So far in Joseph Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness”, we as readers are still left to speculate what “darkness” is referred to in the title of the book. There is no lack of the word itself; however darkness and somber tones are used throughout the book to describe an entire range of objects and concepts, leaving us unsure of which usage of the term is the important one.
Darkness can be found in the wool of the old women in Brussels, in the skin color of the slaves, in the night, in the undergrowth of the Jungle trees at night and all around [...] Kurtz. [...] darkness is omnipresent through the tone of the narration, linking these separate themes together.[...] there is a certain passivity and restraint to the character’s (Marlow’s) tone and actions in the face of such animated events. [examples]. This passivity of character is also accompanied by the length of time in this book; [...]. Through this dark narration, all the dark attributes of the Congo seem to blur together into a single overhanging gloom that is ever present. These elements are never as closely brought together as when Marlow questions: “What was in [the wall of matted vegetation]? I could see a little ivory coming out of there, and I had heard Mr. Kurtz was in there.” (p.32)
The darkness could also be interpreted as the absurdity that is ever present: the lack of clear goals and directions, the absurd shelling of the continent by the ship; the blind leading the blind, or more precisely the blind leading themselves. [...]. These incoherencies further reinforce [...] the “overall darkness” of the book.
Therefore, it is my opinion that darkness in this book is not brought in by a single defined dark entity but by a collection of dark subjects, situations, places and people which together form the Congo. [...].
Overall, I agree with Luke's comments about the darkness in the book connected to the absurdity present and Marlow's passivity thus far.
ReplyDeleteFirst, regarding this passivity in Marlow's tone and actions, which the darkness appears to emphasize: he is indeed passive, but why? Sure, there is not much he can do in the Congo, especially because his wellbeing and safety rely on other people and factors that he cannot control. But he is the captain of the steamer, and even before he boards his ship time seems to fly by without any action. During this time, Marlow obsesses over Kurtz and finding Kurtz, as shown in Luke's quote from page 32. As this is his main preoccupation, passivity becomes king in his mind, which leads me to the point about absurdity.
Despite everything else we have seen and experienced with Marlow up to this point, perhaps this obsession with the "miraculous man" is the most absurd of all. Marlow was right when he said that he thought he was becoming "scientifically interesting": this is the darkness (as we discussed earlier today) of the book. The heart of darkness. It is the very essence of the transition between sanity and madness that Marlow appears to be experiencing, as well as his fellow sailors, as shown by the sudden reaction of the helmsman during the raid. Luke says that the darkness is present in almost every element in the text, from simple matters or objects such as the wool, to more symbolic elements such as the blackness and the darkness of Kurtz's oil painting. This composes the picture of darkness that we the audience see when we read Conrad's novel, and in agreeing with Luke, I must also raise another point which he (and undoubtedly some of you) could or couldn't agree with: although elements make of the dark matter of the story, so does Marlow. And I count Marlow as a composition of different elements such as consciousness, a representative of the passive white man...He creates the darkness, in my opinion, and the elements merely compliment this darkness. Firstly, it is his story, and he is more than able to add notions pertaining to darkness a the time of the narrative. Secondly, the audience is in Marlow's mind, and therefore the world can go on spinning exactly the way it forever but Marlow can twist the spin into something more complex related to his emotions at the time - I'm thinking of obsession and insanity of course.
As such, I suppose it is safe to say that I agree with the points Luke made in his reader's response, though I initially had other interpretations of the elements he discussed.