18.12.2012 Views

Introduction

Introduction

Introduction

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Indian Diamonds 157<br />

cannot share what is another’s, no matter with whom, nor in what proportions”<br />

(86). Jonathan Small tentatively asks: “Whose loot is this, if it is not ours?” (Doyle,<br />

Sign 213) In Marsh’s The Datchet Diamonds, the thief Lawrence answers to Cyril’s<br />

question, why he supposed that he was the “rightful owner of the Datchet diamonds”:<br />

“By right of conquest” (Marsh 252). The legal status of the Eustace<br />

Diamonds is never fully resolved: Lizzie keeps/steals them claiming them as a<br />

present from her late husband in Scotland. Mr. Dove asserts that they are “paraphernalia”<br />

rather than an “heirloom” (Trollope 263-264), a fact that is kept from<br />

Lizzie. Thus, as long as Lizzie insists on keeping up her lie, the true owner of the<br />

Eustace Diamonds cannot be determined. The question of the whereabouts of the<br />

owner is further complicated by determining the original owner. At the basis of<br />

this question the original theft of the diamonds from India introduces a complication.<br />

The never-ending passage from one potential owner to the next emphasises<br />

their mobility. This contrasts with the secure inheritance of land as in The Moonstone.<br />

“The Moonstone seems to embody this shift from land to capital, with the<br />

diamond itself objectifying the intrusion of capital into the landed estate.” (GoGwilt<br />

63). The diamond, consequently, cannot confer identity as the inheritance of<br />

land does. The substitution of marriage and domestic inheritance for the recovery<br />

of the diamonds compensates for the loss and also corresponds to the Victorian<br />

reverence for domesticity.<br />

The problems of the unresolved detective plot are partly accommodated by assigning<br />

the diamonds to the realm of romance. Objects from this fairy-tale Orient<br />

are devoid of historical and political implications as their status as trophies would<br />

suggest. They thus belong to an imaginary place without the threatening connotations<br />

of Mutiny violence and colonial exploitation.<br />

The romantic version of the diamonds, however, does not erase their geographical<br />

and historical provenance. The colonial implications raise specific fears<br />

of infiltration which intensify in late Victorian times. I will now look at the ways in<br />

which this fear is expressed and framed in the texts. The most obvious elements<br />

of invasion are the foreigners who follow the diamonds.<br />

Invasion and Contamination<br />

The Intrusion of the Periphery<br />

The Inside: The Quiet Country House<br />

While The Moonstone is set in the country side and the Verinder’s belong to the<br />

landed gentry, The Sign of Four and “The Rajah’s Diamond” transplant the action<br />

to urban settings. Both London and Paris are the capitals of empires and important<br />

gateways to the colonies. London is infused with colonial goods and subjects

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!