Heart of Darkness #5

          The ambiguity of Kurtz’s last words leaves the meaning of his final message open to interpretation by the reader. With his final breath, Kurtz cries out, “The horror! The horror!” (Conrad 154). Kurtz has been established as an eloquent and powerful speaker. Conrad often uses synecdoche, referring to Kurtz as his voice; it is Kurtz’s primary source of persuasion and control. Thus, the reader can assume that these last words are specifically chosen to convey a certain message. One explanation is that Kurtz has just experienced a moment of catharsis and realizes that his actions in Africa have been morally unjust. Kurtz is a very straightforward person, and Marlow admires this about him. He has been very matter-of-fact about what he has been doing in the Congo; he has taken advantage of the natives and taken an extensive amount of ivory by unethical means. He has severed heads stuck on posts surrounding his shack. Kurtz has justified everything he has done up until this point, but perhaps at this final moment it sinks in that he has not been a just and model human being. Marlow describes Kurtz’s “expression of somber pride, of ruthless power, of craven terror—of an intense and hopeless despair” (Conrad 153). Enlightened by his imminent death, he may be reliving his choices in life and realizing how and where he went wrong. On the other hand, Kurtz could be referring to his own death as the “horror.” Kurtz has considered himself above everyone else in the past, and he still may feel this way. Kurtz may see his death as a “horror” for the rest of humanity. He presents himself to the natives as one equivalent to a god, and even the harlequin follows him with disciple-like devotion. The isolation of the Congo has inflated his self-perception, and perhaps he thinks of himself as almost a divine being. He speaks and writes with such persuasion and self-assurance that people believe him. Marlow admits to being persuaded by Kurtz’s paper about how to treat native people, and Kurtz’s Intended tells how powerful his voice was. Kurtz believed in the ideas he shared with the world, and he may think that the world will suffer without them. Another possibility is that Kurtz is upset at the circumstances of his death, namely, the fact that he is not dying in a position of power. He is leaving the Congo, where he had complete control, against his will. He has lost his followers and his land, and now even his life is being wrested from his grasp. Since Kurtz lives for control, he really has nothing else to live for. Conrad does not clarify the meaning of this message, so there is no way to fully understand Kurtz or the corruption of power he represents.

Heart of Darkness #4

Conrad describes Kurtz from multiple perspectives before the audience actually meets him. This highlights certain aspects of his character so that the reader has some identity to look for and grasp onto when Kurtz is finally revealed. On the ship, Marlow flashes forward in his story to describe Kurtz. Kurtz is very possessive; he feels that all of the land and all of the ivory are entitled to him. However, Marlow reveals that Kurtz “was very little more than a voice” (Conrad 125). His voice clearly carries an extensive amount of power, for Kurtz has been extremely successful in raiding the land for ivory. He is also given the task of writing a report for the International Society for the Suppression of Savage Customs. In his report, Kurtz explains that whites “must necessarily appear to them [savages] in the nature of supernatural beings” (Conrad 127). The eloquence of Kurtz’s writing helps him to be very persuasive, and even Marlow admits that the words convince him of Kurtz’s argument. Kurtz seems to view himself as a god with the power and right to control the African people. This may have partially been caused by his isolation in the jungle; he is given the opportunity to establish his own role there. After the reader receives this information, the story returns to Marlow on the boat, and the ship reaches the inner station. However, Kurtz is not immediately revealed at the heart of the jungle; another character introduces the reader to him first. When the steamboat finally reaches the inner station, a strange man greets the ship. He is referred to as a “harlequin” dressed in brightly patched clothes. This man is completely and insensibly devoted to Kurtz. He remains in this isolated jungle to care for Kurtz even though Kurtz does not ask for nor seem to appreciate his help. In fact, Kurtz threatens to shoot the man when he does not give over his ivory. Still, the harlequin remains ever faithful to Kurtz; he is like a disciple. The man speaks of Kurtz with reverence, and he excuses any questionable deeds by proclaiming that Kurtz is not an “ordinary man” (Conrad 135). The harlequin tells Marlow, “You don’t talk with that man—you listen to him” (Conrad 132). This man confirms both Kurtz’s power with words and his godlike view of himself. Kurtz is able to control not only the African people but also the Europeans, such as the harlequin. He is gifted with eloquence, and he uses this gift to obtain power. The harlequin explains, “he came to them with thunder and lightning, you know—and they had never seen anything like it—and very terrible. He could be very terrible” (Conrad 135). The man recognizes that Kurtz can be “terrible,” yet it seems justified for the greater good that Kurtz appears to support. He is once again presented as a supreme being. Marlow seems repulsed with Kurtz as the man describes him, yet in his previous flashback he offers some explanations for Kurtz’s behaviors. The various interpretations of Kurtz show the reader that he is complex and not necessarily as evil as he seems. Somehow, Marlow will develop some greater understanding of Kurtz’s character.

Heart of Darkness #3

Chinua Achebe criticizes Joseph Conrad’s blatant racism in Heart of Darkness, and he further criticizes Western readers for glossing over and excusing it. The question is not whether or not Conrad’s descriptions of Africa and its people in Heart of Darkness are racist; they are undoubtedly so. What must be considered is whether this prevailing racist undertone is deliberate, and if so, what purpose it serves. Marlow describes how “the men were—No, they were not inhuman. Well, you know, that was the worst of it—this suspicion of their not being inhuman” (108). The convoluted nature of this sentence causes the reader to pause. Marlow uses a double negative in his exploration of the Africans’ potential humanity, referring to the possibility of the Africans “not being inhuman.” He does not call them human; they are simply “not inhuman.” This shows that Marlow, despite his glimpses of remorse for the treatment of the African people, still does not see these people as his equals. Present-day Marlow is making this observation about their humanity, so the reader cannot even excuse this opinion as merely a phase in his journey to understanding human equality. Marlow embodies the racist attitude of those who have begun to recognize the treatment of Africans as inhumane, yet do not recognize their own attitudes as racist. They consider themselves empathetic and enlightened because they recognize the suffering of these ‘lower people.’ From here, the reader must consider Conrad’s own perspective and intent. Achebe believes that the parallels between Conrad and Marlow demonstrate that the author shares the opinions of his protagonist. On the contrary, Conrad has purposely distanced himself from Marlow, inserting multiple layers of narrative insulation between himself and his characters. Marlow is grappling with the concept of equality, and the syntactical breaks seem to represent the cracks in his preconceptions. The passage in which Marlow describes the African people on pages 108-109 is full of dashes in which Marlow inserts thoughts from the present and tries to justify that the Africans are similar to early humans. Marlow chooses to think of the Africans as humans, but inferior humans. Conrad wants the reader to come at least to this realization. During his time period, this idea of African humanity alone may have been difficult for some people to accept. However, he could perhaps also be attempting to get the reader to recognize further equality. By removing himself from Marlow’s struggles with the idea of shared humanity, Conrad almost looks down at Marlow through the eyes of someone who has overcome that particular struggle and continued on. Perhaps Conrad stopped at this point and considered Africans to be an earlier form of humans, or perhaps he understood that these people were his equals. Depending on whether or not later evidence in the book supports a deeper equality, even if it is not recognized by Marlow, the reader may be able to discern Conrad’s own position on racial equality.   

Heart of Darkness #1

            Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness is a story told from multiple perspectives at multiple points in time, allowing for different interpretations of events that the reader must consider. The novel begins with the narrator describing his present situation and company. He is aboard a ship anchored on the Thames River along with the Director of Companies, the Lawyer, the Accountant, and Marlow. The narrator himself, however, is not identified in any way nor does he describe any interactions he has with his fellow companions. Since the reader does not have any impression of him whatsoever, it is easy to simply take his observations and interpretations of character at face value. Conrad introduces the reader to the protagonist, Marlow, through the presumably unbiased and perhaps unenlightened eyes of the narrator. The narrator explains that, unlike the straightforward thinking of typical seamen, to Marlow “the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the tale which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze” (Conrad 68). The reader has now been primed with the assumption that Marlow thinks beyond the obvious and has a deeper understanding than the average person; he may be considered an enlightened character. Conrad has facilitated the formation of these assumptions by presenting them through the narrator, yet the reader actually has no evidence that confirms or contradicts the narrator’s reliability. The story shifts into the past as Marlow begins to describe his experience in the Congo. Marlow is telling the story to his companions, so it is written in dialogue form. This serves as a constant reminder to the reader that Marlow is relaying his experiences from a future perspective. Memories are invariably colored by current knowledge, and this is an important point that the reader must consider. The inner thoughts Marlow presents may or may not reflect his actual feelings at the time. Marlow describes how he was drawn to the idea of exploring the Congo River: “it fascinated me as a snake would a bird—a silly little bird” (Conrad 71). At the time, he clearly did not think of his desire as “silly,” or he would not have put so much effort into getting on the ship. He felt, as he said, “fascinated” by it. Looking back now, with a different understanding, he sees his wish to explore the Congo as a bit trivial and uninformed. Although he seems to tell most of the story from his perspective in the past, there is no way to be sure that he does not edit his feelings or recall them differently. This causes the reader to question whether Marlow honestly “foresaw that in the blinding sunshine of that land [he] would become acquainted with a flabby, pretending, weak-eyed devil of a rapacious and pitiless folly” on the first day when he sees the chain gang (Conrad 82). Marlow may present himself in a better light when he tells his story, so it is important to weigh his words against other evidence in the story. Thus far, the complex narrative story is being told by the narrator, present-day Marlow, past Marlow, and other characters Marlow interacts with. Each perspective provides a different view of Marlow, forcing the reader to truly analyze his actions.