I realize I'm replying to a 14-year-old thread, but I could find no more recent discussion in my search of the mailbase archives. This is also my first post to the mailbase, so I beg your forgiveness if I'm breaking any sort of protocol.
I have a deep interest in this subject, as I am writing a short-story anthology set in the world laid out by Kipling in "With the Night Mail" and "As Easy as A.B.C." I've read and re-read both of these stories many times, and "A.B.C." remains enigmatic, though I have my own ideas, which I should like to present here for comment and criticism.
First, to Mr. Radcliffe's point about the setting date of "A.B.C.", I don't believe it was incidental: "With the Night Mail" was set roughly 100 years into the future, in the nice round-number year of 2000. "As Easy as A.B.C." is set in 2065, significantly, 200 years after the writer's birth.
As for "A.B.C." being a tract against democracy, I reach a different conclusion: In my online research, I've seen the world of the A.B.C. interpreted as everything from Kipling's desire for a technocratic Empire, to his vision of a Libertarian utopia. I believe the work is, instead, decidedly dystopic.
Kipling playing the "unreliable narrator" is not unheard of, and it seems to me that the opinions of the main characters in this story are only tools for the ideals he wishes to convey. If this was Kipling's idea of a utopia, it should be internally consistent. It is not. The world of the A.B.C. is fully of hypocrisy: Most visibly is the idea that individuals refer to themselves as "self-owning men and women", yet these same individuals are willing to kill, or at least allow the A.B.C. to transport into slavery, their fellow men and women whose only crime is not sharing their views. The angry mob, as it were, resort to "crowd-making" in order to protest those whom they charge with the same sin. No writer, attempting to present a complimentary view of their utopia would intentionally include so much hypocrisy, and I can't believe a writer of Kipling's caliber and experience would mistakenly suffer it to live.
I believe what is being presented is an extrapolation of the early 20th century anarchy movement. It's anarchist philosophy (at least by RK's interpretation) taken to the extreme. The statue clearly represents not a celebration, but a warning--a warning against the tyranny of majority rule (the anarchist view of democracy).
As for the A.B.C. itself, it shares so much with RK's depiction of British rule in India that it's hard to ignore. As I see it, the A.B.C. is a sprawling bureaucracy, staffed with overworked, under-appreciated civil servants, that began with the intention of raising up the population (after wars and plagues) but ended up taking more and more responsibility, and ultimately becoming a God-like presence to which individuals have unknowingly surrendered their autonomy.
In another way, the A.B.C. is a relic of the days when men and women of different nations worked together for the common good, and some of that remains with the older members. The planet is at a crossroads. If the "People" do not return, the more militant of the A.B.C. (represented by Pirolo and Arnott) will establish a tyrannical empire. This, I believe, is why De Forest ultimately orders the destruction of the statue: The population has been so long conditioned to fear democracy that they are not yet ready for its return. Only by removing the things that keep reminding them do they stand a chance of recovering their senses and returning to the old ways.
As I said, this is my interpretation. I'm very interested to hear others. Also, I understand there are, extant, some "deleted scenes" from this story. I would very much like to read them, if they are available somewhere online. I have not come across them in my travels.
Bryan Paul Sullo
------
Original message from John Radcliffe
Sun, 15 Aug 1999 20:07:29 +0100
With the Night Mail, it seems to me, is straightforwardly permeated with
RK's fascination with the possibilities of technology, in particular powered
flight, and with the professional expertise and shop-talk of the aviators.
But As Easy as ABC (set incidentally, 60 years later than Night Mail) seems
quite different. It uses the idea of airpower, but is in essence a tract
against democracy. What was that all about ? Did he really mean it ? And who
was he aiming the message at ? I actually don't find the story very
interesting, except as an expression of a deeply pessimistic political
philosophy, but I'm prepared to be convinced !
John Radcliffe
|