Hipsy's View: The Man Who Would Be King

The one you have all been waiting for! My first blog of the year, and yes, my first post of my "rebooted" blog. I would have had it posted sooner, but with the stress of moving, even more stress caused by work, and a computer glitch that erased my original review, this post was postponed (God, I need to work on my puns).  I hope you like this post on a classic story. Enjoy!

Warning: There will be spoilers in this post. If you would like to read this story with no spoilers, I advise you to skip the second paragraph. If you don't mind, then by all means, go ahead and continue reading.

So far this year, I've been a bit busy and a little unfocused on a few things, so to sneak in some books, I have been listening to audiobooks. The books I tend to listen to are ones that are free to the public domain (meaning that they were printed before 1923 and are not under any copyright laws) and are provided by a website called Librivox*, so they are older stories that have already had many reviews on them, but what can one more hurt? While I was moving into my new apartment - about two months ago - I listened to Rudyard Kipling's The Man Who Would Be King to keep me awake as I staked moving boxes up to the ceiling of my new home. 

The story is as followed: The journalist narrator (some have speculated that it is Kipling himself) is retelling the story that an old acquaintance has told him, about his and another soldier's journey to another country to seek their fortune and become kings in a new land. The acquaintance is named Peachey Carnehan, and along with a man named Daniel Dravot - and after the help of our narrator at the beginning of the story - they traveled to a land called Kafiristan to become kings. At the time of the telling, Carnehan is an unrecognizable beggar. He tells the narrator of their success in Kafiristan, and that the natives had believed Dravot to be a godlike figure, perhaps even a reincarnation of Alexander the Great (we learn through the story that Alexander the Great had once conquered this land and that is also why the Kafirs are lighter-skinned than others in the surrounding countries), therefore putting Dravot and Carnehan in the god status (we also learn that Kafirs are pagans). But after a few successful battles with neighboring tribes and creating even higher status for themselves, Dravot becomes too pretentious and begins demanding things that gods are not expected to want or need. The one demand that brought their empire down was when Dravot requested a wife, and he would not take no for an answer. The girl that he chose, like the other Kafirs, feared him because he was a god. As he bent down to kiss his new bride, the girl bit down on Dravot's lip, causing him to bleed; Gods do not bleed. When the truth is found out, Dravot, Carnehan, and a faithful servant run away, trying to escape Kafiristan. Being unsuccessful, the servant was killed and Dravot was driven by the Kafirs onto a bridge, where he fell to his death as the Kafirs cut the bridge's ropes. Carnehan was crucified between two trees and was not expected to live. When he did though, the Kafirs let him go, believing his survival a miracle. To prove his story after telling it, Carnehan showed the narrator Dravot's crowned head that he vows never to be parted from. After the narrator puts Carnehan in a mental asylum - after finding him the next day delirious and suffering from sunstroke - he learns that Carnehan dies two days later; he had no possessions.

As I read/listened to this story, I was reminded of the movie version of it starring Sirs Sean Connery and Michael Caine. I watched it when I was very young and did not realize it was based on any written work. The film is quite faithful to its material, from what I can remember, and I was happy to relive enjoying a story I was awed by as a preteen. I also enjoy the concept presented in the story; two men set out on a journey to gain riches, achieved their goal, but lost it over one small error, causing it all to be lost. Basically, Dravot and Carnehan worked hard to get what they wanted, spilling blood at times to achieve it, and then lost it over a little bit of blood.

Kipling's work is pleasurably entertaining, in my opinion, and is more bearable than Joseph Conrad's work. Also, Kipling's work is known to be based in the India region; he lived during the Post-Colonial time when Exilation and Emmigration was a massive occurrence at the time, which The Man Who Would Be King represents: two men enter an unknown land to gain new riches and higher social status, and in the end are exiled by the people that came to trust and adore them. 

I believe the moral of this story is too not be too selfish, or whatever you gain will be lost by a simple drop of blood.

What are your thoughts? Let me know by leaving a comment. A new blog will be available soon, so look forward to that!

*Have you ever heard of Librivox? It's a site where you can listen to audiobooks recorded by volunteers, and the audiobooks are free! As they do say on every recording though, all Librivox recordings are in the public domain (meaning only books that were published before 1923 are available, due to copyright laws). If you want to learn more about Librivox, listen to what they've got, or volunteer your voice, go to Librivox.org.