Sir, - Your review of a recent Kipling biography (Books, September 11th) tries to revive the truism that Kipling was a writer of genius who held unfortunate opinions.
This approach would equate Kipling with, say, Wagner, seeing both as artists of importance who expressed or fostered appalling views.
But this is mistaken. The case of Kipling differs from that of Wagner. Kipling was not an important artist who incidentally expressed appalling views. Kipling attained distinction precisely by articulating those views. He made them respectable and highlighted the little about them that was edifying.
As a poet and a writer of short stories and children's literature, Kipling belongs comfortably at the top of the second division with the J. M. Barrie, the G.K. Chesterton, or Robert Service. It is as a preacher of empire, and of the mix of values that sustain it, that he attained distinction.
Admiration for Kipling's supposed genius is usually a sign of nostalgia for empire. This is a quaint and almost endearing sentiment, but should not be confused with literary judgement. - Yours, etc.,
Frank Fitzpatrick, Dunville Avenue, Ranelagh, Dublin 6.