Heart
of Darkness (and everything else we’ve read so far)
So instead of rambling on about
identity and time and hollowness and T.S. Eliot like I planned, I’m going to
take a bit of a different approach to this week’s blog. In the spirit of the
final exam, which is coming up sooner than any of us would like, I am here
going to instead ramble on about the relationship between Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness” and ALL the other works we’ve read so
far.
Sorry its long, but its good review! Congratulations to those who make it all the way to the end!
Here goes! (Be warned…some of these
might be a bit of a stretch!)
i)
Conrad
and Genesis and Kant
There are many allusions in Conrad
to Genesis. Some are obvious and some must be gleaned, but regardless, they are
there. One of the first that occur is that the river that intrigues Marlow and
sets in motion his desire to visit the “dark continent” is described as being
snake-like, and further, that “’the snake had charmed [Marlow]’” (73). This of
course, can be seen as parallel to how the snake charms Eve in the Garden of
Eden.
It is interesting to draw parallels
between Africa and the Garden of Eden. If, as Conrad suggests, the parallel
exists, Africa as “the dark continent” is also the continent of temptation, the
continent that embodies the fall, but
also the Continent that brought reason and created societies built around that
reason. This struggle between the negative and the positive aspects of Africa
are in a sense, also played out in Conrad’s book. Africa begins as this place
of wondrous intrigue and discovery for Marlow, but it quickly becomes a place
of darkness. Interestingly, it is the influence of “reason” (i.e. the insertion
of Western Civilization into the “natural” way of life lived by the natives of the
region) that made Africa dark in the first place, or at least that’s the
impression I’ve gleaned from the text.
ii)
Conrad
and Plato
Plato writes on oratory. He writes
on the use of VOICE to convey a message. Not only to convey a message, but to
completely convince an audience that the message is logical, meaningful and
CORRECT. Plato’s orator completely captivates the audience in a fashion, I’d
argue, similar to Mr. Kurtz. Is Mr. Kurtz an orator? I’d say it’s kind of
unclear from the text. Mr. Kurtz himself
doesn’t have very many spoken lines as relayed by Marlow, but he does have
quite the reputation associated with his voice.
“’He had the power to charm or
frighten rudimentary souls into an aggravated witch dance in his honour’” (125)
“’You don’t talk with that man – you
listen to him’” (128) “’He made me see things’” (131)
It is clear that Marlow is given the
impression before meeting Kurtz, which is that Kurtz ought to be placed on a pedestal.
There is much obsession with Kurtz’ voice alone, which is where the connection
to oratory comes in. Again, I’m not one to judge as to whether Kurtz is an
orator or not, but judging by the information we are given, Kurtz was certainly charismatic and definitely commanded
large audiences with his voice alone.
iii)
Conrad
and Sophocles and Butler
For this text, I will focus on responsibility.
In discussing Antigone, it came up that responsibility is something that is
selective. Characters in Antigone do not want to take responsibility for more
than they must, but is that really taking responsibility at all? If we are
selective in taking responsibility, as in we only own up to something that
others can trace back to us, is it responsibility or just accepting that you
had a role in the event in question?
In “Antigone”, the title character
feels that Ismene has no right to be blamed for events. Sure, Ismene may be
implicated, but Antigone claims that she is not at all at fault. Also, Kreon
takes responsibility for the deaths of his family members, but not for Antigone’s
death.
The reason I bring this up in
relation to Conrad is related to the degree of responsibility in relation to “civilizing”
the “dark continent”. In relation to above discussion under section I; if
reason and civilization is responsible for making Africa into a dark continent,
what degree of responsibility rests on each of the characters in Conrad’s
novel, and what form does it take? Does Marlow feel responsible for the
darkness he sees? Does he take responsibility? To what degree is Kurtz
responsible, and does he take responsibility?
Is there even responsibility to be taken?
To relate it back to Antigone, what
is the relation between implication and responsibility? Can one be responsible
by association? (e.g. Is Marlow responsible for Africa’s darkness because he is
a part of western civilization, even if he has taken no direct role in
perpetuating it?)
iv)
Conrad
and Marlowe
There are so many parallels that can
be drawn between “Heart of Darkness” and “Doctor Faustus”. My principle focus
will be their parallel plot.
In Marlowe’s “Doctor Faustus”, the
main character is drawn to knowledge in much the same way that Conrad’s Marlow
is drawn to Africa. Both main characters see something which is within their
grasp if they just pull some strings and take matters into their own hands.
Faustus pursues this knowledge through dealing with the devil while Marlow
employs the help of women in his life to get him on a boat. What’s more,
though, is that once each of these main characters are able to get what they
initially wished for and set out on their quests, they, themselves experience
change. For both characters, the thing they initially wished for and the image
they built up in their minds about their experiences did not mirror the reality
brought forth by experience. It is evident that the reality for both Faustus
and Marlow is a bit of a let down from the image they built in their minds. In
Faustus, his power changes him and he does not want to accept the consequences
of his actions when the consequence comes due. For Marlow, what was so
intriguing and fascinating about the “dark continent” turns into a fascination
with Kurtz, which turns into somewhat of a disappointment when he learns of
Kurtz’ character.
In essence, Doctor Faustus and Heart
of Darkness follow similar plot arcs that each, in turn, have something to say
of the human condition.
v)
Conrad
and Bulgakov
We all know that Bulgakov writes
some fairly absurd things in “The Master and Margarita”. I’m sure I don’t need
to go into detail. But absurdity also runs rampant in Conrad. For example,
around page 114 Marlow begins to think of himself in terms of desirability from
a cannibal’s perspective. Is absurdity included as something like comic relief
for the reader, or is intended to communicate certain madness as experienced by
the characters?
I’m not sure that Conrad wishes his
readers to believe that Marlow has gone crazy, but is it his intent to imply
that one simply cannot stay completely sane when in such a precarious
situation?
Yet another option, and the one that
aligns more with Bulgakov, is the idea that the inclusion of madness is meant
as a political or social commentary. Society is crazy! Politics are insane!
Does it take fictional absurdity for people to realize? More importantly, by communicating
this notion through fictionalized
absurdity, do readers even understand the point that is being made?
vi)
Conrad
and Hobbes and Rousseau
There are more than simply
underlying tones of politics and imperialism throughout Conrad’s novel. It can
be argued that the entire novel is showing the influence of Western
civilization in creating darkness in the world. More closely linked to Hobbes
and Rousseau, however, are the smaller discussions in Marlow’s story.
“’The conquest of the earth, which
mostly means the taking it away from those who have a different complexion or
slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into
it too much’” (Conrad 72)
This is how commonwealths begin, is
it not? When one asserts power and dominance over another? I mean this
quotation has more racial overtones than what Hobbes or Rousseau write about,
but the principle is similar. The intent is even the same! The intent is to “civilize”
the natives of the “dark continent”, not to destroy them, but nonetheless,
destruction occurs in the process. It is to be war under the guise of peace.
More closely related to Rousseau,
however, is the constant discussion of going back. Conrad references often the
pleasantness of the past, not so much in terms of people, like Rousseau does,
but for plants and other vegetation. As Rousseau calls for a return to nascent
society, Conrad calls for a return to “’when vegetation rioted on the earth and
the big trees were kings’” (105)…okay…maybe Conrad doesn’t quite want for
society to go back to “’the earliest beginnings of the world’” (105), but he
does seem to speak of it with a certain fondness.
Looking at the effect of imperialism
and how societies, both civilized and uncivilized, as it were, there are clear
connections between Conrad and Hobbes and Rousseau.
vii)
Conrad
and Trouillot and Carpentier and Cesaire and Walcott
I’ve grouped these authors because
of their connection to Henry Christophe. Henri Christophe was essentially
charged with rebuilding an empire after overthrowing one that didn’t work for
his people. In the process, however, came more oppression and an essential
remaking of an empire that failed to serve its people in the first place. Henri
fell into a trap of remaking; in an effort to make a change, the effects were
quite negative for the people under his reign.
Is this, or something similar, also
to be seen in Conrad? In an attempt to civilize the “dark continent”, or to
make a change in Africa, are the people worse off? This is an interesting
question to ponder in relation to Heart of Darkness. It would seem that with
the ivory trade and all of the slavery and violence occurring in the Congo is a
result of imperialism, perhaps gone too far. It would also appear that in the
novel, civilization has not been very successful. Rather, under the guise of
civilization, what really occurs is control; control over natives, control over
resources and control of control. Then again, we only get a glimpse of this in
Conrad’s novel.
viii)
Conrad
and Wordsworth
Here’s where I can talk about Conrad’s
command of the English language. The first time I read Heart of Darkness, I was
fascinated with the language Conrad was using that I completely missed the plot
(I guess Miranda was right!) and I had to read it again, paying attention to
the plot, then message of the novel. Wordsworth, too, has an excellent command
of the words that he uses. In both Conrad’s novel and Wordsworth’s poems, it’s
entirely possible to simply enjoy the words on the page and let them transport
you to a fictional place while you read, but also with both, underlying
messages are present if one cares to look for them. Actually, one doesn’t have
to look too far because there are, in most cases, very blatant references to
the underlying messages in the works of both authors.
Basically, these authors are both
great because their use of language is superb AND you can get more out their
work than just a good story or poem. They force you to think!
ix)
Conrad
and Austen and Woolstonecraft
Thinking back to the lecture given
for the Austen lecture, the narrative structure of Conrad’s novel has some
interesting parallels. As discussed in seminar, it’s possible that the
narrative structure (being that the story takes place on a boat and Marlow
narrates a story within the story) is meant to prevent the reader from getting
lost in the plot. In lecture, it was suggested that stories can be read either for
the plot or for the message, but not both at the same time.
In Northanger Abbey, it’s easy to get caught up in the frivolous
storyline and miss out on the underlying social commentary. In fact, this is
also argued by Woolstonecraft and
her aversion to novels – the idea that more often than not, readers do get lost, as it were, in the plot and
miss the message entirely.
I’d like to argue that the structure
and content of Conrad’s novel opposes this idea. Sure, it’s easy for the reader
to lose themselves in Marlow’s narrative of his adventures in Africa, being as
it’s so well written and Conrad’s command of the English language is superb,
but Conrad doesn’t allow the reader to remain lost. Instead, Conrad returns a
few times throughout the novel to the initial boat setting, where the reader is
removed from Conrad’s adventure just long enough to re-ground themselves in the
“reality” of the novel and see the bigger picture that Conrad’s writing about.
Those brief pauses in Marlow’s story force the reader to enjoy Marlow’s
narrative, but also reflect on its underlying themes and messages that Conrad
wishes to portray.
Besides, even if one was able to
ignore the underlying messages for the majority of the book, they wouldn’t be
able to read the last words without wondering what, exactly, the heart of
darkness was referring to. So, in opposition to what is represented in Austen
and what Woolstonecraft dislikes about novels, Conrad produces Heart of
Darkness.
x)
Conrad
and Freud
So in seminar, we were discussing
Marlow’s need for rivets to fill the holes in his boat. Freud would have a
field day.
xi)
Conrad
and Fanon
Parts of Conrad’s novel show how
white people are put on a pedestal by non-white people, which is a main focus
of Fanon’s work. For example, on page 74, when Marlow is talking of how his
predecessor was killed (how he earned his position), it is revealed that a
native thrust a spear into his back, killing him. It’s what Marlow says next:
“’The whole population cleared into
the forest, expecting all kinds of calamities to happen’” (Conrad 74)
The white people were so high on a
pedestal for the natives that the act of killing one of them brought them fear
that the consequences would be catastrophic. It’s difficult to say exactly how the
Africans felt, however, because Conrad doesn’t really give them a voice, but it
is clear from the text, that the white influence is dominant.
xii)
Conrad
and Foucault
Foucault talks about the repressive
hypothesis in relation to sex. Instead of silence, discourse has abounded,
perhaps brought on by repression itself. He believes that bio-power has
regularized and normalized sex, but also suggests that bio-power can be
problematic.
Less related to sex as Foucault
describes, is there something resembling the repressive hypothesis and/or
bio-power in Conrad as well?
xiii)
Conrad
and Hacking and Paine
Hacking speaks of the Looping effect
of human kinds: the idea that people conform to labels while simultaneously adapting
the labels to changes that occur within themselves. He also speaks of memory
and of identity. I’m mostly interested in identity in relation to Conrad.
Did anyone else notice that only two
characters were named? Marlow and Kurtz are given names in the novel, but all
of the other characters are referred to by their profession, mostly. On the
boat, there’s the lawyer and the director (who was like a pilot). In Marlow’s
story, there’s the brick maker and the accountant. In Kurtz’ life, there’s “my
Intended”, but no other names than Marlow and Mr. Kurtz.
This is fascinating in a few ways:
what is it about Marlow and Kurtz that Conrad would name them and not others?
Could it have something to do with the ambiguity of their respective
professions? What is Marlow’s job, exactly? What is Kurtz’ job, exactly? It
must be more than that, though. Naming Mr. Kurtz certainly, if nothing else,
adds to the mystery of his character and helps to build up the anticipation of
meeting him. And naming Marlow? Well he’s one of the narrators, but might it be
more than that as well?
Then Conrad goes and adds things
like this:
“’I did not see the man in the name
any more than you do’” (97)
“’The name was as true as everything
else in his life – and death’” (136)
According to this, it would seem
that Conrad does believe that a name is somehow tied to identity.
Another fascinating thing is that
the others are mostly referred to by profession. This is a common thread
throughout works we’ve read. Often, when not referred to by name, profession is
the next most common means of identifying people. Why is that? Is it simply
because it’s easy and supposedly communicates something to their character, or
is it more than that? How much does profession really have to do with a
person’s identity?
The third interesting thing is that
often when Conrad refers to a group of people, and especially a group of
“others”, that the descriptor is a more general one, and sometimes derogatory.
Marlow categorizes “Cannibals” and “Pilgrims” and “Natives”.
What would Hacking have to say about
identity in relation to referring to those by their profession?
How will I relate this to Paine? “Titles
are but nick-names, and every nick-name is a title. The thing is perfectly
harmless in itself, but it makes a sort of foppery in the human character,
which degrades it” (Paine 40). While Paine is referring to political titles,
such as “Duke”, the principle can be applied to this discussion of identity. In
calling someone by their title, or by their profession, Paine would argue that
the act degrades their character. Is it Conrad’s intention to degrade each
character other than Marlow and Kurtz? Likely not, but nonetheless, it’s a perspective
worth considering!
xiv)
Conrad
and de Beauvoir
I will wrap up my insanely long blog
post/review by talking about women in Conrad. Conrad certainly does absolutely
nothing to discourage women from being seen as “the other”. In fact, Conrad
perpetuates it. Conrad’s view on women:
“It’s queer how out of touch with
truth women are. They live in a world of their own, and there had never been
anything like it, and never can be. It is too beautiful altogether, and if they
were to set it up it would go to pieces before the first sunset. Some confounded
fact we men have been living contentedly with ever since the day of creation
would start up and knock the whole thing over” (79).
This certainly perpetuates the idea
of women being delicate, placed on pedestals, and living in a world of their
own, worlds away from the world of men, but also writes as if men have a
complete knowledge of the women’s world, which is not something that agrees
with Beauvoir either.
I wonder what a conversation between
Conrad and de Beauvoir would have been like…
