Post 4

While reading Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad I came to the conclusion that a major theme throughout the entirety of the novella was the hypocrisy surrounding imperialism during this time. As readers, we see this develop through Marlow’s travels. From Europe, to Africa, to the Congo, to the Outer Station, to the Central Station, and finally to the Inner Station what Marlow describes in these scenes about the treatment of native Africans is cruel and near-slavery. Marlow says, “I could see every rib, the joints of their limbs were like knots in a rope; each had an iron collar on his neck, and all were connected together with a chain whose bights [loops] swung between them” (51) Through their physical attributes and near death like appearance, Conrad conveys a steadfast image about the cruelty occurring under imperialism. “The black bones reclined at full length against the tree [referencing a human]” (53) and “the black shadows of disease and death lying confusedly in the gloom” (53) also represent the natives and their situation in response to the European invasion. What Conrad offers through these descriptions is a harsh picture of the colonial enterprise through the lens of Marlow. Instead of aiding the people they met through imperialism and bringing them into the modern world, these imperialistic explorers classified the natives as savages and slaves and took advantage of them for labor. In this way, the true imperialism swayed from the goals it was meant to bring about.

Adding to this theme of hypocrisy within imperialism is the motif of darkness (discussed in post #1). There, we see how Conrad implements the darkness as a tool to create contrasting in order to demonstrate the lack of understanding which the Europeans have about the land and other people and to show that they are limited in their connections to the natives. I wrote that “The darkness that clouds their vision, throughout the story, limits them from coming to terms with what is right before their eyes; they cannot see the truth.” In regards to this idea, it goes hand in hand with the hypocrisy of imperialism explained during this expedition because of the flaws we see occurring with the mistreatment of natives. 

 

During my reading of Heart of Darkness, I tried to remember Nabokov, Prose, and Foster. Each of these writers claims that fondling the details is one of the key aspects of reading. For me, that meant using the dictionary (Nabokov’s necessity) constantly in order to maintain an understanding of the piece. I found that because of implementing both of these strategies more often, I was able to come to terms with the piece quickly and understand it much more efficiently than if I chose to ignore these ideas. However as far as processing my understanding of the work goes, nothing helped more than reading it a second time. Nabokov says that if you are a master of 6 pieces of literature, you are doing well for yourself and I take that to mean that you must truly understand what you read and that means re-reading. Re-reading allowed me to pick up on some of the details which I had missed (even though I looked for them you always miss something) and it helped me create an even better picture of the story in my mind.

 

To individuals considering reading this book, I would suggest reading Heart of Darkness. Although the language is confusing at first, putting effort into understand the story will pay off and the peace is a challenging but fun story to read. If you are an AP student interested in preparing for your AP test, I strongly suggest reading this book. Heart of Darkness has appeared around 15 times out of the last 40 years or so on the AP test and as a result, would be well worth reading to help you prepare for the exam. That was the initial reason why I chose to read this book however my own experiences have been enjoyable and I found this an amazing read. While I was reading this, I found it a little uncomfortable for me because of the language and the lens, which Marlow views native Africans from. However, that isn’t to say don’t read it. In order to become better readers, people must expand their horizons and look at different types of work. You can’t claim that you are an expert on painting if you only look at Landscapes… What about portraits? What about Baroque art? What about the renaissance? The same goes for reading. In order to become a better reader you need to expand your horizons and this may prove the perfect book to allow somebody to challenge their perceptions and look at the world in a different way.

 

Post 3

In Part 3 of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, Marlow finally meets Mr. Kurtz. Conrad develops our understand of Kurtz indirectly through various clues that hint at his identity “In the interior you will no doubt meet Mr. Kurtz… Mr. Kurtz is at present in charge of a trading post, a very important trading post,” demonstrates his position and wealth within society. Later on, we hear that Mr. Kurtz is “the chief of the central station” (62) and “Mr. Kurtz is a universal genius” (65) and through other examples as well, we develop the image of Mr. Kurtz as a sort of god-like figure for the ivory business. His success in the business meant that he could have retired with wealth and prosperity and moved back to England long ago but he chose to stay. Why? Who is Mr. Kurtz and why did he do what he did? The Russian trader sums this up well with his words “I went a little farther” he said, “then still a little farther- till I had gone so far that I don’t know how I’ll ever get back” (99) Perhaps Kurtz experienced the same thing. Perhaps he absorbed the darkness around him and remained enveloped in the lifestyle and ivory trade to the point that he had the money, but it was not enough. The Russian Trader provides descriptions of Kurtz’s actions like “Kurtz wandered alone, far in the depths of the forest” (100) in search of ivory, which point towards his dedication and involvement. Through his descriptions, the Russian maintains an adoring perspective of Kurtz that seems almost as if he’s brainwashed. Later, we hear Kurtz love back in Europe, say “who was not his friend who had heard him speak once” (122). What these suggest is a gilded perspective of Kurtz. On the outside, we the see the hardworking, adoring, linguistic master that creates adoring followers. Enough so that “Mr. Kurtz’s adorers were keeping their uneasy vigil,” (109) while he was sick. So this gilded perspective of Kurtz allows him to cover up his true “Heart of Darkness” The image of Kurtz in his bead when he was dying is described as him having an open mouth wide, giving him a look of an unquenchable appetite, as if we wants to absorb and take in everything. However this need to plan and consume around him has, in turn, consumed his soul and life, because of what it has forced him to do. Kurtz seeks to control his surrounding and manipulate the earth (nature again: response #2) and we see the backlash of such actions that take their toll on Kurtz. Perhaps Conrad is providing caution against trying to control that, which is outside of your domain. At least for Kurtz, expressing himself in this new environment in this fashion meant the loss of his old self.

 

Post 2

 Throughout Part 2 of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, we see the development of a twisted sense of Morality that parallels the title “Heart of Darkness” through the cruelty within this story. As the manager and his uncle discuss late a night, they come to the subject of a local trader who is in their way. Their response: “Get him hanged! Why not? Anything- anything can be done in this country” (72) while they both still retain a sense of basic law, their emotions control their personalities in a way that suggests corruption (or darkness) has taken over their hearts. For them, the law of Europe has been discarded because “the danger is in Europe” (72) and they have nothing truly to fear in Africa, or so they think. This type of mindset remains reflected from the very beginning of the story and Marlow’s doctor appointment where the doctor says “the changes take place inside, you know,” (47) suggesting a corruption of a person through jealousy and greed. This nature of greed, which we see through the manager and his uncle, is strengthened through their constant references to ivory. So what does this add to the story? Why is this nature of any importance and why did Conrad choose to have his title mirror this idea? The revealing of these individuals corrupt nature creates a contrast between the nobility of England, which they are supposed to represent, and the savage greed that they exemplify throughout the story. Marlow’s aunt claims that they should be “something like an emissary of light, something like a lower sort of apostle” (48). However the Europeans seem to become more barbaric in nature than the people they call barbarians. Through this development, Conrad suggests that the mind, body, and nature are all connected. The European’s minds are influenced by the nature and wealth around them and as a result change. Yet Conrad also makes an odd connection to the body through “I saw him extend his short flipper of an arm for a gesture… that seemed to beckon with a dishonoring flourish before the sunlit face of the land a treacherous appeal to the lurking death, to the hidden evil, to the profound darkness of its heart” (73). So what this all shows and what Conrad brings into perspective is that the land is an entity that affects humans and has the power to create evil or to merge human beings with nature (hang with me here). We see the development of how nature changes individuals through greed and physically as well, with the fin, but Marlow’s descriptions paint an image of nature that suggests something almost living. “In a few days, the Eldorado Expedition went into the patient wilderness, that closed upon it as the sea closes upon a diver” (73) and “the reaches opened before us and closed behind, as if the forest had stepped leisurely across the water to bar the way for our return” (75)… Does anybody else see living nature in the way Marlow describes the forest? What does this all mean? Why is it important for Conrad? Perhaps he has brought all of this together to demonstrate how nature and the forest are merely the catalyst to bringing humanity back to its original and barbaric nature. We see the effects it has on the Europeans as they travel and Conrad seems to personify the forest in a lifelike way in order to demonstrate that this may be intentional. What is your take? Please comment below.

Post1

The Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad centers on Marlow, a sailor who voyages up the Congo to meet Mr. Kurtz. As he travels to Africa (from England) and up the Congo, Marlow describes the brutality of the Company’s stationmen towards the natives living there and the inefficiency of their work. All the while, a motif begins to emerge which relates exactly to the title of this piece. From the beginning of the story, Conrad creates an absurd number of references towards darkness, more specifically “black”, and as readers their sheer number makes it hard to overlook. Black and darkness are painted as motifs throughout part 1 of the story. The “black wool” (45), “guarding the door of darkness” (46), the “black shadows of disease and starvation” (53), the “black bones” (53) etc. you get the point; the prominence of this reoccurring image cannot be overlooked. Yet, what is its importance to the story? Why does Conrad choose to title his book “The Heart of Darkness” and create this extremely vivid motif surrounding the same imagery? My first thoughts were that it might be in reference to Africa and the Congo, specifically. However rereading the beginning of the story, we see the same types of imagery pop up in England as well, for “it was difficult for him [Marlow] to realize his work was not out there in the luminous estuary [sea] but behind him in the brooding gloom [England]” (37). Conrad also referenced Africa and the Congo in a similar fashion, saying it was “The edge of a colossal forest, so dark-green as to be almost black” (48). From these descriptions we see that Conrad was not trying to hint at the darkness of a particular people or area. But rather, he chose it to describe the entirety of Marlow’s existence within the story. In real life, darkness refers to the inability to see. We see that Conrad's darkness envelops Marlow’s existence throughout the story. Could it be Marlow is blind or lacking sight? Could it be that Conrad’s references to darkness are looking at the human condition and lack of compassion towards other human beings? Even within part 1 we see the horrible mistreatment of native Africans by the Company; as Marlow describes it, “I could see every rib, the joints of their limbs were like knots in a rope; each had an iron collar on his neck, and all were connected together with a chain whose bights [loops] swung between them” (51). Hmm… As a description of the human condition, Conrad’s darkness has profound implications; we see that his implementation of the word “nigger” (56) and the cruelty of the white men around him suggests a hatred and resentment towards these “slaves” and “savages” (51) that characterizes the native Africans as less than human. Conrad’s motif of darkness intensifies this 17^th century relationship and its emphasis within the story demonstrates a failure to connect with other human beings during this time. The darkness that clouds their vision, throughout the story, limits them from coming to terms with what is right before their eyes; they cannot see the truth.