A Fanwanky Reading of The Gift of the Emperor
What ho, old chaps! I’m new to this fandom - very glad it exists - and wanted to share this bit of analysis. After reading you may roll your eyes and say, “Thanks, Capt. Obvious” - but when I’ve got a reading on my chest I need to cough it up, and “The Gift of the Emperor” sat on me heavier than most.
The story opens with a bad exchange. Queen Victoria gives a pearl to an emperor; in a show of ingratitude, he then sends the pearl to a king who insulted the queen. That opening example of good faith met with bad rewards establishes the story’s running theme. Bunny publishes a poem but receives no payment. Bunny expects a cruise with his best friend, and instead receives days of being ignored followed by disgrace and 18 months in prison. Raffles tries a burglary whose rewards might save him for life, but it dooms him forever instead. And all this centers around two arguments where Bunny and Raffles offer each other the wrong thing, or the right thing at the wrong time. The story’s titled “The Gift of the Emperor,” but it might as well be The Gift of the Magi.
The first offer comes after Bunny and Raffles board the ship. Bunny surprises Raffles by admitting he “was rather hoping you were going to propose” stealing the pearl - “surprises,” because Bunny had left their partnership. Now he admits his desire to give up his quiet life for more adventures with Raffles. This confession causes Raffles to ask incredulously, “You were hoping it?” and “…[Y]ou would have listened to me the other day?” Raffles might not be just surprised at Bunny’s capitulation, but dismayed…because he planned to give up his adventures for a quiet life. He claims, “I could retire and settle down and live blamelessly ever after” - and after that assurance, immediately speaks of the two of them as partners again: “We might take a fishery…just as we were going to sell the schooner…” He also objects to Bunny’s statement that thieves can never turn honest. (It’s interesting that in this conversation Raffles puts Bunny in company with “old Virgil…the first and worst offender of you all” - and an open homosexual. And it may as well be mentioned that Capri, their final destination, was “a relatively safe place for foreign gay men and lesbians to lead a more open life.”)
In other words: for months Raffles has tried to persuade Bunny to come back to him. And just as Bunny offers to return, Raffles offers to retire. They offer what the other wants, but at exactly the wrong time.
Later Raffles and Bunny have that remarkable argument that ends Part II. The easiest reading is that Raffles is fond of Werner and annoyed that Bunny thinks so little of her. There is truth to that - if we understand that by “fond of Werner” we really mean “fond of the idea of settling down.”
Raffles doesn’t care about Werner for herself - and that’s not just me swallowing Bunny’s description of her, we all know Bunny’s jealous. No, let’s ignore Bunny’s scathing remarks and stick to Raffles’ own words. When Bunny says he can tell Werner’s Australian by her accent, Raffles replies, “[S]he has no more twang than you have.” This hardly seems likely. How would Bunny know Werner was Australian (as she is) if she has no accent? When pressed to explain his interest in her, Raffles points out she’s “the daughter of a wealthy squatter…” - that is, not her mind, not her personality, not even her “remarkable eyes,” but her wealth…and the comfortable distance between her home and England.
Not that Raffles isn’t attracted to her. He is. But his attraction is not to Amy qua Amy as to the idea she represents. Werner represents a possible future: quiet, respectable, crime-free…a future Raffles tries valiantly to make himself want, though for whose sake is an open question.
In that argument, instead of answering Bunny directly Raffles responds only with questions: the focus being not on defending Werner but on seeing what Bunny thinks. As Bunny laughs at the idea of Raffles settling down, Raffles gets more and more annoyed until he asks, “It doesn’t occur to you that I might like to draw stumps, start clean, and live happy ever after…?” When Bunny replies, “It certainly does not!” Raffles nearly strikes him.
The only other time that Raffles almost hits Bunny is in “To Catch a Thief,” when an irritated Bunny says Lord Ernest’s “a better man than yourself” - so far as professional thieving goes. Raffles does not like being told he can’t do something…especially when it may be true.
Raffles, I suggest, isn’t angry that Bunny maligns Werner. He’s angry that Bunny can’t see his desire to give up crime. He’s angry that Bunny doesn’t believe he can live honestly. He’s angry especially because Bunny’s probably right.
The story opens with a bad exchange. Queen Victoria gives a pearl to an emperor; in a show of ingratitude, he then sends the pearl to a king who insulted the queen. That opening example of good faith met with bad rewards establishes the story’s running theme. Bunny publishes a poem but receives no payment. Bunny expects a cruise with his best friend, and instead receives days of being ignored followed by disgrace and 18 months in prison. Raffles tries a burglary whose rewards might save him for life, but it dooms him forever instead. And all this centers around two arguments where Bunny and Raffles offer each other the wrong thing, or the right thing at the wrong time. The story’s titled “The Gift of the Emperor,” but it might as well be The Gift of the Magi.
The first offer comes after Bunny and Raffles board the ship. Bunny surprises Raffles by admitting he “was rather hoping you were going to propose” stealing the pearl - “surprises,” because Bunny had left their partnership. Now he admits his desire to give up his quiet life for more adventures with Raffles. This confession causes Raffles to ask incredulously, “You were hoping it?” and “…[Y]ou would have listened to me the other day?” Raffles might not be just surprised at Bunny’s capitulation, but dismayed…because he planned to give up his adventures for a quiet life. He claims, “I could retire and settle down and live blamelessly ever after” - and after that assurance, immediately speaks of the two of them as partners again: “We might take a fishery…just as we were going to sell the schooner…” He also objects to Bunny’s statement that thieves can never turn honest. (It’s interesting that in this conversation Raffles puts Bunny in company with “old Virgil…the first and worst offender of you all” - and an open homosexual. And it may as well be mentioned that Capri, their final destination, was “a relatively safe place for foreign gay men and lesbians to lead a more open life.”)
In other words: for months Raffles has tried to persuade Bunny to come back to him. And just as Bunny offers to return, Raffles offers to retire. They offer what the other wants, but at exactly the wrong time.
Later Raffles and Bunny have that remarkable argument that ends Part II. The easiest reading is that Raffles is fond of Werner and annoyed that Bunny thinks so little of her. There is truth to that - if we understand that by “fond of Werner” we really mean “fond of the idea of settling down.”
Raffles doesn’t care about Werner for herself - and that’s not just me swallowing Bunny’s description of her, we all know Bunny’s jealous. No, let’s ignore Bunny’s scathing remarks and stick to Raffles’ own words. When Bunny says he can tell Werner’s Australian by her accent, Raffles replies, “[S]he has no more twang than you have.” This hardly seems likely. How would Bunny know Werner was Australian (as she is) if she has no accent? When pressed to explain his interest in her, Raffles points out she’s “the daughter of a wealthy squatter…” - that is, not her mind, not her personality, not even her “remarkable eyes,” but her wealth…and the comfortable distance between her home and England.
Not that Raffles isn’t attracted to her. He is. But his attraction is not to Amy qua Amy as to the idea she represents. Werner represents a possible future: quiet, respectable, crime-free…a future Raffles tries valiantly to make himself want, though for whose sake is an open question.
In that argument, instead of answering Bunny directly Raffles responds only with questions: the focus being not on defending Werner but on seeing what Bunny thinks. As Bunny laughs at the idea of Raffles settling down, Raffles gets more and more annoyed until he asks, “It doesn’t occur to you that I might like to draw stumps, start clean, and live happy ever after…?” When Bunny replies, “It certainly does not!” Raffles nearly strikes him.
The only other time that Raffles almost hits Bunny is in “To Catch a Thief,” when an irritated Bunny says Lord Ernest’s “a better man than yourself” - so far as professional thieving goes. Raffles does not like being told he can’t do something…especially when it may be true.
Raffles, I suggest, isn’t angry that Bunny maligns Werner. He’s angry that Bunny can’t see his desire to give up crime. He’s angry that Bunny doesn’t believe he can live honestly. He’s angry especially because Bunny’s probably right.