Colonialism and Morality in The Moonstone and The Man Who Would Be

King
Let us presuppose to begin with that the cursed jewel is an impossibility and the powers
of the Moonstone or any other gem for that matter only exist on an atomic level ( i.e. the
energies which bind such objects together and make them what they are). Additionally it
should be considered that no such object is the means by which a being exerts powers and
no such object consciously exerts powers itself. Notions of the cursed or powerful jewel
can be seen as a bi-product of what Said terms Orientalism. Said describes The
Orient as almost a European invention, a place of exotic beings and remarkable
experiences. (Ashcroft et al ed. p.87) This hypothesis adequately compliments Wilkie
Collins characterisation of the eponymous jewel in The Moonstone and the moral pattern
the author forms around its adventures.
In the Nineteenth Century the jewel was the ultimate exotic object, Collins describes the
Moonstone as a yellow diamond- a famous gem in the native annals of India, (Collins
p.33) and clearly credits influence to the Koh-i-Noor in his preface to the novel. Collins
builds upon the alien nature of such an object utilising the perceived mysticism of the
Orient linking the jewel to a four handed Indian God (Collins p.33) [Saids exotic
being ?] and superstition, the notion of the jewel feeling the influence of the deity who
adorned it (Collins p.33) [remarkable experiences to Said?]. Collins rapidly develops
the exotic object into the cursed object primarily to create a long involving tale with a
successfully satisfying denouement. the novel is, of course foremost a detective story;
how memorable or lengthy a tale would it have been if the misappropriated object were
as English and as homely as say half a crown or a tin of boot polish? The jewel is
portrayed as a fascinating invader in the Empires heartland, an English country estate, in
theory its safest haven. The Moonstone is a narrative device which illuminates the text in
multiple ways.
Such a device remains popular in western adventure literature and film, whether in the
form of an Egyptian scarab or a monkeys claw. The mystical object with powerful
properties is involved in adventure tales from Conan-Doyle through Indiana Jones, even
one of the most famous of modern legends the fates of Carter and Caernarfon excavators
of Tutankahmuns tomb involves a curse and shameful Orientalism. Perhaps the best
indicator of such notions becoming part of western folklore is when they become utilised
as simple metaphor. This is apparent in John Hustons 1975 film version of Rudyard
Kiplings The Man Who Would Be King. The desire of the central protagonists; Peachy
Carnahan and Daniel Dravitt to become Kings of an isolated region of the Indian subcontinent is built upon by the abundance of treasures that becomes available to them, an
aspect absent from Kiplings original tale. Hustons version increases the greed of the two
adventurers which in turn provides a more satisfying justification of their fates than we
receive in the original short story.
Whilst admiring giant rubies Hustons Peachy remarks All we need do is fill our pockets
and wed be millionaires. Dravitt then retorts that if they stayed they would be Kings.
Carnahan subsequently remarks these here stones make the jewels in The Tower of

London look like cheap family heirlooms. Surely one must assume that the desire to be
visibly richer than the richest Empire is profoundly immoral. The cursed jewel blatantly
becomes transmuted into that which it always signified: cursed greed. It is not the jewels
that are bad it is the act of stealing them. This is a contrast to Kiplings original emphasis
upon a different kind of immorality; Dravitts wish to break his contract, his word of
honour and take a wife. The scratch of his brides finger nail being an indication to the
natives that he is not in fact a God but composed of flesh and blood and hence his
downfall. The scene has a more fitting place in the novel than the film which also utilises
it as a moment of high drama.
A notion common to both forms of The Man Who Would Be King is that the immorality is
revenged by the native people, in narrative terms they could be re-evaluated not as
savages but as upholders of virtues forgotten by Empire builders. However, a similar
reading of The Moonstone produces far more noteworthy results. The author seems to
divest himself of the burden of taking an ethical standpoint. Moral balance becomes the
responsibility of the native culture and people, this in turn is objectified in the Moonstone
itself. Collins presents us with a for the want of a better term; discerning curse, a moral
arbiter. At an extreme the cursed jewel can be seen as a universalist device dispensing
sub-Christian morality. Virtuous characters pass on the jewel unharmed, Franklin Blake
emphasised as being the innocent means of bringing the unlucky jewel into the house,
(Collins p.47) or Rachel Verrinder another innocent youth. Alternatively bad non-virtuous
characters are harmed, John Herncastle came back [from India] with a character that
closed the doors of his family against him... (Collins p.63) Godfrey Ablewhite seems to
suffer a death of Orientalisation; compare the original description of the character as
having a beautiful red and white colour; a smooth round face, shaved as bare as your
hand and a head of lovely long flaxen hair, (Collins p.89) to the later image of his
disguised cadaver The mans swarthy face was placid and still with black hair and
beard. (p.50). One can only conject that this is a transformation that is intended to strike
the Ablewhites of the world with disgust rather than the more liberal.
If such ideas are valid and morality is placed with the colonised people rather than with
the widely presumed superior of the time the colonist, are we thus viewing the suggestion
of an enlightened pluralistic approach being presented by Collins and Kipling? What is
normally the other is afforded respect in both stories uncommon for the time. Although
the texts do not directly acknowledge the harm Empire may be doing to the colony,
Indian culture is portrayed as the conscience of what Said would call European material
civilisation and culture (Ashcroft et al ed. p.87) something of which he believes the
Orient to be an integral part.
These texts and ideas have led me to construct a table which loosely reflects the moral
attitudes put forward by Collins/Kipling/Huston in the discussed works. I do not claim it
to be in any way universal and it is certainly a simplification of ideas yet I believe it to be
a useful model for comparison to other texts and may facilitate future discussion.

Table: Actions and Moral Standpoints in The Moonstone and The Man
Who Would Be King.
ACTION
Direct looting.
Controlling of
persons.

EQUALS?

PERFORMED BY...

Bad
Imperialism.

John Herncastle, Godfrey Ablewhite, Daniel

Dravitt (film/book),P.Carnahan (film).

Tolerated
Imperialism.

Peachy Carnahan (book).

(Pseudo-looting in
name of the crown?)
Innocent appreciation Good
of native culture.
Imperialism.

Franklin Blake, Rachel Verrinder, Mr Murthwaite,

Narrator of The Man Who Would Be King
(Kipling?)

Bibliography
Collins, Wilkie The Moonstone London: Penguin 1966
Kipling, Rudyard The Man Who Would Be King and Other Stories London: Granada
1975
The Post-Colonial Studies Reader e. Ashcroft, Griffith, Tiffin, London: Routledge 1995
The Man Who Would Be King dir. John Huston 1975