Skip to main content

How did Kipling created suspense when Rikki-tikki followed Nagaina down the hole? What is one instance in the story where you were left wondering...

That part of the story is suspenseful for sure; however, it is oddly suspenseful. It's odd that part is suspenseful because readers get no details of the underground fight that ensues. Essentially, readers are told Rikki-tikki went in the hole and came out alive. That shouldn't be suspenseful, but it is.  


The reason it is suspenseful is because Kipling uses the most suspenseful technique of all: the unknown. The unknown is scary because our imaginations take over. All Kipling does is feed those imaginations with small, hinting details. As Rikki-tikki plunges down the hole, we are told a mongoose should never choose to do that. The underground passage is the snake's home territory. Nagaina knows all the ins and outs. Rikki-tikki is fully aware that he has no idea when the passages will open up and allow her to strike. By this point in the story, readers are accustomed to Rikki-tikki being in control and almost fearless; however, that is not happening at this point. Readers realize there is a very good chance Rikki-tikki made a fatal mistake. That's suspenseful.  



It was dark in the hole; and Rikki-tikki never knew when it might open out and give Nagaina room to turn and strike at him.



Kipling then forces the reader to wait. He does not announce the outcome of the battle in the next paragraph. Instead, Kipling has Darzee start announcing Rikki-tikki's death. That brings even further doubt into the minds of readers. Considering that the entire "hole" sequence is about a paragraph and a half, it is very suspenseful. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more