Talk:Rudyard Kipling

Should Kipling be referred to as English-Indian?

Should Kipling be referred to as English-Indian – or a similar term, such as British-Indian – in the lede and/or the short description? I am posing this as if it were an RfC, but am not formally making it such, because I believe that would potentially be more of a hindrance anything. Cheers, Will Thorpe (talk) 04:37, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I am of the opinion that he should be. Of course he was English and British; this does not contradict that he was Indian, and India was his home. His writings constitute a major part of the Indian literary canon. Previous discussions about Kipling's national identity seemed at times to fall into reductiveness, which is impossible when discussing Kipling's identity. Will Thorpe (talk) 04:44, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

This has been discussed a number of times on this talk page, with respect to "Anglo-Indian", "British-Indian", or just plain "Indian", and general opinion was that this does not accord with how Kipling is described - in his own time or currently. Nor does it match how we label other authors of British nationality but international birth and upbringing, such as Doris Lessing. See page archives, and this very page two topics up. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 05:46, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

These discussions have often been misguided, getting lost in terminology rather than principle (whether 'Anglo-Indian' should be used today in the way it was used before, rather than whether the person was indeed of both identities), nationality law (which is besides the point, as India was in the Empire), or a false dichotomy – which guided the instigator of the above discussion.

From my skimming, there may not have yet been a suitable discussion of this matter.

Many reliable sources 1 2 3 4 5 6 note his Indian birth, and many of these his Anglo-Indian identity and affection for India.

He must at least be described as 'Indian-born English'.

Cheers, Will Thorpe (talk) 06:11, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I think the present wording, with the 2nd sentence all about his India links, is fine. As for "India was his home", he left it in his early 20s, & I think never returned, despite being quite the globetrotter. Johnbod (talk) 03:51, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

@Johnbod I do think, especially in light of his sentiments and his literary output, 'Indian-born English' would be a better emphasis of this. Those who have raised an issue here in the past have had a point, and I believe this would be a middle-ground way to ameliorate the issue, whilst acknowledging that his growing up there is already mentioned, albeit secondarily.

Would you oppose such a change? Cheers, Will Thorpe (talk) 14:15, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Do we assume our readers only read the first five words of articles? The second sentence works well. Johnbod (talk) 00:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

It is a matter of importance and emphasis. The second sentence can merely be rephrased, not deleted:

- Kipling was an Indian-born English writer

- His native British India inspired much of his works Will Thorpe (talk) 13:00, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Religion/Religious background - "God-fearing Christian atheist" ?

re

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Christian_Nobel_laureates#Why_not_treat_Christian_as_'ethnoreligious'?_Include_Christians,_Ex-Christians_or_people_w/_such_parents?

1 "God-fearing Christian atheist" ?

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/kiplings-religion-john-derbyshire/

2 methodist?

'Rudyard Kipling was born in Bombay in 1865, the son of a highly skilled artist and sculptor, John Lockwood Kipling, and his wife Alice (nee Macdonald), who was the daughter of a celebrated Methodist. The Methodist background does not play a large part in Kipling’s life, but his aunts on his mother’s side gave him an entrée into the cultivated English upper class.'

https://yalebooks.yale.edu/2021/06/28/the-making-of-a-childrens-writer/

3 anglican?

what happened to this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rudyard_Kipling/Archive_1#Anglican?

Does anyone know why Kipling has been included in Category:English Anglicans? While he was baptized into the Anglican church (like the great majority of English people at the time) he does not seem to have been in any way an active churchgoer, and I do not see the relevance of the category. DuncanHill 15:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC) Obtained from the 1938 Anglican Church of Canada Revised Hymnal, in which a hymn or hymns appear by Kipling. Kipling's religious affiliation is mentioned in the listing. Homagetocatalonia 02:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC) 218.253.54.29 (talk) 16:15, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Simpler proposal: 'Indian-born English writer'

As I have stated above, the central issue here when it comes to the lede is a matter of emphasis. The lede may open as follows whilst only resolving rather than sustaining or creating any contention:

Joseph Rudyard Kipling (/ˈrʌdjərd/ RUD-yərd; 30 December 1865 – 18 January 1936) was an Indian-born English journalist, novelist, poet, and short-story writer. Much of his work was inspired by his native British India, though he lived elsewhere for most of his life.

This appears to me to resolve all points of uncertainty, whilst adding valuable (not superfluous) information to the lede. I also might like to add a footnote referring to his Anglo-Indian identity discussed and cited in the body.

Cheers, Will Thorpe (talk) 10:08, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

No objections, looks fine. I assume the only internal links would be to the pronunciation and to British India. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

This is tricky. Putting Indian anything in the title implies he was Indian by virtue of being born there - when he was of the British coloniser class. Place of birth is not usually mentioned in the lead section. SinoDevonian (talk) 08:36, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Shakespeare and Bible theory (section After the War (1918-1936) - page numbers for source please

In 1934, he published a short story in The Strand Magazine, "Proofs of Holy Writ", postulating that William Shakespeare had helped to  polish the prose of the King James Bible.

All that is stated of the citation is this: Short Stories from the Strand, The Folio Society, 1992 - but no page numbers. It would be helpful if those who added this interesting fact (interesting to both Shakespeare and Bible afficionados) could state the pages so that other users could read the article and see if it is worth including at more length in the Featured Article on William Shakespeare and wiki article on the King James Bible. It would be interesting to see what grounds Kipling had for these views. The translation committee were all - except one lay knight - clergy.Cloptonson (talk) 08:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

@Cloptonson I don't have access to that, but there's a short note on it from the Kipling Society here, which traces the original idea to a passing comment by John Buchan, which Kipling then ran with. There are a few pieces referred to in the Kipling Journal that flesh it out in more detail (this one by a NZ academic is probably the most detailed)

I don't know if "postulating" is the right word, given the background there - to me it seems like an idea he found interesting to flesh out into a story, rather than an actual reasoned-out theory, but it isn't explicit either way. I wonder if the suggestion turns up in any of Buchan's own writings? Andrew Gray (talk) 19:29, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

A little more on this - this chapter discusses it along with a similar short story by Anthony Burgess (where Ben Jonson is the translator) and also notes a distinct theory that Shakespeare wrote Psalm 46 specifically, based on very Stratfordian hidden-messages etc (no specific origin for that one, but it seems to crop up here and there). Andrew Gray (talk) 20:42, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

His prejudices about the Irish where not confirmed

The sentence "A visit to Ireland in 1911 confirmed Kipling's prejudices." is not appropriate as it suggests that Kipling was right about the Irish (he was not). It needs to be changed to better reflect that he might have felt his prejudices confirmed or something. ~2026-68211-1 (talk) 13:20, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

I took the current phrasing to mean just that - he felt that his prejudices had been confirmed - but sure, no issue with formulating that a bit more clearly. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:29, 31 January 2026 (UTC)