. I think the following joke is well worthy of repetition and further preservation. I do not know the author, but it has the flash of the steel nib of E. V. Lucas, the really literary laureate of the open and closed roads and ways in life in literature.

  A “ VERY-NEARLY “ STORY.

  (Not at all by Mr. Rudyard Kipling.)

  Once upon a time — not very long ago — an Eminent Writer met a Modern Child.

  “Approach, Best-Beloved,” said the Eminent Writer; “come hither, oh ‘scruciating idle and pachydermatous phenomenon, and I will tell you a ‘trancing tale! “

  The Modern Child regarded him with mild curiosity. “ Feeling a bit chippy? “ he asked; “slight break in the brain- box? Or why do you talk like that? — No, can’t stop now, I’m sorry to say.”

  “But you must, Best-Beloved! You’ve got to, oh, ‘satiable Chimpanzee! Can’t you see that I’m an Eminent Writer, talking in this way on purpose to please you? And you don’t even know how the Ruddikip got His Great Big Side! Do stop and listen! “

  “Oh, anything you like,” said the Modern Child, sitting down weariedly. “ Let me light a cigarette. Now, drive ahead! “

  “Down at the back of beginning, oh, extremely Precious, there was a little Ruddikip. And he was the most ‘defatigable creature that anyone ever knew. There never was a creature so specially and ‘scusably ‘defatigable. And first he grew several Tails, which the ‘defatigable Ruddikip said were Plain, but all the other creatures said were highly-coloured, and very fine indeed. Then he made many other inventions in the day’s work, and sang songs too, and everybody agreed that there never was such a ‘defatigable Ruddikip, and his little Side began to grow — ’cause he couldn’t help it. ‘Cept when he tried a Light that Failed; then he got a hump instead. So, Best- Beloved, the ‘defatigable Ruddikip pleased all the big people and creatures, and they all shouted out ‘ Hurrah! Well- done! ‘ just as loud as ever they could shout. Then he said:

  “‘ I have pleased the big people; it behoves me to do something for the rising generation of muddied oafs’ — which was the way the Ruddikip talked after his Side was grown big. So next he said a pretty piece about a most ‘strordinary Storky and Co., but the young muddied oafs only said, i Pah! Bah! Pooh! ‘ — which hurt the feelings of the Ruddikip. ‘Sons of the Spuming Spring-tide! ‘ he snorted (and no one knew what was meant), ‘ I will now turn to the Small Children, and I shall address them in decapitated polysyllables.’

  “Wherefore and ‘cordingly, oh, Best- Beloved, the most and-altogether-beyond- record-’defatigable Ruddikip took his little pen, and he wrote. Then they took the writing of the ‘defatigable Ruddikip, and put it in beautiful, big black print. For they knew, oh, Approximately Invaluable, that this is the kind of talk you like, and that you would thank the Ruddikip ever so much for tales written just in this way! “ “ Chuck it! “ said the Modern Child as he rose and fled.

  STEVENSON AND KIPLING.

  (First printed in a pamphlet supplement to the Letters of R. L. 5.)

  To Rudyard Kipling.

  In 1890, on first becoming acquainted with Mr. Kipling’s “ Soldiers Three,” Stevenson had written his congratulations red-hot. “ Well and indeed, Mr. Mulvaney,” so ran the first sentence of his note, “ but it’s as good as meat to meet in with you, sir. They tell me it was a man of the name of Kipling made ye; but indeed and they can’t fool me; it was the Lord God Almighty that made you.” Taking the cue thus offered, L

  Mr. Kipling had written back in the character of his own Irishman, Thomas Mulvaney, addressing Stevenson’s Highlander, Alan Breck Stewart. In the following letter, which belongs to an uncertain date in 1891, Alan Breck is made to reply. “ The gentleman I now serve with “ means, of course, R. L. S. himself.

  (Vailima, 1891.)

  Sir, — I cannot call to mind having written you, but I am so throng with occupation this may have fallen aside. I never heard tell I had any friends in Ireland, and I am led to understand you are come of no considerable family. The gentleman I now serve with assures me, however, you are a very pretty fellow and your letter deserves to be remarked. It’s true he is himself a man of very low descent upon the one side; though upon the other he counts cousinship with a gentleman, my very good friend, the late Mr. Balfour of the Shaws, in the Lothian; which I should be wanting in good fellowship to forget. He tells me besides you are a man of your hands; I am not informed of your weapon; but if all be true it sticks in my mind I would be ready to make exception in your favour, and meet you like one gentleman with another. I suppose this’ll be your purpose in your favour, which I could very ill make out; it’s one I would be sweir to baulk you of. It seems, Mr. Mcllvaine, which I take to be your name, you are in the household of a gentleman of the name of Coupling : for whom my friend is very much engaged. The distances being very uncommodious I think it will be maybe better if we leave it to these two to settle all that’s necessary to honour. I would have you to take heed it’s a very unusual condescension on my part, that bear a King’s name; and for the matter of that I think shame to be mingled with a person of the name of Coupling, which is doubtless a very good house but one I never heard tell of, any more than Stevenson. But your purpose being laudable, I would be sorry (as the word goes) to but off my nose to spite my face. I am, Sir, your humble servant,

  A. STEWART,

  Chevalier de St. Louis.

  To Mr. Mcllvaine,

  Gentleman Private in a foot regiment, under cover to Mr. Coupling.

  He has read me some of your Barrack Room Ballants, which are not of so noble a strain as some of mine in the Gaelic, but I could set some of them to the pipes if this rencounter goes as it’s to be desired. Let’s first, as I understand you to move, do each other this rational courtesy; and if either will survive, we may grow better acquaint. For your tastes for what’s martial and for poetry agree with mine.

  A. S.

  FIRST REVIEW OF THE FIRST BOOK ON KIPLING.

  “RUDYARD KIPLING: The Man and His Work,” an attempt at appreciation by G. F. Monkshood, is evidently, and as was to be expected, a big success, for a second edition is already published. Speaking of this book the critic of the Globe says : — ” It has at the basis of it both knowledge and enthusiasm — knowledge of the wo
rks estimated and enthusiasm for them. This book may be accepted as a generous exposition of Mr. Kipling’s merits as a writer. We can well believe that it will have many interested and approving readers.” While in the Daily Telegraph Mr. W. L. Courtney wrote as follows : — “ He writes fluently, and he has genuine enthusiasm for his subject, and an intimate acquaintance with his work. Moreover, the book has been submitted to Mr. Kipling, whose characteristic

  letter to the author is set forth in the preface. ... Of Kipling’s heroes Mr. Monkshood has a thorough understanding, and his remarks on them are worth quoting.” Scotch reviewers are always pretty shrewd in their criticism, and one of the best of them wrote thus in the Scotsman : — ” This well- informed volume is plainly sincere. It is thoroughly well studied, and takes pains to answer all the questions that are usually put about Mr. Kipling. The writer’s enthusiasm carries both himself and his reader along in the most agreeable style. One way and another his book is full of interest, and those who wish to talk about Kipling will find it invaluable, while the thousands of his admirers will read it through with delighted enthusiasm.” H.R.H. the Duchess of York has just accepted a copy of Mr. Monkshood’s interesting monograph on Rudyard Kipling.

  EPILOGUE.

  Passage, O soul, to India!

  Eclaircise the myths Asiatic, the primitive fables.

  Not you alone, proud truths of the world,

  Nor ye alone ye facts of modern science,

  But myths and fables of eld, Asia’s,

  Africa’s fables, The far-darting beams of the spirit, the