Colonialism as a Benevolent Force Theme Analysis

Kipling was an Englishman living in India during its period of British occupation. As a result, “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi” and similar stories often portray colonialism as a benevolent force: bringing peace, order, and tranquility to a violent and chaotic world.  Such attitudes were common and uncontroversial at the time, but both Kipling and “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi” have been criticized in recent decades for “whitewashing” the often-cruel realities of life in India under British rule.

Regardless, “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi” depicts the British as benevolent rulers, as symbolized by Teddy and his parents. A mongoose is native to India, and the ecology he inhabits is that of the Indian subcontinent. Yet he lives in the home of an English family, who not only grant him his “civilized” demeanor, but represent comfort, intellectualism, and reason’s triumph over the violent killed-or-be-killed world around them. In that sense, Rikki-tikki is a “good” Indian—submitting to the will of his white masters—while the cobras are “bad” Indians trying to undermine the white man’s rule.

Rikki-tikki begins life as a resident of the wild world and is almost killed by a flood. He’s rescued by a white family that appears almost godlike to him, nursed back to health, and given a house full of wonders and comforts to inhabit. He thus quickly learns the benefits of being ruled by the British. Teddy’s father in particular is depicted as being benevolent, wise, and almost all-seeing. He reassures Teddy’s mother than the mongoose is not a threat and rewards Rikki-tikki with food and a run of the house. Perhaps most importantly, Teddy’s father understands the danger of the cobras and the value of Rikki-tikki’s protection.

Under the tutelage of civilization, Rikki-tikki learns to fight for the common good and use his skills for the benefit of all, something he would not have done had Teddy’s “civilizing” family not been kind to him. Similarly, Rikki-tikki’s mother—who lived in the home of a British general—once told Rikki-tikki how to behave in order to be trusted by the British. Together these details suggest that, in time, India will not only accept and embrace Britain’s rule, but will prosper more under it.

Unlike Rikki-tikki, the cobras are unhappy with Teddy’s family in the house, and fight against their rule. As “bad” Indians, they reject the benefits of colonialism and want to return the property to their own control. Kipling links the cobras directly to Indian (as opposed to British) culture when Nag explains how “the great god Brahm”—a Hindu deity—put his mark on the snake’s hood. Unlike the stable and orderly rule of Teddy’s family, the cobras rule by strength and fear, taking what they want and giving no consideration for the other animals sharing their space. They’re shown as being particularly hostile to Teddy’s family and speak about how wonderful it will be when the house is empty.

While the transition from Indian to English is generally shown as being positive in the story, Rikki-tikki retains important character traits from his mongoose heritage. This suggests that the give-and-take between the British and the Indians is not as one-sided as it appears. Moreover, it suggests that Rikki-tikki’s Indian characteristics—his instinctive behavior—can benefit the British if allowed to flourish.

Most obviously, Rikki-tikki uses his wild nature to fight the cobras—moving silently, striking suddenly, and falling back on (Indian) instincts to make up for his lack of experience. As a mongoose, he can move freely and often undetected from the (British) house to the (Indian) garden and back without incident. Teddy’s family, on the other hand, wouldn’t be able to move so freely without attracting attention, underscoring their separation from both the natural world and the Indian society in which they live.

Even though he appreciates all the things the family does for him, Rikki-tikki still considers them strange and foolish sometimes. Kipling presents this as very hard-headed and sensible, rather than arrogant or conceited. For instance, Rikki-tikki is baffled by Teddy’s father’s attempt to beat Karait, since the baby cobra is already clearly dead. Thus, even as “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi” is definitely pro-colonialism, it also shows a subtlety to the exchange between the occupying British and the native Indians. Both sides benefit from British rule, in the world of the story, but the British can also benefit from Indian culture—often in ways they do not expect.

Of course, Kipling’s attitude toward colonialism in the story was subjected to revision as Indians successfully obtained their independence. That granted them an autonomy that Kipling’s stories implicitly denied and allowed them to state emphatically that they could stand on their own two feet instead of relying on the British to be ruled. In the process, it made the cultural reach of British colonialism clear—showing how its attitudes could be reflected even in a seemingly simple story about a brave little mongoose protecting a boy.