The Terminale OIB English course complements and continues the work begun in Première OIB. We continue to sharpen our analytical and close reading skills as we probe issues of self and other, individual and society, assimilation and alienation. Some of our major texts are concerned in particular with race and colonization.
After reading part 1 of Heart of Darkness, what are your impressions? What kind of a traveler and storyteller is Marlow? What are his motivations? To what extent is he a mouthpiece for Conrad? Where is this novella taking us?
The oil painting, located in the agent’s room, is painted by Kurts during his stay at the station, while he was waiting to be moved to his trading-post. Marlow discovers that it depicts a “woman, draped and blindfolded, carrying a lighted torch” (Conrad, 30). This light is contrasted with the “sombre” (Conrad, 30), black background. The fact that the person represented is a blinded woman is provocative. It suggests that women, during the Imperialistic period, had very little power, were weak, and not involved in the process. However, the fact that a woman is carrying a light through the darkness suggests that women are bringing light to the darkness. Meanwhile, the woman could also be interpreted as a pioneer bringing light to the untamed and undiscovered Africa, without exactly knowing where to go and how to go about the colonization, which is the case of most European countries. Furthermore, on a more symbolical note, the woman could also represent both Justice, through her blindfolded impartiality, and Liberty, through her enlightening and leading torch. This is the typical stance Europeans took on colonization, claiming they were bringing these values to the native peoples. Nonetheless, the context here is ambiguous: this painting expresses irony because until now it does not reflect at all what Marlow has been discovering.
The ivory symbolizes greed and the ruinous nature of man. The managers of the Company are so consumed with obtaining ivory to the point where they forget about their morals. On page 37, Marlow says that the men at the Central Station are “like a lot of faithless pilgrims bewitched inside a rotten fence”. Conrad then states, “The word ‘ivory’ rang in the air, was whispered, was sighed. You would think they were praying to it.” Therefore, these “pilgrims” recognize ivory as their God, the meaning of life, and their fate. However, the meaning of the word ‘ivory’ begins to shift from acquisitiveness, taking on a sinful connotation as Marlow nears the hearts of darkness, being Kurtz and the Inner Station. Kurtz has collected more ivory than all the other stations combined, which is why the ivory imagery is mainly used in describing Kurtz. In Heart of Darkness, ivory plays a dual role in its meaning; on one hand, representing evil and covetousness, and on the other, the actions taken to obtain it in the first place (for example, the maltreatment of blacks). Ivory is known to be one of the whitest materials discovered in nature, whereas Kurtz’s soul is entirely black, showing irony because evil is generally correlated with the color black as opposed to white.
From Robin: Throughout part I, Marlow - and perhaps Joseph Conrad - exposes and accuses a very peculiar sort of "evil". It evades the typical and classic cliche of the evil that many authors tend to use, especially, during Romanticism and the few decades that follow - the unsurprising merciless and cruel bad guy. Here, Joseph Conrad indeed emphasizes the intolerable ineffectiveness of human acts - mostly the imperialist ridiculous narrow-mindedness - as opposed to cruelty or violence. For instance, when a fire is declared at the station, laborers use buckets to put it out, but they have holes, making the scene slightly comical to the observer. And Joseph Conrad establishes a bridge between this very example and the human condition as a whole. This meaninglessness or lack of purpose comes from the 'inside of the human", not solely the mere appearance and explicit impression that an objective observer might express. the human soul is in fact corrupted, perverted to its deepest level. This is perfectly illustrated by the attitude and stereotypical behavior of the general manager that Marlow meets, after having traveled 200 miles into the Congo. The people he meets seem to be related to conspiracies which all originate from evil intentions. And this is what, I believe, differentiates Joseph Conrad. His accusations are novelties, and they make a perfect transition to Modernism. In fact, Joseph Conrad writes at the very end of the 19th century, and it is during the first few decades of the twentieth century that Modernism makes its explosion. And this literary movement corresponds perfectly to what was said earlier - It is indeed characterized by a recurrent lack of goal, absurdity, and meaninglessness.
So, are we beginning to see this journey into darkness as a journey deeper into the self? Is Marlow's voyage into the heart of Africa a metaphor for something else, perhaps for another kind of psychological or philosophical investigation? And how does Kurtz factor into this? Hmmmm...
From Annabel: The black men are described as erect and slow, only wearing « black rags wound around their loins ». Completely naked to the eyes of men, there is no human pride left, no human dignity. They pass the narrator without glancing at him but were filled with a « deathlike indifference of unhappy savages ». They are thin and their bones compared to knots in a rope. Thus, these men are linked to animals but also materials, nothing is left of them, no emotions, no feelings. It then brings us back to the notion of the consequences of human activities intensified with the narrator’s intervention : « […] made me think suddenly of that ship of war I had seen firing into the continent. It was the same kind of luminous voice ; but these men could by no stretch of imagination be called enemies. They were called criminals, and the outraged law, had come over them, an insoluble mystery from over the sea. » Indeed, Marlow expresses an idea, an opinion. This noise reminded him of war, when what he saw were only men working. And he recognizes that these men are no enemies, they are not here to disturb the peaceful ways of a country. They are here to obey and to build. Moreover, he acknowledges that they are criminals and that they have been judged by the law, a law however mysterious. A critique is then brought together : the law which represent the rules that the people follow, is the sole accountable for what these men turned into. And this law is unknown to others, to the ones who follow it. This is then a problem enlightened by the author and by the disintegrated aspect of the black men. This critique is exemplified with the role of the « reclaimed », « the product of the new forces at work ». This man then directly emblematizes the society, the ones who are responsible for this scenery. He is described with some irony which accentuates and affirms the assessment expressed by the author. Hence the man is strolling miserably next to them and holding a rifle. The rifle represents power, he is the one who holds the authority on the black men. He is thus in liberty to perform whatever tasks he wants to practice. The reader is then introduced to a scene illustrating the law of nature, who is the strongest. And here the man who seems to be the strongest, is despondent. As a result, this brings forward a contradiction, a ridiculous scene, an illogical one which is stressed with the use of irony. Furthermore, when he recognizes Marlow as being a white man with no violent intentions whatsoever, he was « speedily reassured » which brings out a notion of gullibility. This man only classes people according to their appearance to their skin color. One white man is as able as being dangerous as any black man. When he sees him, his face is over-lighted with a grin, « a rascally grin » followed with « a glance at his charge ». He puts himself in a position of superiority and invites Marlow to be his partner in crime. In return, the narrator realizes this and puts it through words as being « to take me into partnership in his exalted trust. » It underlines the separation between white and black. They are different and linked together. Then, another critique is stated : « After all, I also was a part of the great cause of these high and just proceedings ». This sentence is full of irony. « These high and just proceedings » are ironic but it also portrays a truth. Every white men were responsible for the crimes they did by practicing slavery. Even though they weren’t in direct contact with slavery, by not acting, they were responsible.
Close Reading excerpt: "Besides the rotting machinery on the hill, Marlow also encounters a group of black prisoner, chained on their own homeland. They were obviously mistreated as Marlow’s description is extremely wretched and pathetic: “Black rags were wound round their loins [...] I could see every rib [...] each had an iron collar on his neck, and all were connected together with a chain whose bights swung between them, rhythmically clinking.” This description shows that the black natives are being mistreated, they look starving and dirty, like animals, and are being treated like criminals. Marlow says that they could “by no stretch of imagination could be called enemies.” However, he also says they were called criminals, even though they look more like victims and act “despondently.” Marlow described their stare as filled with “deathlike indifference of unhappy savages.” They are apparently working on a railway. Marlow describes the sound of the work as that of a “ship of war [...] firing into a continent. It was the same kind of ominous voice,” the noise is brutal, like a war, which shows that the work these people are subjected to is harsh. Furthermore, Marlow seems to think the work is useless. He characterizes it as “objectless blasting” and when he encounters an artificial hole, he says “the purpose of which I found it impossible to divine,” as if the work has no purpose and is mere torture.
Marlow characterizes the colonizers’ need for the natives’ work as a “philanthropic desire of giving the criminals something to do.” This is ironic, because this torture is not philanthropy, it is in search of profit. There is even more irony when Marlow announces that he “was a part of the great cause of these high and just proceedings” because after his dreadful description, it is clear he does not believe this to be justice and greatness, unlike the other men of the Company. He implicitly characterizes the colonizers as “devils.” He says he’s “seen the devil of violence, and the devil of greed, and the devil of hot desire; but, by all the stars! these were strong, lusty, red-eyed devils.” The interjection “by all the stars!” shows how shocked Marlow is and how he has never seen such a spectacle before. He is saying that these devil are the worst. The colonizers are in fact lusty and greedy. He also characterizes the colonizer as “flabby, pretending, weak-eyed devil of a rapacious and pitiless folly,” showing his greed as well as his turn to madness because of his sinful quest to profit, which can foreshadow the effect of the trip on Marlow, or mostly Kurtz. Again, here it seems that Marlow has entered a hell, the heart of darkness, as he describes this scene as a “gloomy circle of some Inferno,” referring to Dante’s Inferno, a description of hell. Death is also very present, as Marlow says “not a breath stirred, not a leaf moved.” This parallelism shows there is no life. He declares “I stood appalled.” This announcement shows that Marlow grasps the horror of colonization and is not naive like many Europeans were.
Marlow is no longer in a romanticized version of exploration. In this passage, the truths of colonization are slowly revealed, even though it is only the beginning. The dark atmosphere of the entire novella is set up. The reader also gets more insight on Marlow’s perspective, though while rational and understanding of this horror, it is also ambiguous because of his ambivalence and the lack of any direct negative remark about the colonizers or direct pity for the black prisoners. Marlow remains a mystery to the reader, though it is made clear that his trip will indeed be filled with darkness. "
The mysterious Kurtz, however, is the source of Marlow’s dubiety. The manager proposes that his own refusal to accept the consequences of the tropical climate displays not just physical constitution but the approval of some higher power. Marlow struggles to analyze what he has overheard about Kurtz; if the manager’s story is true, Kurtz is an obsessed psychopath. However, contrasting the manager’s obsequious manipulations and shabby aspirations lie Kurtz’s magnificent gestures and appealing, ethically equivocal successes. The journey up the Thames attracts threatened mishaps that never come to pass. Marlow’s restless vigilance is due to the silence surrounding his steamer in the center of the infinite African continent. He feels as if he has no time and must constantly “discern, mostly by inspiration, [hidden] signs.” He views his journey on the steamboat along this dangerous river as his discovering a world of schemes, secrets, and mysteries. Now that both Europe and Africa have become impenetrable to Marlow, only the peculiar and secretive Kurtz seems “real.”
Furthermore, the contrasting language throughout this part of the novella reflects Marlow’s complex and uneasy position. For example, the steamer “tears slowly along the riverbank”. To tear generally demonstrates speed and rapidity, but the oxymoronic addition of the world ‘slowly’ instantly strips the phrase of its meaning. Another example is shown through Marlow’s companions aboard the steamer. The “pilgrims” are boisterous, aggressive men; the “cannibals” are quiet and, although malnourished, go about their jobs without complaint. This amalgamation of compassionate cannibals and barbarous pilgrims with a manager who manages secretively rather than openly brings forth the ridicule in the novella.
Excerpt from Part II Reader Response Marlow doesn’t seem to be much of a follower, which puts into question his trip to Africa. Even he doesn’t know why he’s there. He doesn’t seem to have ever been a fan of capitalism, which is characterized by greed, competition and wealth; he seems to be rather a fan of tranquility, peace and introspection. It still seems though, that capitalism is a part of Marlow. When he reflects on the pilgrims’ throwing of the natives’ rotten hippo-meat, a necessity to them, overboard, Marlow defends the pilgrims saying that “it was really a case of legitimate self-defence. You can’t breathe dead hippo […] and at the same time keep your precarious grip on existence.” –p50. Marlow doesn’t think logically here, and he is clearly overtaken by his European ways, as he deems his and the pilgrim’s desires more justifiable than the natives’ necessities. He even knows of this wrong: “It’s really easier to face bereavement, dishonor, and the perdition of one’s soul --- than this kind of prolonged hunger.” –p51. It is perhaps the natives’ remarkable ability to restrain themselves that made him think wrongly like this.
Looking back on what i said in this excerpt, it seems like Marlow is a bit of a hypocrite; it isn't very evident but it seems like he can hold two opposing views and justify both (even if they aren't all logic like here)
exerpt part2 reader response: When they going up the river, Marlow finds himself very important and without his person the engine would not be able to reach the station, which emphasizes the fact that he is in control. We see with his descriptions that the other members of the crew are less capable, in fact the Europeans are seen as silly and the natives are presented as savages. He considers the “savages” as “not inhuman” which shows the difficulty for Marlow to describe them as human, and also shows the incapability of the Europeans to consider them as equals. However Marlow proves to the reader that he is better than these Europeans and that he doesn’t entirely have the same beliefs since he compares this fight between Africans and Europeans, with the fight between England and Rome in the first part of his narrative. In fact he states that the conflict that marked the history between England and Rome started because those countries each thought they were the most powerful and that they each deserved the territory of the other. This is why their problems erupted into a war, action which now sounds ridiculous since they are considered both to be the same, as they are white. Marlow is trying to explain that the difference of race is not what should define people, and he starts a debate that is going to be very important in history and that is going to change the lives of African American people. He even describes the journey as being back in time, because of the primitive way of living of the indigenous people. This shows the view the colonizers have of these people, even if they are on their land. This description can be related to the one in the first part of the book when Marlow describes the battle between England and Rome, and also when he was talking about knights. Another incident that explains he thinks that their journey takes place in the ancient time is that the fight against the natives is made with arrows and spears. These arms were used a very long time ago in times of wars, but now the world evolved and firepower weapons have been invented, arms that the indigenous people do not know about. It is even with the steamer’s whistle that Marlow got to scare the natives away, which shows that they are not developed and for Europeans this journey is like a trip back in time.
The Oil Painting
ReplyDeleteThe oil painting, located in the agent’s room, is painted by Kurts during his stay at the station, while he was waiting to be moved to his trading-post. Marlow discovers that it depicts a “woman, draped and blindfolded, carrying a lighted torch” (Conrad, 30). This light is contrasted with the “sombre” (Conrad, 30), black background. The fact that the person represented is a blinded woman is provocative. It suggests that women, during the Imperialistic period, had very little power, were weak, and not involved in the process. However, the fact that a woman is carrying a light through the darkness suggests that women are bringing light to the darkness. Meanwhile, the woman could also be interpreted as a pioneer bringing light to the untamed and undiscovered Africa, without exactly knowing where to go and how to go about the colonization, which is the case of most European countries. Furthermore, on a more symbolical note, the woman could also represent both Justice, through her blindfolded impartiality, and Liberty, through her enlightening and leading torch. This is the typical stance Europeans took on colonization, claiming they were bringing these values to the native peoples. Nonetheless, the context here is ambiguous: this painting expresses irony because until now it does not reflect at all what Marlow has been discovering.
The Ivory
ReplyDeleteThe ivory symbolizes greed and the ruinous nature of man. The managers of the Company are so consumed with obtaining ivory to the point where they forget about their morals. On page 37, Marlow says that the men at the Central Station are “like a lot of faithless pilgrims bewitched inside a rotten fence”. Conrad then states, “The word ‘ivory’ rang in the air, was whispered, was sighed. You would think they were praying to it.” Therefore, these “pilgrims” recognize ivory as their God, the meaning of life, and their fate. However, the meaning of the word ‘ivory’ begins to shift from acquisitiveness, taking on a sinful connotation as Marlow nears the hearts of darkness, being Kurtz and the Inner Station. Kurtz has collected more ivory than all the other stations combined, which is why the ivory imagery is mainly used in describing Kurtz. In Heart of Darkness, ivory plays a dual role in its meaning; on one hand, representing evil and covetousness, and on the other, the actions taken to obtain it in the first place (for example, the maltreatment of blacks). Ivory is known to be one of the whitest materials discovered in nature, whereas Kurtz’s soul is entirely black, showing irony because evil is generally correlated with the color black as opposed to white.
From Robin: Throughout part I, Marlow - and perhaps Joseph Conrad - exposes and accuses a very peculiar sort of "evil". It evades the typical and classic cliche of the evil that many authors tend to use, especially, during Romanticism and the few decades that follow - the unsurprising merciless and cruel bad guy. Here, Joseph Conrad indeed emphasizes the intolerable ineffectiveness of human acts - mostly the imperialist ridiculous narrow-mindedness - as opposed to cruelty or violence. For instance, when a fire is declared at the station, laborers use buckets to put it out, but they have holes, making the scene slightly comical to the observer. And Joseph Conrad establishes a bridge between this very example and the human condition as a whole. This meaninglessness or lack of purpose comes from the 'inside of the human", not solely the mere appearance and explicit impression that an objective observer might express. the human soul is in fact corrupted, perverted to its deepest level. This is perfectly illustrated by the attitude and stereotypical behavior of the general manager that Marlow meets, after having traveled 200 miles into the Congo. The people he meets seem to be related to conspiracies which all originate from evil intentions. And this is what, I believe, differentiates Joseph Conrad. His accusations are novelties, and they make a perfect transition to Modernism. In fact, Joseph Conrad writes at the very end of the 19th century, and it is during the first few decades of the twentieth century that Modernism makes its explosion. And this literary movement corresponds perfectly to what was said earlier - It is indeed characterized by a recurrent lack of goal, absurdity, and meaninglessness.
ReplyDeleteSo, are we beginning to see this journey into darkness as a journey deeper into the self? Is Marlow's voyage into the heart of Africa a metaphor for something else, perhaps for another kind of psychological or philosophical investigation? And how does Kurtz factor into this? Hmmmm...
ReplyDeleteFrom Annabel: The black men are described as erect and slow, only wearing « black rags wound around their loins ». Completely naked to the eyes of men, there is no human pride left, no human dignity. They pass the narrator without glancing at him but were filled with a « deathlike indifference of unhappy savages ». They are thin and their bones compared to knots in a rope. Thus, these men are linked to animals but also materials, nothing is left of them, no emotions, no feelings. It then brings us back to the notion of the consequences of human activities intensified with the narrator’s intervention : « […] made me think suddenly of that ship of war I had seen firing into the continent. It was the same kind of luminous voice ; but these men could by no stretch of imagination be called enemies. They were called criminals, and the outraged law, had come over them, an insoluble mystery from over the sea. » Indeed, Marlow expresses an idea, an opinion. This noise reminded him of war, when what he saw were only men working. And he recognizes that these men are no enemies, they are not here to disturb the peaceful ways of a country. They are here to obey and to build. Moreover, he acknowledges that they are criminals and that they have been judged by the law, a law however mysterious. A critique is then brought together : the law which represent the rules that the people follow, is the sole accountable for what these men turned into. And this law is unknown to others, to the ones who follow it. This is then a problem enlightened by the author and by the disintegrated aspect of the black men.
ReplyDeleteThis critique is exemplified with the role of the « reclaimed », « the product of the new forces at work ». This man then directly emblematizes the society, the ones who are responsible for this scenery. He is described with some irony which accentuates and affirms the assessment expressed by the author. Hence the man is strolling miserably next to them and holding a rifle. The rifle represents power, he is the one who holds the authority on the black men. He is thus in liberty to perform whatever tasks he wants to practice. The reader is then introduced to a scene illustrating the law of nature, who is the strongest. And here the man who seems to be the strongest, is despondent. As a result, this brings forward a contradiction, a ridiculous scene, an illogical one which is stressed with the use of irony.
Furthermore, when he recognizes Marlow as being a white man with no violent intentions whatsoever, he was « speedily reassured » which brings out a notion of gullibility. This man only classes people according to their appearance to their skin color. One white man is as able as being dangerous as any black man. When he sees him, his face is over-lighted with a grin, « a rascally grin » followed with « a glance at his charge ». He puts himself in a position of superiority and invites Marlow to be his partner in crime. In return, the narrator realizes this and puts it through words as being « to take me into partnership in his exalted trust. » It underlines the separation between white and black. They are different and linked together. Then, another critique is stated : « After all, I also was a part of the great cause of these high and just proceedings ». This sentence is full of irony. « These high and just proceedings » are ironic but it also portrays a truth. Every white men were responsible for the crimes they did by practicing slavery. Even though they weren’t in direct contact with slavery, by not acting, they were responsible.
Close Reading excerpt:
ReplyDelete"Besides the rotting machinery on the hill, Marlow also encounters a group of black prisoner, chained on their own homeland. They were obviously mistreated as Marlow’s description is extremely wretched and pathetic: “Black rags were wound round their loins [...] I could see every rib [...] each had an iron collar on his neck, and all were connected together with a chain whose bights swung between them, rhythmically clinking.” This description shows that the black natives are being mistreated, they look starving and dirty, like animals, and are being treated like criminals. Marlow says that they could “by no stretch of imagination could be called enemies.” However, he also says they were called criminals, even though they look more like victims and act “despondently.” Marlow described their stare as filled with “deathlike indifference of unhappy savages.” They are apparently working on a railway. Marlow describes the sound of the work as that of a “ship of war [...] firing into a continent. It was the same kind of ominous voice,” the noise is brutal, like a war, which shows that the work these people are subjected to is harsh. Furthermore, Marlow seems to think the work is useless. He characterizes it as “objectless blasting” and when he encounters an artificial hole, he says “the purpose of which I found it impossible to divine,” as if the work has no purpose and is mere torture.
Marlow characterizes the colonizers’ need for the natives’ work as a “philanthropic desire of giving the criminals something to do.” This is ironic, because this torture is not philanthropy, it is in search of profit. There is even more irony when Marlow announces that he “was a part of the great cause of these high and just proceedings” because after his dreadful description, it is clear he does not believe this to be justice and greatness, unlike the other men of the Company. He implicitly characterizes the colonizers as “devils.” He says he’s “seen the devil of violence, and the devil of greed, and the devil of hot desire; but, by all the stars! these were strong, lusty, red-eyed devils.” The interjection “by all the stars!” shows how shocked Marlow is and how he has never seen such a spectacle before. He is saying that these devil are the worst. The colonizers are in fact lusty and greedy. He also characterizes the colonizer as “flabby, pretending, weak-eyed devil of a rapacious and pitiless folly,” showing his greed as well as his turn to madness because of his sinful quest to profit, which can foreshadow the effect of the trip on Marlow, or mostly Kurtz. Again, here it seems that Marlow has entered a hell, the heart of darkness, as he describes this scene as a “gloomy circle of some Inferno,” referring to Dante’s Inferno, a description of hell. Death is also very present, as Marlow says “not a breath stirred, not a leaf moved.” This parallelism shows there is no life. He declares “I stood appalled.” This announcement shows that Marlow grasps the horror of colonization and is not naive like many Europeans were.
Marlow is no longer in a romanticized version of exploration. In this passage, the truths of colonization are slowly revealed, even though it is only the beginning. The dark atmosphere of the entire novella is set up. The reader also gets more insight on Marlow’s perspective, though while rational and understanding of this horror, it is also ambiguous because of his ambivalence and the lack of any direct negative remark about the colonizers or direct pity for the black prisoners. Marlow remains a mystery to the reader, though it is made clear that his trip will indeed be filled with darkness. "
Excerpt from Part II Reader Response
ReplyDeleteThe mysterious Kurtz, however, is the source of Marlow’s dubiety. The manager proposes that his own refusal to accept the consequences of the tropical climate displays not just physical constitution but the approval of some higher power. Marlow struggles to analyze what he has overheard about Kurtz; if the manager’s story is true, Kurtz is an obsessed psychopath. However, contrasting the manager’s obsequious manipulations and shabby aspirations lie Kurtz’s magnificent gestures and appealing, ethically equivocal successes. The journey up the Thames attracts threatened mishaps that never come to pass. Marlow’s restless vigilance is due to the silence surrounding his steamer in the center of the infinite African continent. He feels as if he has no time and must constantly “discern, mostly by inspiration, [hidden] signs.” He views his journey on the steamboat along this dangerous river as his discovering a world of schemes, secrets, and mysteries. Now that both Europe and Africa have become impenetrable to Marlow, only the peculiar and secretive Kurtz seems “real.”
Furthermore, the contrasting language throughout this part of the novella reflects Marlow’s complex and uneasy position. For example, the steamer “tears slowly along the riverbank”. To tear generally demonstrates speed and rapidity, but the oxymoronic addition of the world ‘slowly’ instantly strips the phrase of its meaning. Another example is shown through Marlow’s companions aboard the steamer. The “pilgrims” are boisterous, aggressive men; the “cannibals” are quiet and, although malnourished, go about their jobs without complaint. This amalgamation of compassionate cannibals and barbarous pilgrims with a manager who manages secretively rather than openly brings forth the ridicule in the novella.
Excerpt from Part II Reader Response
ReplyDeleteMarlow doesn’t seem to be much of a follower, which puts into question his trip to Africa. Even he doesn’t know why he’s there. He doesn’t seem to have ever been a fan of capitalism, which is characterized by greed, competition and wealth; he seems to be rather a fan of tranquility, peace and introspection. It still seems though, that capitalism is a part of Marlow. When he reflects on the pilgrims’ throwing of the natives’ rotten hippo-meat, a necessity to them, overboard, Marlow defends the pilgrims saying that “it was really a case of legitimate self-defence. You can’t breathe dead hippo […] and at the same time keep your precarious grip on existence.” –p50. Marlow doesn’t think logically here, and he is clearly overtaken by his European ways, as he deems his and the pilgrim’s desires more justifiable than the natives’ necessities. He even knows of this wrong: “It’s really easier to face bereavement, dishonor, and the perdition of one’s soul --- than this kind of prolonged hunger.” –p51. It is perhaps the natives’ remarkable ability to restrain themselves that made him think wrongly like this.
Looking back on what i said in this excerpt, it seems like Marlow is a bit of a hypocrite; it isn't very evident but it seems like he can hold two opposing views and justify both (even if they aren't all logic like here)
exerpt part2 reader response:
ReplyDeleteWhen they going up the river, Marlow finds himself very important and without his person the engine would not be able to reach the station, which emphasizes the fact that he is in control. We see with his descriptions that the other members of the crew are less capable, in fact the Europeans are seen as silly and the natives are presented as savages.
He considers the “savages” as “not inhuman” which shows the difficulty for Marlow to describe them as human, and also shows the incapability of the Europeans to consider them as equals. However Marlow proves to the reader that he is better than these Europeans and that he doesn’t entirely have the same beliefs since he compares this fight between Africans and Europeans, with the fight between England and Rome in the first part of his narrative. In fact he states that the conflict that marked the history between England and Rome started because those countries each thought they were the most powerful and that they each deserved the territory of the other. This is why their problems erupted into a war, action which now sounds ridiculous since they are considered both to be the same, as they are white. Marlow is trying to explain that the difference of race is not what should define people, and he starts a debate that is going to be very important in history and that is going to change the lives of African American people.
He even describes the journey as being back in time, because of the primitive way of living of the indigenous people. This shows the view the colonizers have of these people, even if they are on their land. This description can be related to the one in the first part of the book when Marlow describes the battle between England and Rome, and also when he was talking about knights. Another incident that explains he thinks that their journey takes place in the ancient time is that the fight against the natives is made with arrows and spears. These arms were used a very long time ago in times of wars, but now the world evolved and firepower weapons have been invented, arms that the indigenous people do not know about. It is even with the steamer’s whistle that Marlow got to scare the natives away, which shows that they are not developed and for Europeans this journey is like a trip back in time.