Kim isn't Rudyard Kipling's most popular and famous work (which is of course The Jungle Book) but it is the one that's generally considered by the literary critics to be his "true masterpiece". Now I recently read both Kim and The Jungle Book and when it comes down to which of the books that I think is the better read I'm completely on the side of the general public here because I found The Jungle Book to be the far more accessible and enjoyable book of the two.
Kim was an extremely hard-going and tedious read. There's actually very little plot in the book, I was completely unable to care about Kim or any of the other characters, and the dialogue in the book is not only curiously formal but is absolutely full of idioms, colloquialisms and lines that felt like historical/cultural references that I wasn't able to get. I felt like I was constantly missing things in the book and that was extremely frustrating to me.
However even though I can't say that I enjoyed Kim very much, I will say that there are some lovely descriptions in it (there was a particularly beautiful description of night-time Lahore near the start that gave me a lot of hope for the novel) and that Kipling has an obvious fondness for India. Kipling is rather a controversial writer in our time due to his pro-imperialist views but overall the writing in this book left me with the very strong impression that Kipling had a great deal of love and affection for India and its people.