The Tale of the Monkey and the Tiger

[Wealhtheow]

I am thinking of writing a philosophical tale of an overheard dialogue between *take a guess* - a monkey and a tiger.

Actually it is not for certain these animals - what is most important is that the names of the animals sound poetic, and one is solitary, sober, serious...a thinker - the other is jocund, lively, talkative...a blabbermouth. I want to emphasise the contrast between the frightening and the comical.

The problem is that there is already a book called 'the monkey and the tiger', which, ironically, seems to have very little to do with those animals (correct me if I'm wrong). Is this a problem? I don't want to plagiarise as I'm planning to get this published somewhere, sometime, somehow.

If anyone has any suggestions of animals that are more apt for this project then I'm happy to hear about them. I am aware that 'monkey' and 'tiger' may automatically generate the assumption of a chinese-type story, but I intend no such thing. I wonder, however, how other people view this. Would my choice of animals be too inapt for what I intend to write?

Anyway, this idea is inspired by and wil be modeled on the Mediaeval poem 'the Owl and the Nightingale', if that means anything to you.

Please, I want feedback, preferably positive but constructive comments are very important to me, however much they may damage my pride.

Here's an example of the style that I intend:

 

One calm summer's evening, while I was walking along a winding forest path, methought I heard two voices bickering. Upon investigation, I saw a monkey and a tiger in heated discussion! Unusual though it was, they spoke perfect English, although my astonishment was not merely because of this - it was the content of their dialogue that aroused my curiosity. I hid myself behind a bush, and listened to their every word....

 

Forgive my archaic language - it is intended that way, although I wouldn't mind if you told me it's just too odd. Anyway the story progresses, we hear about their differences and one rebuffs the other and vice versa. The topics they discuss are meant to be symbolical, metaphorical, allegorical, and even satirical of human behaviour. Here's a taste of the idea:

 

And then the monkey rebuffed the tiger's statement, or at least tried to. 'But Sir Tiger,' he said slyly, while positioning himself out of the reach of the tiger's fearsome claws, 'you seem to forget that I am accompanied by others of my kind. There is always a cousin or a friend to take away my loneliness, and when I am ill, my group is sure to look after me. What do you do when you're hurt, I ask you? Who will make sure that you are well fed? Many of your kind have suffered a painful, lonely death for the lack of a companion to take over in times of need. You say that you like being alone, but you have never encountered true danger before. When that happens, it will be the final chapter of your life, you mark my words!'

'Right,' the tiger growled sceptically, one eyebrow raised. 'Listen to this, you fool,' he said, as he readjusted the arrangement of his gigantic paws, 'cease your rant and hear me out. I will die alone, it is inevitable. I do not waste time lamenting that fact. Do I need to suffer company to enjoy life? I find my mate and establish an heir, and then I go my way. I eat all that I kill, I do not need to share my food with anybody. You go hungry because your superiors demand your 'banana' - I have no dealings with an hierarchy. I am not willing to give up my freedom to indulge in the company of others. Moreover, you say I will die, but so will you. You do not gain immortality from being in a group.'

The monkey was jumping up and down in excitement. 'You're right,' he shouted, 'I will die too, but what you say is essentially flawed. I am merely arguing that having company may procrastinate the hour of my death. You are disguising false statements with witty comments, but I am not easily deceived! I see through you. You are cunning, but so am I! I will not listen to your arguments if they are ill-founded. Speak sensibly, or hold your tongue.'

'Are you trying to find fault with me?' the Tiger retorted angrily. 'You obviously fail to accuse me of anything more serious than being cunning. Stop being sidetracked and tell me what you come up with that's worth hearing.'

 

Anyway that's it for now, please let me know any thoughts on this idea, how long you think I can go on like this without being boring, what I can do to enhance the style and any other comments or suggestions that you might have.

 

Thanks - Wealhtheow

[Tanuchan]

In my opinion, the idea is good for a short tale. Too much of the arguments, even if they are lightened by a joking mood from the monkey, would get boring. It would be like watching two people who we know are hardly ever going to agree... what would be the point in listening to their day-long discussion? Unless you introduce some twist in the story, or some unexpected event, maybe going away from the "just overhead conversation" idea. I can't comment much on language, really, as I'm not native... but I have the impression that you would have to be careful to keep the coherence.

 

The monkey and the tiger, and you style of writing, seem to convey well what you want. A comment I'd like to make, and I'm not very sure if it's pertinent at all, is that I have the impression that tigers mate for life. I may be wrong, though.

 

I know this is not much, but I think you should go on and post more of your story, so that people can read and give more feedback to you.

 

Of course, these are just my thoughts.

Edited June 1, 2004 by Tanuchan

[Wealhtheow]

Thank you, Tanuchan, for your feedback. I agree that there needs to be some sort of plot, or else it will get boring. However, since the debate aspect of the story is much more important than the events, I would like to keep that to a minimum. Here's a rough outline.

The story starts out with the tiger having just eaten, so the monkey realises that the tiger is no threat to him. However, he is cautious not to get too annoying, and cause the tiger to lunge at him, so he stays out of reach of the tiger's fierce paws. They sort of walk along (with the narrator following inconspicuously behind), when suddenly the tiger exclaims that he is hungry again, and (jokingly, but the monkey does not realise this) runs after the frightened monkey. The monkey quickly climbs up the nearest tree, a young, tender sapling. The tree bends and swings under the monkeys weight but then the monkey finds a balance. They continue their discussion, but then the monkey aggravates the tiger and the tiger starts beating at the little tree (which, in turn, is swinging wildly) until the tree collapses and the monkey quickly runs off to a higher, sturdier tree. Anyway, the monkey, feeling a lot safer and finding back his self-confidence, starts complaining that the tiger shouldn't have ruined a young tree to get at his objectives. The tree was young and fragile, but had the potential to grow out to be the king of the forest! I say the monkey gets these lines because I am afraid that I am too biassed to let the tiger be the 'cool, wise' one, and the monkey be the 'stupid, silly' one. I want the reader to give them equal sympathy. So, the monkey complains that the tiger, through being such a solitary creature, has lost all its ability to care for other creatures and plants. And so on and so forth. Anyway more topics get brought up and then later the monkey should challenge the tiger to show the effectiveness of tiger-hunting, so the tiger goes to demonstrate. In the end the tiger has learned to become more cooperative, and the monkey has learned to think more for himself (as opposed to being a member of a group), to give the story some meaning. What do you think?

[Tanuchan]

The outline seems good, but as I said, everything will depend on how you deal with the debate aspect. The idea of trying to prevent bias towards any one of the animals is nice, but I think it must be done in a way that it doesn't come out predictable - I mean, not causing the reader to say "oh, it's done just to keep the story balanced". One of the aspects of a story I myself always enjoy is the "suspension of disbelief", so if I perceive too much manipulating from the "storyteller" I tend to enjoy it a lot less.