So much reminded me of W&P in these chapters, from Fleury’s bumbling attempts to contribute ideas to the conversation, to the boisterous and reckless young officer riding a horse into the bungalow and making it drink horrid champagne (the poor bear came to mind), to the ruined dwellings, a bit like Bald Hills after the soldiers had come through - and these Victorians feeling so very nearly secure in their perceived superiority over their underlings. All the way to the rather brilliantly expressed musings on women’s place in a conversation - almost an echo of disgruntled late Leo, but with much more ironic distance and used as a way of skewering the men’s preconceptions.
Bhairava: (I’m not South Asian, but was married to one, and lived with him in Chennai, formerly called Madras, for many years). Bhairava’s name means terrifying, he looks terrifying, eager for blood. He has a baffling number of arms. His cup is made from a skull. There are jackals, carrion eaters near his shrine. He is often a gatekeeper, stationed at the entrance to temples to keep out evil-doers. I would have thought that he belonged at the place where Fleury goes to meet the Maharaja, and that he would symbolize Fleury’s transition from his idea of order into the disturbingly alien native world. (See the cave in Passsage to India?) Instead, Bhairava is placed at the entrance to a scene of the worst of the Raj - stupid, ugly, violent people who despise and demean Indians. He appears to represent them, instead of repelling them. Bhairava also has an association with Kali Yuga, the last and most degraded age of the universe, before it is destroyed and begins again. Could that be it? I’m interested in what others have to say.
I was interested in the jackal. To me the abandoned land felt like a place of cremation, haunted by carrion eaters. The frightening deities, like the ascetic Shiva and the black goddess Kali, are associated with such places. Bhairava, as an aspect of Shiva, can also be associated with death. So maybe he is a harbinger of death for the corrupt Raj as embodied in Rayna and company.
I wondered the same thing… I supposed that it was servants from nearby bungalows making the offerings. Although the servants, appear to follow the Sahib‘s orders assiduously this shrine places a strong undercurrent of blood and rebellion in the mix.
I wondered whether Fleury would see this shrine as an example of Indian civilization. but he seems to want to hurry away from it as being sinister, the one aspect of the decaying property that is being kept in order.
I love the heated and lofty theme of “civilization” being juxtaposed with the horrifying behavior of the opium seller and friends. Acting like frat boys while renaming their servants as animals. I kept wishing for a scene where we could see what they are thinking about these awful people.
(Sorry, I’m reposting to put this in the right place; somehow it ended up in the middle of the discussion about snakes!)
I’m loving Farrell’s wry, often dark, humor. I want to highlight one example in Ch. 3 that had me chortling loudly: The Padre, worried by a newspaper editorial about the dangers posed by a projected new translation of the Bible, can’t understand why a translation EVER should have been necessary in the first place — the Bible obviously should have been written in English, which is spoken all over the world, while hardly anybody understands Hebrew! The current “magnificent” English translation is allowable because God must have realized that the original Hebrew and Greek version was a mistake — oh, but wait, that suggests that God committed an error, which is not possible … oh, dear, thinks the poor Padre, I’m getting out beyond my theological abilities …
There’s a lot going on here. I’m resisting the temptation to read ahead. Mixed emotions as well. I find some of it comical and other sections make me feel uncomfortable. It’s definitely not my usual read and that’s a good thing 👍
I think some of the best literature makes the reader feel uncomfortable. The skill of Farrell is in keeping his cast of pompous, snobby, racists from verging on caricature.
I am glad Farrell’s writing is making me feel uncomfortable, for it’s making appreciate how far we have evolved into a better society, if you can get my gist. In fact, as I read the chapters I cannot help reflecting on many social issues from the past ..
There is so much humor in this book, some subtle, some knee-slapping. It must have been fun to write this book. I like, for instance, that Fleury bought his dog Chloë because its golden tresses reminded him of Louise. 😂
I have been trying to come up with the perfect distraction from today, and you have provided it. Time to dive deeper into all of your links and images.
I felt there to be an intriguing clash of tones in these chapters. On the one hand, the blithe disregard of clearly signalled danger reminded me of the opening scenes of a disaster movie. And the description of Hopkins at the start of ch4, with his staring, dark circled eyes and unnatural stillness made me think he could be a bit of a Cassandra figure. Plus the creeping sense of danger at disgusting Rayne’s place - all very disturbing and tense. Yet on the flip side there’s all this wry humour which I absolutely loved - especially the conundrum of whether to display a sense of confidence or bolt for the Residency, resulting in a likely ‘calm and confident bolting’. Something about that is so utterly British - straight out of Yes Minister. Ultimately it’s taking me some time to figure out exactly what kind of book I’m reading! Enjoying it immensely though! Thanks for the excellent notes Simon.
I finally got to sit down and read our next two chapters, what a treat! I laughed out loud several times – mind you, it was an exasperated kind of laughter. What a bunch of clowns! Farrell is finessing some nice psychology behind the egregious, in-your-face racism and misogyny – at this point in the story I would call the colonizers immature, insecure, posturing. With the exception of doctor McNab (and possibly Miriam) they all seem to be stealing sidelong glances at each other, judging but terrified to be judged in return, desperate to prove how civilized, unflappable and morally superior they are. The military is especially idiotic, with General Jackson being essentially a Monty Python character and the soldiers a bunch of frat boys, all hell-bent on curing Fleury (excellent name choice!) from his supposed effeminate tendencies.
So far I’m most interested in the Collector and the debate on civilization he seems to embody. He’s obviously a fan of science and progress and at one time he might have genuinely believed in his right to educate India, but it seems like he is starting to doubt and he’s afraid to show it. At first he seems to side with the Reverend’s silly takes (which are not as silly as they sound, more like controlling and downright scary). But his chat with McNab shows that he’s no fundamentalist and he’s casting around for a like-minded person in a context where going against the status quo will isolate you. He’s already lonely as it is, with his wife gone, appearances to maintain and looming troubles that he’s the only person smart enough to take seriously. I especially found bittersweet how desperate he was to assert his role as good leader and father in front of McNab, you could smell the insecurity (I wrote “the lady doth protest too much” in my notes). He is not a good father because he puts his pride first, it’s appearances before substance, status quo before humanity. That’s the whole problem with these people, isn’t it?
Favorite footnote of the week: “Fleury you ridiculous donut!” Does it count as a footnote if I wrote it myself?
I am currently also reading White Tiger, by Aravind Adiga, so I can tutor my friend’s daughter for her IB exam. White Tiger is set in the recent past (the book was written in 2008), and I have been struck by how servants are treated just as horribly in White Tiger—including being given cruel nicknames and bejng expected to grovel—as they are in The Siege of Krishnapur. But this time the abusers are not English colonizers but upper-caste Indians.
The two books make for a dispiriting juxtaposition. The arc of the moral universe is long, and it doesn’t always bend toward justice.
I was struck by the priest's turmoil over translating the bible from English into Hebrew and Greek (I think I have that right) having just lived through the fight for a translation of the bible into English with Wolf Hall.
Thanks for the heads-up about the Empire podcast. Its really helped set the tone for my reading of Siege. I've gone back to the beginning to listen in order - its great. I'd let William Dalrymple tell me the history of just about anything.
My goodness Simon - you certainly provided 'footnotes and tangents' aplenty this week! Thank you so much for the many rabbit holes readers may now lose themselves in. It must take you an age and I appreciate it.
I was fascinated this week by:
* the continued discussion on ideas/civilisation and that one could only acquire - through wealth mind you - 'the superior way of life' (civilisation) which would include the spiritual! (chp3) Ouch!
* is it a peaceful countryside? (chp4) By showing no sign of fear everything would be alright or should they prepare? There is much to consider and so far - mostly from the English viewpoint - dissension arises within. I'm keen to read on.
Yes, thanks Simon, for the abundance of links. I particularly appreciated images of pig sticking, the Bairava and the floating Church — all of which I would have had to search for myself. Looking forward to more next week.
the breadth of this novel is quite something. the quality of literary artistry to imbue its themes - history, civilisation - within a story that isn't weighed down by them, they emerge from its narrative, characters and situations, it really is a special novel.
Thanks for an awesome set of links! There are so many things opening up here. (And reading that Baden-Powell thought boars enjoyed pig-sticking was an especially mind-boggling moment...)
Just finished Chapter 3 and can barely imagine Cutter and his drinking, cavorting horse scene.
I, too, have been associating Fleury with Pierre, and even Louise with Helene.
The suspense is building of course with these splendid vignettes of people and place. I’m marking up half the book so far…the sleeping punkah wallah, Chloe licking a brown baby’s stomach….
And I want to read more about the author and his life.
Fleury reminds me of Pierre, in W&P?
This occurred to me a few times this week.
So much reminded me of W&P in these chapters, from Fleury’s bumbling attempts to contribute ideas to the conversation, to the boisterous and reckless young officer riding a horse into the bungalow and making it drink horrid champagne (the poor bear came to mind), to the ruined dwellings, a bit like Bald Hills after the soldiers had come through - and these Victorians feeling so very nearly secure in their perceived superiority over their underlings. All the way to the rather brilliantly expressed musings on women’s place in a conversation - almost an echo of disgruntled late Leo, but with much more ironic distance and used as a way of skewering the men’s preconceptions.
A fantastic read so far!
Same here! I’m looking forward to seeing how this character will evolve—if ever :)
That was exactly what I was thinking. I just couldn’t help replacing Fleury with Pierre in mind.
Bhairava: (I’m not South Asian, but was married to one, and lived with him in Chennai, formerly called Madras, for many years). Bhairava’s name means terrifying, he looks terrifying, eager for blood. He has a baffling number of arms. His cup is made from a skull. There are jackals, carrion eaters near his shrine. He is often a gatekeeper, stationed at the entrance to temples to keep out evil-doers. I would have thought that he belonged at the place where Fleury goes to meet the Maharaja, and that he would symbolize Fleury’s transition from his idea of order into the disturbingly alien native world. (See the cave in Passsage to India?) Instead, Bhairava is placed at the entrance to a scene of the worst of the Raj - stupid, ugly, violent people who despise and demean Indians. He appears to represent them, instead of repelling them. Bhairava also has an association with Kali Yuga, the last and most degraded age of the universe, before it is destroyed and begins again. Could that be it? I’m interested in what others have to say.
It’s interesting to me that this shrine is in a theoretically abandoned compound. Who is making offerings, at this point?
I was interested in the jackal. To me the abandoned land felt like a place of cremation, haunted by carrion eaters. The frightening deities, like the ascetic Shiva and the black goddess Kali, are associated with such places. Bhairava, as an aspect of Shiva, can also be associated with death. So maybe he is a harbinger of death for the corrupt Raj as embodied in Rayna and company.
I wondered the same thing… I supposed that it was servants from nearby bungalows making the offerings. Although the servants, appear to follow the Sahib‘s orders assiduously this shrine places a strong undercurrent of blood and rebellion in the mix.
And is there perhaps something in the juxtaposition of this small shrine and the floating church from the great exhibition??
Maybe its to highlight the ignorance of the British to Indian culture and beliefs? Although I'm not convinced by this myself.
I feel like Fleury was expecting to see civilised order imposed by the British but so far all the British people he's met have been faintly ludicrous.
Ludicrous is the right word. In this, the British and Indians have much in common.
I wondered whether Fleury would see this shrine as an example of Indian civilization. but he seems to want to hurry away from it as being sinister, the one aspect of the decaying property that is being kept in order.
Thanks for that Nancy, very illuminating!
I love the heated and lofty theme of “civilization” being juxtaposed with the horrifying behavior of the opium seller and friends. Acting like frat boys while renaming their servants as animals. I kept wishing for a scene where we could see what they are thinking about these awful people.
(Sorry, I’m reposting to put this in the right place; somehow it ended up in the middle of the discussion about snakes!)
I’m loving Farrell’s wry, often dark, humor. I want to highlight one example in Ch. 3 that had me chortling loudly: The Padre, worried by a newspaper editorial about the dangers posed by a projected new translation of the Bible, can’t understand why a translation EVER should have been necessary in the first place — the Bible obviously should have been written in English, which is spoken all over the world, while hardly anybody understands Hebrew! The current “magnificent” English translation is allowable because God must have realized that the original Hebrew and Greek version was a mistake — oh, but wait, that suggests that God committed an error, which is not possible … oh, dear, thinks the poor Padre, I’m getting out beyond my theological abilities …
There’s a lot going on here. I’m resisting the temptation to read ahead. Mixed emotions as well. I find some of it comical and other sections make me feel uncomfortable. It’s definitely not my usual read and that’s a good thing 👍
I think that's what the writing is meant to do: make you laugh and feel uncomfortable, and uncomfortable about laughing as well.
I think some of the best literature makes the reader feel uncomfortable. The skill of Farrell is in keeping his cast of pompous, snobby, racists from verging on caricature.
I am glad Farrell’s writing is making me feel uncomfortable, for it’s making appreciate how far we have evolved into a better society, if you can get my gist. In fact, as I read the chapters I cannot help reflecting on many social issues from the past ..
There is so much humor in this book, some subtle, some knee-slapping. It must have been fun to write this book. I like, for instance, that Fleury bought his dog Chloë because its golden tresses reminded him of Louise. 😂
I have been trying to come up with the perfect distraction from today, and you have provided it. Time to dive deeper into all of your links and images.
Thank you!
From one horrorshow to another.
I felt there to be an intriguing clash of tones in these chapters. On the one hand, the blithe disregard of clearly signalled danger reminded me of the opening scenes of a disaster movie. And the description of Hopkins at the start of ch4, with his staring, dark circled eyes and unnatural stillness made me think he could be a bit of a Cassandra figure. Plus the creeping sense of danger at disgusting Rayne’s place - all very disturbing and tense. Yet on the flip side there’s all this wry humour which I absolutely loved - especially the conundrum of whether to display a sense of confidence or bolt for the Residency, resulting in a likely ‘calm and confident bolting’. Something about that is so utterly British - straight out of Yes Minister. Ultimately it’s taking me some time to figure out exactly what kind of book I’m reading! Enjoying it immensely though! Thanks for the excellent notes Simon.
I finally got to sit down and read our next two chapters, what a treat! I laughed out loud several times – mind you, it was an exasperated kind of laughter. What a bunch of clowns! Farrell is finessing some nice psychology behind the egregious, in-your-face racism and misogyny – at this point in the story I would call the colonizers immature, insecure, posturing. With the exception of doctor McNab (and possibly Miriam) they all seem to be stealing sidelong glances at each other, judging but terrified to be judged in return, desperate to prove how civilized, unflappable and morally superior they are. The military is especially idiotic, with General Jackson being essentially a Monty Python character and the soldiers a bunch of frat boys, all hell-bent on curing Fleury (excellent name choice!) from his supposed effeminate tendencies.
So far I’m most interested in the Collector and the debate on civilization he seems to embody. He’s obviously a fan of science and progress and at one time he might have genuinely believed in his right to educate India, but it seems like he is starting to doubt and he’s afraid to show it. At first he seems to side with the Reverend’s silly takes (which are not as silly as they sound, more like controlling and downright scary). But his chat with McNab shows that he’s no fundamentalist and he’s casting around for a like-minded person in a context where going against the status quo will isolate you. He’s already lonely as it is, with his wife gone, appearances to maintain and looming troubles that he’s the only person smart enough to take seriously. I especially found bittersweet how desperate he was to assert his role as good leader and father in front of McNab, you could smell the insecurity (I wrote “the lady doth protest too much” in my notes). He is not a good father because he puts his pride first, it’s appearances before substance, status quo before humanity. That’s the whole problem with these people, isn’t it?
Favorite footnote of the week: “Fleury you ridiculous donut!” Does it count as a footnote if I wrote it myself?
Favorite (?) tangent of the week: I had to look up punkah-wallah to make sure that yes, I understood it correctly and these f***** people made their servants stay up all night operating a big ceiling fan so that velvet-clad sahibs and memsahibs could sleep under a gentle breeze. https://scroll.in/article/1028513/amidst-uk-heatwave-a-reminder-of-how-british-colonials-exploited-punkah-walas-in-indias-summers
Good grief, that article on the punkahs and punkah-wallahs is shocking and infuriating. Thanks for digging it up.
I am currently also reading White Tiger, by Aravind Adiga, so I can tutor my friend’s daughter for her IB exam. White Tiger is set in the recent past (the book was written in 2008), and I have been struck by how servants are treated just as horribly in White Tiger—including being given cruel nicknames and bejng expected to grovel—as they are in The Siege of Krishnapur. But this time the abusers are not English colonizers but upper-caste Indians.
The two books make for a dispiriting juxtaposition. The arc of the moral universe is long, and it doesn’t always bend toward justice.
I was struck by the priest's turmoil over translating the bible from English into Hebrew and Greek (I think I have that right) having just lived through the fight for a translation of the bible into English with Wolf Hall.
Thanks for the heads-up about the Empire podcast. Its really helped set the tone for my reading of Siege. I've gone back to the beginning to listen in order - its great. I'd let William Dalrymple tell me the history of just about anything.
Pig-sticking. Reminds me of the wolf hunting that I read about somewhere. If only I could recall where! 😉
My goodness Simon - you certainly provided 'footnotes and tangents' aplenty this week! Thank you so much for the many rabbit holes readers may now lose themselves in. It must take you an age and I appreciate it.
I was fascinated this week by:
* the continued discussion on ideas/civilisation and that one could only acquire - through wealth mind you - 'the superior way of life' (civilisation) which would include the spiritual! (chp3) Ouch!
* is it a peaceful countryside? (chp4) By showing no sign of fear everything would be alright or should they prepare? There is much to consider and so far - mostly from the English viewpoint - dissension arises within. I'm keen to read on.
I aimed to write less, but as always I got lost down too many rabbit holes!
Yes, thanks Simon, for the abundance of links. I particularly appreciated images of pig sticking, the Bairava and the floating Church — all of which I would have had to search for myself. Looking forward to more next week.
No, no, don’t write less and keep those rabbit holes coming! So many ridiculous scenes going on that we need to make some sense of!
the breadth of this novel is quite something. the quality of literary artistry to imbue its themes - history, civilisation - within a story that isn't weighed down by them, they emerge from its narrative, characters and situations, it really is a special novel.
Thanks for an awesome set of links! There are so many things opening up here. (And reading that Baden-Powell thought boars enjoyed pig-sticking was an especially mind-boggling moment...)
I have read all the 5 star reviews from boars how much they enjoy it and can’t wait to do it again 😉
😅
Just finished Chapter 3 and can barely imagine Cutter and his drinking, cavorting horse scene.
I, too, have been associating Fleury with Pierre, and even Louise with Helene.
The suspense is building of course with these splendid vignettes of people and place. I’m marking up half the book so far…the sleeping punkah wallah, Chloe licking a brown baby’s stomach….
And I want to read more about the author and his life.
Check out my further resources Barbara: https://footnotesandtangents.substack.com/p/the-siege-of-krishnapur-online-resources I listened to the RTE podcast a couple of days ago about Farrell's premature death. There's lots of interesting stuff up on that page.