![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Who would win?
Oct. 12th, 2010 08:20 pmIn a fight, who would win: Mowgli, (the Kipling version, not the Disney version), or Tarzan?
I'm thinking Mowgli. Mowgli, at seventeen, was full-grown, and every bit as physically tough as Tarzan, but I think he was smarter. Tarzan was Lord of the Jungle, and so was Mowgli, but Tarzan really just had animals that obeyed him, while Mowgli had actual intelligent friends who loved him and cared about him, along with obeying him.
Also, well before he reached his full growth, Mowgli managed to kill the man-eating tiger Shere Kahn. As a full-grown man, Mowgli could have just killed Shere Kahn in hand-to-hand combat, but, at twelve, when he was too small to do so, he used a more effective weapon: a stampeding herd of cape buffalo. He lured the tiger into a steep canyon, then led a stampede through. The biggest problem with the plan was finding enough of the tiger at the end to skin him and wear his skin as a cloak, like he boasted he would.
I mean, what weapons does Tarzan have? He has a knife, and so does Mowgli. But Mowgli uses weapons like "diplomacy", "understanding of the rules of the Law of the Jungle". If Mowgli wants elephants to destroy a village, he calls a meeting, and explains to the elephants why they should do it, and why it is allowable by the Law of the Jungle.
Tarzan, however, doesn't really have the ability to call a board meeting of the most powerful beings in the jungle. So I think that, while they're both physically tough and can speak the language of the jungle beasts, Mowgli would win, because he actually has stuff to SAY to the jungle beasts, and Tarzan, mostly, doesn't.
I'm thinking Mowgli. Mowgli, at seventeen, was full-grown, and every bit as physically tough as Tarzan, but I think he was smarter. Tarzan was Lord of the Jungle, and so was Mowgli, but Tarzan really just had animals that obeyed him, while Mowgli had actual intelligent friends who loved him and cared about him, along with obeying him.
Also, well before he reached his full growth, Mowgli managed to kill the man-eating tiger Shere Kahn. As a full-grown man, Mowgli could have just killed Shere Kahn in hand-to-hand combat, but, at twelve, when he was too small to do so, he used a more effective weapon: a stampeding herd of cape buffalo. He lured the tiger into a steep canyon, then led a stampede through. The biggest problem with the plan was finding enough of the tiger at the end to skin him and wear his skin as a cloak, like he boasted he would.
I mean, what weapons does Tarzan have? He has a knife, and so does Mowgli. But Mowgli uses weapons like "diplomacy", "understanding of the rules of the Law of the Jungle". If Mowgli wants elephants to destroy a village, he calls a meeting, and explains to the elephants why they should do it, and why it is allowable by the Law of the Jungle.
Tarzan, however, doesn't really have the ability to call a board meeting of the most powerful beings in the jungle. So I think that, while they're both physically tough and can speak the language of the jungle beasts, Mowgli would win, because he actually has stuff to SAY to the jungle beasts, and Tarzan, mostly, doesn't.