In "The Female of the Species" does Kipling offer us a sympathetic portrait of women?
How does this poem compare when juxtaposed with "The Vampire"?
The Female of the Species
WHEN the Himalayan peasant meets the he-bear in his pride,
He shouts to scare the monster who will often turn aside.
But the she-bear thus accosted rends the peasant tooth and nail,
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.
When Nag, the wayside cobra, hears the careless foot of man,
He will sometimes wriggle sideways and avoid it if he can,
But his mate makes no such motion where she camps beside the trail -
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.
When the early Jesuit fathers preached to Hurons and Choctaws,
They prayed to be delivered from the vengeance of the squaws -
'Twas the women, not the warriors, turned those stark enthusiasts pale -
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.
Man's timid heart is bursting with the things he must not say,
For the Woman that God gave him isn't his to give away;
But when hunter meets with husband, each confirms the others tale -
The female of the species is more deadly than the male.
Man, a bear in most relations, worm and savage otherwise,
Man propounds negotiations, Man accepts the compromise;
Very rarely will he squarely push the logic of a fact
To its ultimate conclusion in unmitigated act.
Fear, or foolishness, impels him, ere he lay the wicked low,
To concede some form of trial even to his fiercest foe.
Mirth obscene diverts his anger; Doubt and Pity oft perplex
Him in dealing with an issue - to the scandal of the Sex!
But the Woman that God gave him, every fibre of her frame
Proves her launched for one sole issue, armed and engined for the same,
And to serve that single issue, lest the generations fail,
The female of the species must be deadlier than the male.
She who faces Death by torture for each life beneath her breast
May not deal in doubt or pity - must not swerve for fact or jest.
These be purely male diversions - not in these her honor dwells -
She, the Other Law we live by, is that Law and nothing else!
She can bring no more to living than the powers that make her great
As the Mother of the Infant and the Mistress of the Mate;
And when Babe and Man are lacking and she strides unclaimed to claim
Her right as femme (and baron), her equipment is the same.
She is wedded to convictions - in default of grosser ties;
Her contentions are her children, Heaven help him, who denies!
He will meet no cool discussion, but the instant, white-hot wild
Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.
Unprovoked and awful charges - even so the she-bear fights;
Speech that drips, corrodes and poisons - even so the cobra bites;
Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw,
And the victim writhes with anguish - like the Jesuit with the squaw!
So it comes that Man, the coward, when he gathers to confer
With his fellow-braves in council, dare not leave a place for her
Where, at war with Life and Conscience, he uplifts his erring hands
To some God of abstract justice - which no woman understands.
And Man knows it! Knows, moreover, that the Woman that God gave him
Must command but may not govern; shall enthrall but not enslave him.
And She knows, because She warns him and Her instincts never fail,
That the female of Her species is more deadly than the male!
Rudyard Kipling
*** STRING IS CLOSED ***
42 comments:
Girls rule, boys drool.
The end :)
To answer Mr. D's question, yes. I believe that this poem is sympathetic to women. This poem says that women have so much power and we are "deadlier." At the same time, this poem makes women look so awesome, and then evil. I am biased, but I think that women are deadlier because we are emotionally strong then men. I know, it is a generalization, and we had this whole big discuusion in calss about this subject, or something similar to it. Women are fierce!
Compared to "the Vampire", this poem gives a lot more "props" to women. "The Vampire" made women sound like monsters. There was really no good in that poem about women. "The Female of the Species" doesn't call women bloodsuckers so I like this poem.
Why does Mr. Kipling always write about women?
In this poem, the author doesn't really offer a sympathetic portrait of women. He makes the women of his poem powerful and strong.
Juxtaposed with "The Vampire", these two works are very different. In this poem women are given power and "props" while in "The Vampire" women are referred to as bloodsuckers and given a negative light.
Ange,
In your answer to the first question, you said the author was sympathetic. By what definition would you descrpibe sympathetic?
When I first read it I thought that by saying sympathetic, I thought that he meant the author was feeling bad for women or trying to make them feel good about themselves.
To be sympathetic is to be compassionate or congenial (agreeable). So if we have a sympathetic character, we have an individual for whom we feel compassion, or with whom we have some connection. Does that make sense, or have I only further confused you?
I feel that the poem is true in that most women are strong because of the fact that they are the ones who must bear the children, but that may have to do with the fact that I myself am a female.
I get confused and don’t understand the ending part of it though.
I don’t believe that Kipling is giving us a sympathetic portrait of women because he warns the reader of our deadliness but says nothing of our compassion and understanding. Also I feel that when he writes, “ She can bring no more to living than the powers that make her great As the Mother of the Infant…,” he is saying that we have no other use than to have babies (which isn’t true at all). Kipling also makes us sound like bullies when he writes, that women have ”Speech that drips, corrodes and poisons…And the victim writhes with anguish…” In this way, I think that this poem compares with “The Vampire” in that they both speak of women in a negative way, one says women suck life out of men and the other says we are deadly with no use other than giving birth to babies.
I really liked this poem, mostly because it had generally more simple language and was relatively easy to understand. Here, Kipling portrays women as a positive, storng figure in society.
Juxtaposed with "The Vampire," Kipling's portrayal of women changes. In "The Vampire," women are painted in a negative light, while in "The Female of the Species," women are honored and deemed more important than men.
Abby,
I agree with what you hae to say about the poems being juxtaposed: that in "The Vampire," women are shown negatively, but in "The Female of the Species," they are given power.
Abby,
The way I took sympathetic was a little confusing. I thought of "The Vampire" and in that poem, he made women sound like horrible monsters, so not sympathetic. Then I compared it to this poem, which gave power to women and made you feel like you were able to see both sides of women. Meaning, the "bad", deadly side and the "good", power side.
I most likely made it harder then it had to be.
Do you think that this poem makes women sound bad, or good? ( Not in comparison to "The Vampire", just what he says in this poem).
Also, in part of the poem the author states that women should not govern, or be in charge, and I think that is so wrong because we can do whatever we want to so ha!
Abby, I agree with you in that Kipling isn't being sympathetic towards women in this poem. =)
What is it about Kipling's portrayal of women that you find unsympathetic?
In what may or may not be a related issue, what do you make of the following line?
"Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw, And the victim writhes with anguish - like the Jesuit with the squaw!"
Ange,
I 100% thing he makes women sound awesome. I am a little confused as to the term sympathetic still. In my head it makes sense that he is not. However, after reading your post I can see where you are coming from and also believe he is sympathic.
Collin,
I agree with you about the simple language and how much easier it was to understand than most. Some parts are still a little tricky though.
Mr. D,
Could that line mean that women and men are more similar then we think? I'm a little confused at this Squaw.
Abby, a squaw is a female indian / native American. A Jesuit is a Christian missionary.
This poem makes me relatively angry upon initial reading. I don't think that Kipling offers a sympathetic portrait of women. He portrays women as deadly, poisonous, scandalous, and vengeful. Of course, this is a genrealization that I'd say many woman have to potential to be. I've decided that the man who felt unloved in The Vampire wrote this poem due to his misinterpretation of the love affair.
In Kiplings peom he is suggesting that females are more dangerous and deadly than the males. He writes about how in all species the female race is a greater threat than a male. He basically desrcribes them to be manipulatvie, relentless, vengeful, and don't give the benefit of the doubt. So in this peom we do not see a sympathetic portrait of women, hence the terms used above. This peom juxtaposed with "The Vampire" because the contrast between men and women is so differnt. In the vampire it seems to show men to be weak and caring, and in "The Female of the Species" the women are mean, selfish, and careless.
Collin,
I really love your view on the poem. Your outlook of it made me open my eyes and see it in a different light. I guess you being a male and having these views also make me happy. so...
Do you think these poems are true relation to our species or do you think they are only singling out certain people?
Mr. D,
I believe that the line you are speaking of is one that does not show women in a nice way. I think that it is saying that women "hit a nerver", they make people angry?
This poem does not symathise with women. It makes them seem strong ans in charge, which sounds right to me. I think that it can be juxtaposed with "The Vampire" in a way because in both poems women are in charge and have a major affect on men or in general.
Collin, I also like how easy this poem is to understand. I'm all for it!
Marissa,
I think that these poems single out certain members of today's society. Not all women are positive figures in society and at times, men are more important than women.
Marissa, I completely agree with you. I also find that in “The Vampire” Kipling portrays men in a sympathetic way and this view is also demonstrated in “The Female of the Species.”
Collin, I agree with you in that Kipling uses simpler langue than some of the other poems we’ve had to look at. =)
Collin, I agree with you in that Kipling uses simpler langue than some of the other poems we’ve had to look at. =)
"Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw, And the victim writhes with anguish - like the Jesuit with the squaw!"
Mr. D, I think that by the following quote we can guess that Kipling hasn’t had a good experience with women. To me, it sounds like Kipling is saying that women, in general, know how to get under one’s skin and really irritate people. However, I do believe this is a skill that transcends the female gender and is present in some males.
After reading the poem I feel that Kipling percieves woman to be strong and confident. He does not seem to think they are weak, he feels they are capable to accomplish any task.
This poem is similar to "The Vampire" in that it talks about women being a superior power. It's different because in this poem he gives off a much stronger feeling and is very obvious with his thoughts.
This poem means the most when all the background is known. All the actions he describes, as with the bear, the cobra, and the jesuits, give this poem more meaning to me. This poem is very unsympathetic in women's portayal. Kipling is describging women's strength, specifically that to protect their children. The passages and their message concerning the protection of her children, are the only parts that are sympathetic to women. The rest shows how they are savage and uncaring. Kipling describes women as unjust and uncomprimising which lead them to be the sex that shall not govern or rule. Juxtaposed with "The Vampire" I see these poems as having some relations. Both poems describe women very generally and negatively. The unjust and uncaring aspects of both poems seem to stand out. While "The Vampire" seems to show the women as somewhat weak, in that they can never understand the man's love, the Kipling poem gives them more power.
Mr.D - The reason i think the poem is unsympathetic is based on the end of the poem. What stands out to me as unsympathetic was that he describes them as uncomprimising and that they do not undertand justice. The passage concerning the unprovoked and awfule charges further stands out to be as portaying women as cruel and indifferent to men.
The line to me is describing how women can manipulate men by picking out weaknesses and exploiting them. "Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw", is imagery relating how women can push on one weakness until a man, "Writhes with anguish."
Very ture Collin... Men and women both play important roles in society. I believe it all matters on who the person is to characterize their personality and not be characterized by their sex.
This poem is definitely not sympathetic toward women. Yes this poem is saying that women are strong and will protect their children against any dangers, but it is also saying that women are more dangerous, cruel, and vicious than men. This poem is a lot like "The Vampire" because both poems portray women as being really strong and having a strong affect on men. But in this poem women are portrayed as strong and courageous and in "The Vampire," women are just selfish and cruel, sucking the life out of innocent men.
Nina and Mariana, I agree with both of your interpretations. I don't think this poem is necessarily positive toward women. This poem is saying that women are careless and vicious.
“ And Man knows it! Knows, moreover, that the Woman that God gave him
Must command but may not govern; shall enthrall but not enslave him. . . “
I don’t really like this part of the poem. I don’t agree with it since there are women in the government and just because they are women, it doesn’t mean that they can’t do the job well or hold less brain power than men.
With the whole “enslaving” part of it, I feel that Kipling is, in a way, contradicting himself because in his other poem, “The Vampire,” a man is practically enslaved by a woman. Or is it that he is simply stating in “The Vampire” that women shouldn’t enslave men because it would lead to a bad outcome (a part of him dying) as represented at the end of the poem? (If true, this would, therefore, further support his belief that women “shall enthrall but not enslave.”)
Marianna,
I agree with so much of what you're saying. You last post quoting: "And Man knows it! Knows, moreover, that the Woman that God gave him
Must command but may not govern; shall enthrall but not enslave him..." is a huge reason as to why this poem makes me feel angry. You basically summed everything up, so I won't be redundant.
My first impression of this poem, when Mr. D read it to us, was that it's incredibly one sided. It sounds like a feminazi wrote it. Everyone can be deadly; I personally think all people are born evil, so anyone could be "deadly". It is true that in some instances women are more dangerous; the angler fish that we think of are actually just the females, the males are about an inch or two long and are really not scary at all. However, some species have meaner, bigger, and stronger males. It is my experience that male rabbits are usually much more aggressive and harder to along with then female ones.
Thanks Nina! =)
Deanna,
Do you really think that everyone is born evil? Do you also think that a baby is evil? I don’t really agree with that. Maybe if you are right, and it is true that everyone has evil in them, I think that they develop their evilness as they grow up into our corrupted society. We aren’t born evil; babies aren’t evil (in my opinion). But then again, it brings us back to the whole nature vs. nurture argument doesn’t it?
By the way, “femi-nazi” made me smile; I think, in this poem, it fits Kipling nicely. =)
Mariana,
I really do think everyone is born evil, and yes everyone, even children. I have never seen someone take as much pleasure in hurting someone the way a child does. I don't constantly tell on my peers to spite them the way a child does, I have never punched someone in the face just to do it the way I have seen children do. They hog toys, but get mad when others do that. They think only of themselves.
If everyone (from the trolley blog) saved themselves by allowing another to die, well, I would call that evil...
Is it that children are born evil, or that they're born without the knowledge of good and evil. It seems to me that for an action to be truly evil, an awareness of the evil nature of the act is necessary. Yes? No?
Mr. D, I think they know that some, or most, of the bad things they do are wrong; I've worked with little kids, and they'll hit each other and be nothing but smiles while they watch someone else cry, but as soon as you you ask them what they did, they all say, "...nothing..."
Mr. D,
Would your comment about how “to be truly evil, an awareness of the evil nature of the act is necessary” tie into our class discussion about our own perspectives that gives labels to things? I think it would . . . right?
Deanna,
Thank you for answering my question. =)
SO ive been putting this post off for so long just because it is so long and because of this its harder to understand. I can understand most parts of it but its hard to piece the entire poem together as a whole to really understand Kipling's whole message.
I dont think this poem is at all sympathetic to women. If i was something other than a human and read this poem, honestly i would be afraid of women due to the way that Kipling describes them. He tells of them being scary, savage creatures who will do anything to protect their children.
This poem and The Vampire have many similarities but many differences as well. They both describe how harsh and unforgiving women can be, but This poem does it in a much more severe manner. It is more direct in describing women.
I agree with most everyone's arguments, especially with Alyssa's comparison with this poem and The Vampire.
Im not sure how anyone thinks that this poem is sympathetic towards women. It doesnt make sense... at least in my eyes
Jarrett,
I agree with you completely. This poem offers no source of sympathy towards women, except for the fact that the poem mentions that when their children and their “mates” are “lacking” she’s there to help them, because of the way it describes how women fight viciously and makes them out to be evil..that’s what I felt when I read this. That women are evil, but strong, and men are foolish and weak.
Post a Comment