Seminar 9

1. Narratological analysis.

1) The basic narrative mode is mimetic.

2) Zero focalisation- focus on what the character does or says

The novel is written in the perspective of third-person omniscient (following characters from the
outside, but with the ability to move from character to character and even to describe their inner
states). Omniscient (ahm-NIH-shihnt) is a literary tool where the author writes a narrative in
third person, and the story’s narrator has complete awareness, understanding, and insight into the
thoughts, feelings, and motivations of some or all of the characters in the story. Such a
perspective would allow for switches to other characters beyond Kim, but the narrative only
rarely does this. It is Kim’s experience, and Kim’s alone, that dominates the book.

3) Сovert narrator is telling the story.

4) Analepsis. The story about Kim’s mother and father.

5) double-ended - we do not return to the frame narrative after the embedded is over.

6) Speech:

direct and tagged:

1. “Off! Off! Let me up!” cried Abdullah, climbing up Zam-Zammah’s wheel.

“Thy father was a pastry-cook, Thy mother stole the ghi,” sang Kim. “All Mussalmans fell off
Zam-Zammah long ago!”

“Let me up!” shrilled little Chota Lal in his gilt-embroidered cap. 

2. “Who is that?” said Kim to his companions.

“Perhaps it is a man,” said Abdullah, finger in mouth, staring.

“Without doubt,” returned Kim; “but he is no man of India that I have ever seen.”

“A priest, perhaps,” said Chota Lal, spying the rosary. “See! He goes into the Wonder House!”

“Nay, nay,” said the policeman, shaking his head. “I do not understand your talk.” The constable
spoke Punjabi. “O Friend of all the World, what does he say?”

“Send him hither,” said Kim, dropping from Zam-Zammah, flourishing his bare heels. “He is a
foreigner, and thou art a buffalo.”

free direct:

1. “So they made the triple trial of strength against all comers. And at the test of the Bow, our
Lord first breaking that which they gave Him, called for such a bow as none might bend. Thou
knowest?”
“It is written. I have read.”

“And, overshooting all other marks, the arrow passed far and far beyond sight. At the last it fell;
and, where it touched earth, there broke out a stream which presently became a River, whose
nature, by our Lord’s beneficence, and that merit He acquired ere He freed himself, is that whoso
bathes in it washes away all taint and speckle of sin.”

2. The colonial imprint and imperial views.

Much of a reder’s attention is paid to the race and there's an important historical reason for this.
Rudyard Kipling is writing about India during the period of British colonial domination at the
turn of the twentieth century. Kipling's India includes a huge mix of people from different
nationalities, ethnic groups, religions—you name the category, it appears in this book. But even
though people of many cultures appear in Kim, race still makes a big difference to how much
economic and social mobility the different characters have.Undeniably, Kipling is writing
according to a pro-imperial, racist worldview. So even though Kim is very poor, he has the
opportunity to make a great profession for himself partly because he is white.

While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is

largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India. In his introduction to Kim, Said
(1987)
emphasizes this fact, arguing that Kipling was
writing not just from the individual perspective
of
a British man in a colonial setting, but also
"from the perspective of a massive colonial
system
whose economy, functioning and history had
acquired the status almost of a fact of
nature”
While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is
largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India. In his introduction to Kim, Said
(1987)
emphasizes this fact, arguing that Kipling was
writing not just from the individual perspective
of
a British man in a colonial setting, but also
"from the perspective of a massive colonial
system
whose economy, functioning and history had
acquired the status almost of a fact of
nature”
While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is
largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India. In his introduction to Kim, Said
(1987)
emphasizes this fact, arguing that Kipling was
writing not just from the individual perspective
of
a British man in a colonial setting, but also
"from the perspective of a massive colonial
system
whose economy, functioning and history had
acquired the status almost of a fact of
nature” (p.
10). For Said, Kim is a "master work of
imperialism"
While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is
largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India. In his introduction to Kim, Said
(1987)
emphasizes this fact, arguing that Kipling was
writing not just from the individual perspective
of
a British man in a colonial setting, but also
"from the perspective of a massive colonial
system
whose economy, functioning and history had
acquired the status almost of a fact of
nature” (p.
10). For Said, Kim is a "master work of
imperialism"
While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is
largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India. In his introduction to Kim, Said
(1987)
emphasizes this fact, arguing that Kipling was
writing not just from the individual perspective
of
a British man in a colonial setting, but also
"from the perspective of a massive colonial
system
whose economy, functioning and history had
acquired the status almost of a fact of
nature” (p.
10). For Said, Kim is a "master work of
imperialism"
While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is
largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India. In his introduction to Kim, Said
(1987)
emphasizes this fact, arguing that Kipling was
writing not just from the individual perspective
of
a British man in a colonial setting, but also
"from the perspective of a massive colonial
system
whose economy, functioning and history had
acquired the status almost of a fact of
nature” (p.
10). For Said, Kim is a "master work of
imperialism"
While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is
largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India. In his introduction to Kim, Said
(1987)
emphasizes this fact, arguing that Kipling was
writing not just from the individual perspective
of
a British man in a colonial setting, but also
"from the perspective of a massive colonial
system
whose economy, functioning and history had
acquired the status almost of a fact of
nature” (p.
10). For Said, Kim is a "master work of
imperialism"
While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is
largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India. In his introduction to Kim, Said
(1987)
emphasizes this fact, arguing that Kipling was
writing not just from the individual perspective
of
a British man in a colonial setting, but also
"from the perspective of a massive colonial
system
whose economy, functioning and history had
acquired the status almost of a fact of
nature” (p.
10). For Said, Kim is a "master work of
imperialism"
While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is
largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India. In his introduction to Kim, Said
(1987)
emphasizes this fact, arguing that Kipling was
writing not just from the individual perspective
of
a British man in a colonial setting, but also
"from the perspective of a massive colonial
system
whose economy, functioning and history had
acquired the status almost of a fact of
nature” (p.
10). For Said, Kim is a "master work of
imperialism"
While Kipling’s portrayal of India in Kim is
largely sympathetic and affectionate, it is
necessary
to remember that the novel was written in the
context of empire, by an author who reaped
the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India.
the novel was written in the context of
empire, by an author who reaped the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India.
the novel was written in the context of
empire, by an author who reaped the
benefits of Britain’s colonial presence in
India.
The novel was written in the context of empire, by an author who reaped the benefits of
Britain’s colonial presence in India. Kipling presents the reader with an idealized colonial
figure - Kim - in whom Indian and British identities are united in harmony and set to work in
the service of the empire.
The novel displays the absolute division between the white and the non-white that existed during
the British Raj in India. Right in the very beginning of the novel the narrator introduces the
eponymous hero, the thirteen-year-old Kim, as sitting “in defiance of municipal orders, astride
the gun Zam-Zammah”[8], a symbol of British authority, for the British were the last who
captured the gun as a symbol of its conquest of the Punjab. The opening lines state the existing
imperial roles, the conqueror and the conquered, as well as underline the British superiority:
“Who hold Zam-Zammah, that ‘fire-breathing dragon’, hold the Punjab, for the great green-
bronze piece is always first of the conqueror’s loot. There was some justification for Kim ...
since the English held Punjab and Kim was English”[9]. Kim’s behaviour in the “king-of-the-
castle” game with his friends Abdullah and Chota Lai, in which he feels himself as a winner in
advance because “’All Mussalmans fell off Zam-Zammah long ago!’” and “’The Hindus fell off
Zam-Zammah too’”[10], is the next evidence of his assumed predominance over other religions
and races. Kim’s action of kicking his Indian friends off of the trunnions is rationalized and
“justified” by the colour of his skin. Further, the readers learn that Kim is sitting opposite the
anthropological museum of Lahore, which was “given up to Indian arts and manufactures, and
anybody who sought wisdom could ask the curator to explain.”[11] 

One striking point drawing attention is that the “Keeper of the Wonder House” turns out to be an
Englishman as well. So, the opening scene stresses the unequal status of both nations by
presenting Kim in control of the emblem of British authority over the Indians, the gun, and the
English curator in control of the place of knowledge, the native museum.

3. Exotic depiction of Indian cultural peculiarities.

4. Being a chameleon. Identity change.

The character of Kim could also be examined as a symbol. In Kim, there are symbolically mixed
the elements of British ruler with those of insensitively ruled Indian. This is because of his
European descent, of which, in fact, Kim was proud. If Kim had not had European parents and
had been a native, he would not have suffered from the foreignness of the European treatment.
To conclude, in the character of Kim, there are two components fused: Kipling’s praise of Indian
culture and his partial identification with it, and at the same time his persuasion that the British
are the rightful rulers of the natives.

What is more, among his friends, Kim was known as „Little Universal Friend”; flexible and
inconspicuous, he carried out the instructions of cunning, brilliant young dandies, making his
way along the roofs of houses crowded with people. The woman who looked after him tearfully
insisted that he wear European clothes - trousers, a shirt and a worn hat. But in the execution of
certain assignments, Kim found it more convenient to put on a Hindu or Mohammedan costume.
So it was not so difficult for him to change his identitz when he wanted or needed this.
Additionally, I have noticed one more thing that proves that Kim was a kind of chameleon:in text
it was said that when he met a lama, Kim accepted this new god without any emotion. He
already knew dozens of gods. It means that one day he believes in a one god and trust his
beliefs,but another day he chooses another god and appreciate him.

Although he knows about his origin, he feels comfortable in the country where he has spent his
entire life and even tries to escape his white identity . Nevertheless, Kim’s identity is not
depicted explicitly, he is neither Hindu nor anything else, he is the “Little Friend of all the
World” and “borrow[s] right- and left-handedly from all the customs of the country he knew and
loved” . In this part of the novel, Kipling both confirms and denies Kim’s European identity.

5. Kim, a perfect spy (character analysis).

Kim is white, the orphan son of an Irish regimental soldier and his wife, but he is left with only
minimal guardianship after his parents’ death. Thus, he grew up learning Indian culture as an
insider, a street urchin in the markets of Lahore.

At 13 years old, Kim is confident, adventuresome, and whimsical, exuding a boyish charisma
that endears him to those he meets. He is known in Lahore as the “Little Friend of all the
World”. The first scene offers an extended background narration, revealing that although Kim
now appears Indian in aspect and language, he is an Irish orphan, the son of a nurse-maid and a
sergeant in the Irish regiment. His father, Kimball O’Hara, had later worked on the Delhi
Railway and had succumbed to a fatal opium addiction (Kim’s mother having earlier died of
cholera). Kim’s father left him with a birth certificate and some Masonic papers, and in his
opiate-addled state, he spoke of the promise of Kim’s future, couched in Masonic and regimental
terms. These the young Kim remembered, holding them as a sort of prophecy of things to come:
“A Red Bull and a Colonel on a horse will come, but first, my father said, will come the two men
making ready the ground for these matters”.

1.“He sat, in defiance of municipal orders, astride the gun Zam-Zammah on her brick platform
opposite the old Ajaib-Gher—the Wonder House, as the natives call the Lahore Museum. Who
hold Zam-Zammah, that ‘fire-breathing dragon,’ hold the Punjab, for the great green-bronze
piece is always first of the conqueror’s loot.”

(Chapter 1, Page 3)

These are the novel’s opening lines, and they immediately paint a portrait of young Kim’s
temperament as being bold and adventurous. The first sentence also introduces the reader to the
theme of cultural diversity that runs throughout the book by giving both the native name and the
English designation for the museum.

2.

“His nickname through the wards was ‘Little Friend of all the World;’ and very often, being lithe
and inconspicuous, he executed commissions by night on the crowded housetops for sleek and
shiny young men of fashion. It was intrigue, of course—he knew that much, as he had known all
evil since he could speak,—but what he loved was the game for its own sake […].”
(Chapter 1, Page 5)

In this quote, readers are introduced to Kim’s winsomeness, his outlook on the world, and the
theme of “the game.” Even when he was a boy, far before any espionage missions, Kim carried
out intrigues in the alleys of Lahore.

6. The chronotope of the Wonder House

The Lahore Museum is a truly amazing real-life building that still stands in Lahore to this day. It
was constructed in the 1860s for the British Indian government's Punjab Exhibition of 1864,
marking the transition towards Britain's more direct colonial administration of India in the late
nineteenth century. And—fun historical fact—John Lockwood Kipling, Rudyard Kipling's
father, was the curator of the Lahore Museum when Kipling was a child. So we might assume
that the kindly, knowledgeable curator in Kim is modeled after Kipling's own father.

First introduced to English-speaking readers of literary fiction through Rudyard Kipling’s Kim,

the term Ajeeb Ghar continues to be used to refer to all museums in South Asia. The literal
translation from the Urdu is Strange House or Wonder House.  But wonder and strange can have
multiple meanings in the museum world.  The original and eponymous Ajeeb Ghar was the
fabulous Lahore museum with which Kim opens, where Lockwood Kipling (Rudyard’s father)
was curator. In Kim and other historical or literary accounts, Ajeeb Ghar was a magical – even
wondrous – place where 18th and 19th century viewers encountered marvelous, astonishing
things from around the world and across oceans, from royal palaces to everyday lives.