French Man of War
Marlow comes upon the French man-of-war when he is still on the coasts of Africa and has not yet reached the first station. This ship was considered the most powerful type of armed ship from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century. Its presence in "the empty immensity of the earth, sky, and water" (p.16) is thus a contradiction to its usual activity: the contrast between the object within the landscape creates an antithesis through imagery. It is clearly not in its rightful place and has no true reason to be here. Beyond the comical appearance of this odd situation, there lies a darker message about the role of Europe within Africa. The "incomprehensible" feeling that emanates from Marlow when discovering the ship reflects how profoundly disturbing its action really is. It fires bullets in an empty land, deranging everything around, yet "nothing happened". It perseveres in a fruitless and cruel enterprise, which only consists of destroying its surroundings. The men claim that its goal is to kill the "enemies" that are hidden somewhere; yet there is no proper evidence of their guilt. This man of war is the symbol of the Europeans' exaggerated parasitical power within the African continent, desiring to control every part of the land using the tool of destruction. However, "nothing could happen": in the end, no matter how much power they appear to have, their bullets never reach the natives. They may have colonized the land, but the essence and culture of the people remains untouched.
Like Laure-Abeille, I have analyzed the French Man of War. I feel that it is true that this « French Man of War » gives us a message about the role of Europe in Africa but, there is also a more general image here. The boat’s destructive power can be compared to colonialism or imperialism. In fact, colonizers, to Marlow, appear as violent, brutal and he doesn’t understand their actions; this is also the case here with this war ship. Moreover, I feel that the ship’s firing in the forest not only shows a disturbing action but also represents the unknown. The “French Men-of –war” fires in the empty forest because it is unknown; it is almost like they are taking a precaution against the “enemies”. Finally, I think that “nothing could happen”, tells us that this “stupid” action cannot reach the native. But, on the contrary, I think it reaches the essence and culture of the people. On a “physical” point of view, the natives remain untouched but “mentally”, this “French man-of-war” has a strong impact as it may create terror and hence influence the natives in both their point of views and prevent them from fully expressing their culture through freedom.
ReplyDeleteHaving also appreciated the "French man-o-war" passage of Marlow's narrative, I have tried to extract the meaning of its presence and actions in my own reader response. However, despite having analysed the same aspects of its own irrationality as analysed here by Laure-Abeille, I found it to be not a symbol of the colonizers for say. Instead, I saw the ship rather as a symbol of the feverish madness which seems to render men "scientifically interesting" in the Congo. Indeed, I attributed the thought of this comparatively tiny ship thinking itself capable of taking on the impassive continent to the same madness that led Fresleven to beat a village chief over two hens. In the same way, the fever killing the man-o-war's crew is a literal representation and maybe even cause of this madness.Of course, I do not disagree with Laure-Abeille's well argued point as I believe that both points of view can be applied.
ReplyDelete