How we cite our quotes: (Chapter. Paragraph)
Quote #1
'No. Punishment. When a man is bound by the action of his predecessor—'
'But C25 may have lied.'
'He bears out the other's information. Practically, they showed their hand six months back. But Devenish would have it there was a chance of peace. Of course they used it to make themselves stronger. Send off those telegrams at once—the new code, not the old—mine and Wharton's. I don't think we need keep the ladies waiting any longer. We can settle the rest over the cigars. I thought it was coming. It's punishment—not war.' (2.148-151)
First of all, what do you think is the difference between punishment and war? We feel like punishment implies justified force; a state (or in this case, the five rebellious northern kingdoms) has done something wrong according to its ruling government, and it has to be taught a lesson.
The Englishman's language here (we discover later that it's Creighton) implies that the rebellion by these states is not right, and that they need to be put down as a result. The novel clearly justifies violence against colonies that try to break free of the British Empire; Kipling is not ashamed about being pro-war (or punishment, as he hypocritically puts it) in the service of imperial order.
Quote #2
'The Gods, who sent it for a plague, alone know. A madness ate into all the Army, and they turned against their officers. That was the first evil, but not past remedy if they had then held their hands. But they chose to kill the Sahibs' wives and children. Then came the Sahibs from over the sea and called them to most strict account.'
'Some such rumour, I believe, reached me once long ago. They called it the Black Year, as I remember.' (3.132-3)
The "Black Year" that the old man is describing here is the Indian Mutiny of 1857-8. In fact, Mutiny is not the right way of describing what happened; as we discuss in our "Detailed Summary" of Chapter 3, it was really a legitimate military uprising against British political domination by British-trained Indian members of the military. But even though this rebellion took place only about two or three decades before the action of Kim, most of the novel emphasizes the "natural rightness" (in quotes because we completely disagree) of British imperial rule of India.
So this elderly Indian man who fought the rebels describes it as a "plague" from the Gods and "a madness" and an "evil." This rebellion is abnormal (rather than completely justified), and requires the British army to come and punish its participants. The fact that this old Indian man echoes the language of punishment that the Englishman uses about the five northern kings (2.148-151) indicates the universal sense of justice that Kipling is trying to add to his portrayal of these colonial wars to keep India under British control.
Quote #3
'A Sahib and the son of a Sahib—' The lama's voice was harsh with pain. 'But no white man knows the land and the customs of the land as thou knowest. How comes it this is true?'
'What matter, Holy One?—but remember it is only for a night or two. Remember, I can change swiftly. It will all be as it was when I first spoke to thee under Zam-Zammah the great gun—'
'As a boy in the dress of white men—when I first went to the Wonder House. And a second time thou wast a Hindu. What shall the third incarnation be?' He chuckled drearily. 'Ah, chela, thou has done a wrong to an old man because my heart went out to thee.'
'And mine to thee. But how could I know that the Red Bull would bring me to this business?' (5.135-8)
The lama starts out not knowing much about Kim's origins—because Kim spends most of his time in Hindu clothing with the lama, the lama just assumes that Kim is a Hindu boy. But in fact, under that clothing, Kim is a European; the lama is disappointed and hurt by what he sees as Kim's deception.
The lama's confusion over Kim's racial identity indicates Kim's great abilities with disguise, but it also raises questions about what kinds of knowledge friends owe each other. Should Kim have told the lama about his origins? Why does the lama tell Kim that he has "done a wrong to an old man"? Why might the lama's heart not have gone "out to [Kim]" in the same way if he had known that Kim's parents were British?
Quote #4
A priest clothed me and gave me a new name... One priest, however, was a fool. The clothes are very heavy, but I am a Sahib and my heart is heavy too. They send me to a school and beat me. I do not like the air and water here. Come then and help me, Mahbub Ali, or send me some money, for I have not sufficient to pay the writer who writes this. (6.46)
Poor Kim's first encounter with the world of discipline and order is pretty brutal: he has been beaten, and he feels homesick and out of place. So Kim writes to Mahbub Ali to come and rescue him, but Mahbub Ali leaves Kim where he is—he believes that, as unpleasant as Kim's lessons in duty have been, he has to learn to be responsible for more than just his own interests.
This raises a philosophical question for us: Is duty always a painful thing to learn? Are there duties out there that you find pleasant and fulfilling to perform, or is duty by definition something you don't want to do, but that you have to do anyway?
Quote #5
A day and a half have I waited, not because I was led by any affection towards thee—that is no part of the Way—but, as they said at the Tirthankars' Temple, because, money having been paid for learning, it was right that I should oversee the end of the matter. They resolved my doubts most clearly. I had a fear that, perhaps, I came because I wished to see thee—misguided by the Red Mist of affection. It is not so... (7.64)
This passage strikes us as kind of—odd. The lama is telling Kim, Hey, look, I'm not checking in on you because I love you—no, I'm keeping up with you because I paid for your education and I want to see how that investment turns out. Kind of cold, right?
Why is the lama phrasing his interest in Kim in terms of duty instead of affection? What religious objections does he raise to his relationship with Kim? How does the lama's talk of duty and responsibility regarding Kim seem to affect Kim himself, as someone who the lama goes on later to describe as a spiritual grandson to him?
Quote #6
'Because he is so fond of me. Suppose you were fond of someone, and you saw someone come, and the man you were fond of was more pleased with him than he was with you, what would you do?'
Kim thought. Lurgan repeated the sentence slowly in the vernacular.
'I should not poison that man,' said Kim reflectively, 'but I should beat that boy—if that boy was fond of my man. But first, I would ask that boy if it were true.'
'Ah! He thinks everyone must be fond of me.' (9.76-9)
Lurgan explains to Kim that the Hindu youth he has raised is so attached to him that he will actually try to poison Kim and/or Lurgan out of jealousy over the all of the attention that Lurgan is giving to Kim.
First of all, we have to point out that this notion of the super-emotional person of color is a classic racist stereotype. It plays on biased ideas that white people are more rational than people of color, which supposedly justifies European imperialist domination of other countries. So this whole representation of the Kim-Lurgan-Hindu boy triangle is based on racist assumptions.
But we are also interested in Kim's claim that, if he was fond of a man who seemed to be paying a lot of attention to someone else, he would "beat that boy," his rival. For Kim, it would be the fault of the other kid for taking his father figure away from him… but we think the duty should really be Lurgan's to make sure that the Hindu boy continues to feel like his father figure cares about him.
Quote #7
'My son, said he, 'what need of words between us? But is not the little gun a delight? All six cartridges come out at one twist. It is borne in the bosom next the skin, which, as it were, keeps it oiled. Never put it elsewhere, and please God, thou shalt some day kill a man with it.'
'Hai mai!' said Kim ruefully. 'If a Sahib kills a man he is hanged in the jail.'
'True: but one pace beyond the Border, men are wiser. Put it away; but fill it first. Of what use is a gun unfed?' (10.19-21)
Mahbub Ali's attitude toward shooting people reveals an interesting cultural difference. Kim claims that "if a Sahib [white man] kills a man he is hanged," while Mahbub Ali claims that "one pace beyond the Border [in Afghanistan]," shooting people is fine. Why do you think Kipling associates formal law and order with the culture of the Sahib, the white man? How might Kipling's racial and imperialist assumptions come through in this scene between Kim and Mahbub Ali? Why does Kim receiving a gun become a kind of coming-of-age ritual for Mahbub Ali?
Quote #8
'We of the Game are beyond protection. If we die, we die. Our names are blotted from the book. That is all. At Bandakui, where lives one of Us, I thought to slip the scent by changing my face, and so made me a Mahratta. (11.140)
The Mahratta (a.k.a. E23) assures Kim that he can't ask for help from the Government to beat back his enemies. That's not how spies work—they have to stay secret no matter what, and if they get into trouble, they have to figure out a way to get out of it.
Quote #9
They gave him a glass of whitish fluid like to gin, and then more; and in a little time his gravity departed from him. He became thickly treasonous, and spoke in terms of sweeping indecency of a Government which had forced upon him a white man's education and neglected to supply him with a white man's salary. He babbled tales of oppression and wrong till the tears ran down his cheeks for the miseries of his land. Then he staggered off, singing love-songs of Lower Bengal, and collapsed upon a wet tree-trunk. Never was so unfortunate a product of English rule in India more unhappily thrust upon aliens.
'They are all just of that pattern,' said one sportsman to the other in French. 'When we get into India proper thou wilt see. I should like to visit his Rajah. One might speak the good word there. It is possible that he has heard of us and wishes to signify his good-will.' (13.24)
The Babu is pretending to be unhappy with English rule over India to get on the good side of these two Russian agents. The narrator sounds so dismissive when he claims that the Babu is "[babbling] tales of oppression and wrong"—as though such tales of Indian oppression by the British must be false or ridiculous. But the way that Kipling writes about the Babu's pretended outrage strikes us as a lot more moving than his real feelings of loyalty to the British Indian state.
Quote #10
'Sister,' said the lama, using that form of address a Buddhist monk may sometimes employ towards a nun, 'if charms comfort thee—'
'They are better than ten thousand doctors.'
'I say, if they comfort thee, I who was Abbot of Such-zen, will make as many as thou mayest desire. I have never seen thy face—'
'That even the monkeys who steal our loquats count for again. Hee! hee!'
'But as he who sleeps there said,'—he nodded at the shut door of the guest-chamber across the forecourt—'thou hast a heart of gold... And he is in the spirit my very "grandson" to me.' (15.45-9)
After the lama finds his Enlightenment, he can admit that his feelings for Kim are not just based on the duty of a teacher to a student or whatever. He really loves Kim, and regards Kim as a grandson. He will do whatever he must to look after his almost-grandson, even writing endless stupid charms for the Kulu woman's grandsons. Why do you think it is so important to the lama's quest that he understands how he truly feels about Kim? What is the relationship between his spirituality and his emotional life in this book?