Today, Rudyard Kipling’s original novel The Jungle Book may be more well-known for it’s many adaptations from the likes of Disney, Chuck Jones, and many others. It is not uncommon to hear about the book itself, but the adaptations make the original more on the iconic side than the beloved classic side, as it is easier to hear opinions on the adaptations than the source material.
There may be a reason for that. It’s impossible to discuss the book without admitting it is aged, in two specific ways. In the last review I mentioned that the original Tarzan of the Apes was dated in its race relations, but Burroughs was well-intended. Jungle Book is also dated in regard to race, however, Kipling was not well-intended. Kipling was open about his support of Imperialism, and if you are familiar with the subject, you will understand why it’s not controversial to state that no one should be proud of British Imperialism. The Indian tribes in this book are treated overall terribly. Superstitious morons who lie and believe anything they are told, with main character Mowgli being practically the one exception, and bare in mind he was literally raised by wild wolves. In short, the novel has racist themes, and they become uncomfortable. There are points in this novel were it feels Kipling was outright saying he believed Indian people to be savage and inferior to white people, (and he outright says that about all Asian people in the sequel, although that is for another time).
The other dated aspect is the writing style, and the prose of the poetry and songs. There are songs in the novel, however, it is common for them to not rhyme. Reading them rarely feels interesting, and usually feels out of place, despite the fact they always come at the end of a chapter. As for the regular wording, adjectives tend to be overused and styling can get out of hand very easily. When you read something very old, such as The Bible or works by Shakespeare, you encounter the word “thou”. While I am usually the person to argue people never in fact used this word, and it was purely a fiction device, what I’ve read from those examples did show me that these writers knew how to use the word and when. Kipling’s writing felt the opposite. Words like “thou” and “thee” are thrown around as if to make the stories sound smart, but instead make the dialogue stilted and hard to digest. This style of writing can make the book become boring or derivative at any point, no matter if the subject itself is interesting.
If you read my last review, you may remember that I praised Tarzan of the Apes for writing animals in a way that made them feel like animals. Kipling writes animals almost exactly the same as humans, with only a rare few animalistic references. This becomes confusing in some parts, there were occasions I honestly forget whether an animal or human was talking, as there is little or no difference in the way they speak or act. In one of the later stories, I could not tell who the main character was, as everyone bled into each other, and this is despite the fact the story in question was named after the supposed main character.
I say stories as The Jungle Book is a collection of short stories. Mowgli is the main character of around half of the full book, with the latter half being unrelated stories. These other stories are The White Seal, Rikki Tikki Tavi, Toomai of the Elephants, and Her Majesty’s Servants. As these stories are short, it’s difficult to say anything of their plot without saying almost the entirety, but I'll do what I can. The White Seal is about an albino seal who loses his pack due to hunters, Rikki Tikki Tavi is about a mongoose protecting his new human family from a family of cobras, Toomai is about a boy who is working with elephants, and Her Majesty is about a parade. The last two stories are the least interesting, making the book unfortunately end on a very dull thud. For reference, Toomai is the one whom I couldn’t figure out the main character from the others, and Her Majesty is literally only about the parade, nothing else happens.
White Seal works surprisingly well. You feel horrible for the seal and his plight, and it is the closest to feeling like a story about animals. It pulls no punches and still works today, despite the novel’s heavy aging. Then there is Tavi, one of the more popular stories from the collection, and it deserves this status. Tavi himself is very likable, and his agenda works out sympathetic and understandable as well, I personally feel the general writing improves. However, there is a common criticism today that the cobras are more likable then the human family, and many readers have said they rooted for them instead. Admittedly, I did as well. The humans family is not written strongly in the slightest, they are fairly flat, and that kills my interest in caring about them. As for the cobras, the main cobra Nag is given a very humanizing moment. Both Nag and his wife Nagaina want to kill Tavi as he is a predator, which is understandable from an animal’s standpoint. Nagaina suggests killing the humans just to hurt Tavi, and Nag objects, morally horrified, until Nagaina reminds him the humans will kill all of their unborn children just for being cobras, and he changes his mind. In this, instead of making Nag evil, only Nagaina appears evil, and Nag comes across as a creature with morals who will break them if his children come to harm. He becomes the most likable character, and you don’t want him to lose.
Then there are Mowgli’s stories. Mowgli himself, and his friends, are interesting and their iconic status is understandable. They are all unique, and fit within the realm of the story. The prose still fails far too often, but the stories featuring Mowgli and his friends still mostly work. I do have one major complaint, and that is Shere Khan. It’s not that he is a bad character, quite the opposite, he is a good character, but he is so underutilized that he fails as a villain. A good villain is intimidating, it keeps the audience afraid of them winning. Shere Khan plans to kill Mowgli, but rarely shows up, and it is easy to outright forget he exists. I won’t say exactly how his part in the story ends, but I will say it’s pathetic. Shere Khan had potential, and nothing else.
When it comes to classic literature, the question is whether or not you read it for yourself. In the case of The Jungle Book, it is better to understand it. Sometimes iconic means knowing the source and what people liked about it. Reading it for yourself may not prove as enjoyable as simply watching one of its many adaptations. If you do want to read any of it, I suggest either the stories involving Mowgli, The White Seal, or Rikki Tikki Tavi, and the last two stories should be skipped altogether. The story is in the public domain, so doing so should prove easily enough. I personally cannot recommend the entirety of the novel, but at the end of the day, the ideas were there, and the ideas were good. It was all about the execution.