Introduction

140
Sabina Fazli
imperialism” (Suleri 17) 11 in which the diamonds are again taken to signify female
sexuality. However, Nancy L Paxton points out that the trope of rape in imperial
discourse differs in pre- and post-Mutiny narratives. While, before 1857, in more
sympathetic accounts of India, the exploitation by the East India Company was
criticised as a “rape” of the land, after the Mutiny, the idea of the native-as-rapist
and Englishwoman-as-victim prevails (Paxton 5-7). With reference to The Moonstone,
critics have remarked on the parallel thefts of the diamond from Tipu’s
treasury and from Rachel’s “Indian cabinet” in her bedroom, so that plunder and
metaphorical rape are conflated (Nayder, Wilkie Collins 118). This scene therefore
rather conforms to Paxton’s pre-Mutiny cast of the metaphor. Nevertheless, in the
direct confrontation with the Brahmins, the image of Indians threatening English
womanhood is confirmed. Rachel is the subject of their scrutiny as she is wearing
the diamond on her dress (Collins, Moonstone 78).
It has become apparent that the two realms of imagery, the domestic and colonial
are linked in the gendering of diamonds. This naturally leads to a multilayeredness
of diamond narratives where diamonds as sentimental and sexual imagery
always bear Orientalist overtones.
Owning the Diamonds in England
Relocation of Agency
Indian Revenge and Imperial Forgetfulness
Jaya Mehta argues that “imperial violence, originally wrought on the colony by the
English, [is] subsequently represented as springing from the colony” (613). This
can be clearly seen in the reactions to the Mutiny. It was not understood as an
uprising against colonial suppression, but as originating in Indian society and its
proneness for crime and violence which had to be checked.
The idea that the diamonds have actively been ‘sent’ to Europe, that they are
part of some deliberately designed plan to work revenge on an innocent and harmonious
society is explicitly expressed in “The Rajah’s Diamond”. It is Prince
Florizel, the detective figure, who is able to suggest this plan: “[I]f the Rajah of
Kashgar […] desired vengeance upon the men of Europe, he could hardly have
gone more efficaciously about his purpose than by sending us this apple of discord”
(Stevenson, “Rajah’s” 126). The revenge, it is implied, consists of sowing
distrust and inciting “discord” in an otherwise peaceful and cohesive society. It is
11 Sara Suleri goes on to argue that the colony frequently is not gendered as female at all, but as
masculine, albeit effeminate. The encounter then takes on homosexual connotations (16). The
main point, though, is that it has to be gendered as deviant in relation to the male coloniser.