I will summarize it here:
I researched various authors and analyzed our text through the lens of postcolonial theory. I found that Rudyard Kipling is a comparable author from this period. Learning about his stories lent further insight into ours. Jeffrey Richards and John Mackenzie provide literary criticisms that illuminate the influence of military imperialism on British popular culture, particularly in juvenile literature.
The Tiger King was published when British took control of India between 1859 and 1885 and shortly after Queen Victoria declared herself Empress of India. The British elite society entered India with the intention to establish their own roots, and in the mean time they displaced the incumbent social hierarchy of native Indians.
Although the British brought positive industrial changes and increased technological efficiency, they undermined Indian inhabitants with their superior attitude. “Rather than underscore the celebratory elements of imperial romance, these stories point to anxieties about the nature and effects of imperialism” (17 Siddiqi). Racism occurs frequently in our story. Although “The Tiger King” does not necessarily celebrate imperial romance, per se, it grasps various opportunities to glorify the British military hero and demonize the lone Indian figure in it.
Juvenile literature of this nature bound its readership with the morals it preached. “It is now widely recognised that it was saturation in the literature and imagery of militarism over several decades that helped prepare the youth of England for enthusiastic participation in World War I….” (Richards 81). The values of bravery, aggression and national pride entered these tales to uplift notions of danger, adventure, and conquest. My research revealed the intimate link that joined military ambition to the juvenile imagination.
Boys writers of the time reached their audience through various popular publications like this Boys Sunday Reader. Although the editor of our story, Edwin J. Bennet, is not very famous, he takes after other big authors who emerged in this time, including Rudyard Kipling and G.A. Henty. Magazines called penny dreadfuls were printed cheaply to spread widely.
Brett’s fame has dulled with time, but Kipling’s longstanding achievement as a boys’ writer (Jungle Book, for example) remains a model from which we can glean understanding of the British occupation of India. “Kipling…provided a gallery of archetypes that inspired a whole genre of Indian Empire fiction, in particular the scarlet-and-gold heroics of the North West Frontier…there were close and mutual” (82).
Our story tends to minimize the native and exoticize India, and Henty’s stance reflects the colonialist value system: “In his attitude to the indigenous people of India, Henty faithfully reflected the attitudes of his age. He is inclined to characterise whole races dismissively” (98). The description of setting in the opening of “Tiger King” flattens inhabitants into the scenery rather than presenting them as humans of equal status. The narration refers to them simply as “the enemy” and “old offenders” (124) dotting the landscape. These descriptions evoke suspense and tension and imply that Indians must conquered and controlled, just like the territory.
Religion also figures as an important theme. A casual glance at the table of contents reveals titles such as “Saved by Prayer,” “The Christian Martyrs,” and “The Seven Deadly Sins.” These were surely aimed at souls who would read them and grow into mature, loyal nationalists. “In juvenile literature as elsewhere in the army, now the embodiment of Christian and chivalric values, came to be seen as the pre-eminent vehicle for service and imperial expansion” (88). The stories turn imperial domination into an evangelical mission.
The Imperialist spirit of conquest over Indian territory projected its values of cultural dominance into the literature it produced. To take a specific moment from the story, for example:
A confrontation occurs on the riverbank between Romajee and Albury,in which “…Albury, jumping from his horse, addressed the penitent in Hindostanee, ordering him to hold his animal while he took a dip…’the villagers….surrounded him, and forced him to mount his horse and go’” (125). This passage emphasizes the imbalanced relationship of the British and the apparently servile Indian, although further narration reveals Romajee’s status as, in fact, that of royalty. The Englishman challenges the Indian's national honor and subjects him to public humiliation. This polarizing view of the Indian continues when Romajee is portrayed as greedy and manic. Carlyon offers him a bribe to subdue his anger. “The man’s eyes glistened as he first glanced at the money…” (125). These depictions function to ‘Other’ the native in a way that glorifies the Englishman by making Romajee the villain (Said).
Such stark characterization functions to reinforce the negative image of the native. The story's ending celebrates the inferiority of the Indians by creating a conflict between Albury and Romajee which highlights the moral superiority of the Englishman. Albury befriends Carlyon, a fellow Englishman while Romajee is concluded to be evil. The tale undermines Romajee in order to elevate the integrity of the British soldiers. by making him the common enemy against which the army men unite to “combine… service with adventure” (Richards 94). Thus, the story legitimizes the unjust conquest of “enemies” with its happy ending and Albury’s transformation.
