 |
| Pyrrus |
I felt that the company didn’t perceive Kurtz as an equal human being given his “transformations” from living on the African continent. They feel he is some sort of hybrid between the indigenous “savages” and them, no longer a concrete human being. This image is redoubled when we meet Kurtz and he is dehumanized by his sickness, forced to crawl around on 4 legs and can barely speak. Marlow treats him as an infirm, inferior to him. However, despite the fact that Marlow seems to hate Kurtz and feels betrayed by his past conception and by Kurtz’s “unsound” methods of educating and imposing colonization upon the natives, he takes his side when Kurtz is finally confronted by the company’s manager, who finds Kurtz unfit for his duty, based on his “unique” way of governing. Marlow feels disgust and has to choose between two wrongs: supporting the brutal, heartless Kurtz or supporting the hypocritical manager.
In my opinion, Marlow chose to stay with Kurtz because he believed it was the managers fault that Kurtz became the way he became. The managers naïveté, and his unwillingness to see the ineffectiveness or cruelty of his colonizing methods was far worse than Kurtz simply trying to complete the mission he set out to complete by any means. Kurtz is more enlightened than the manager, and has some of conception of Africa, since he has been so changed by it. It is evident that he realizes the stupidity and madness of any attempt to colonize Africa when he claims “the horror! The horror!” right before he dies. For me, this means that Kurtz understands to what point it is impossible to continue to hope that one day Europeans will manage to tame the “wild” Africa. Perhaps it’s the horror at his own futility, or the horror at the naivete of his commanders in Europe, I don’t know for sure.
This last part is also full of action. As the steamer departs after the jungle experience with Kurtz, it seems that Kurtz may still reach the end of the river and maybe come back to Europe to see his “intended”. But, the boat breaks down once again which takes a lot of time to repair. This has both and effect on Kurtz who dies before they repair the ship but also on Marlow who almost dies. Marlow is now in a bad state both physically and mentally. We can see that the expedition as a whole has weakened him physically. He has done many repairs and natives have attacked him. Mentally, his state is even worse as he has seen two people die before him and he has seen the horrors that are taking place in the Congo. This has a really great effect on him as he is not totally sane. At the beginning of the novel, we knew that his trip would be hazardous and tragic but not really in this way: even if he returns home he will never be the same as he is traumatized by what has happened here.
What I also liked is the end of the book because it returns to the image of the “heart of darkness”; here it is seen through the color of the sky. As we look at the book as a whole we see that there were numerous hearts of darkness and not only a single one. The Company and Kurtz could seem as hearts of darkness as their philosophy was to destroy a civilization. Moreover, we can feel that Marlow, who was in the beginning a good sailor, has now become a terrible man. He doesn’t want to follow in Kurtz’s steps but it seems his vision of the world has turned all gray: he cannot really be happy anymore after what has happened to him.
I think that Marlow came a little too late to see the real Kurtz, the one who was showered with praise coming from other agents such as the chief accountant, the Russian trader who worked with him and was close to him. At the same time, Marlow was maybe expecting too much out of Kurtz after what he had heard; he thought he was going to meet a God-like figure. Since his hopes were very high, he was disappointed after seeing Kurtz but also showed some admiration towards him. Marlow also stated the “incredible degradation” of Kurtz, who had been sick and was dying. The latter was “not much heavier than a child” something Marlow stated as he was carrying him at a point in Part III. Kurtz was not the same as before; the wildlife clearly had taken over him as it had done with many other pilgrims. He was mad but still his conscience and intelligence. Maybe Kurtz was overrated and did not actually deserve all of this praise but I mostly think that he was a great man but had been transformed and became “scientifically interesting” after years passed in Congo. Other pilgrims who had seen Marlow with Kurtz were not impressed as they would have been had this been some time before. Marlow states that the “pilgrims looked upon me with disfavor”, something they firstly felt about Kurtz and now about Marlow because he was with Kurtz.
Kurtz was leading a double life at this point in my opinion as he was liked by some natives who did not want him to leave. They obeyed him; like for example when he ordered some to attack the steamship Marlow and the manager were on. He himself did not want to leave. His mistress was a native as well. On the other hand, Kurtz was still performing his duty towards the Company as the amount of ivory he had collected was still good.
Marlow makes clear that he believes Kurtz to have gone mad. Marlow states that Kurtz was “hollow at the core…”, on page 72. As he hears more and more about Kurtz through the Russian man, Marlow becomes disgusted, he shouts, “I don’t want to know anything of the ceremonies used when approaching Mr Kurtz” […] “Mr Kurtz was no idol of mine”, p.72-73. It is when Marlow sees Kurtz for the first time that we finally see him through criticizing eyes, for what he has truly become: “It was as though an animated image of death carved out of ivory had been shaking its hand with menaces at a motionless crowd of men made of dark and glittering bronze.”, page 74. Although this description is dark and horrible, it is so symbolic with him as death for he can kill who he wants, but he himself has died inside; for ivory is white like him, but also what he has become, what he wants, his reason to live, and because it is “old ivory”, it has lost its worth. Although Kurtz came to the Congo with good intentions, opposing to everybody else’s greed, he has become obsessed with ivory in his quest to prove himself to his fiancé’s parents. Marlow still does respect him, “I think Mr Kurtz is a respectable man”, but the manager answers him coldly, “He was”, page 77. Although Marlow seemed obsessed with Kurtz throughout his journey, I feel that thinking of him was a way of putting aside all the horrors happening around him, having a goal. However, Marlow is still confused about his feelings for Kurtz, sensing disgust as well as respect for him.
[Excerpt]
At this point in the novel, Marlow has reached the Inner station, and it seems as if the reader has reached the inner darkness of the Congo’s heart. Kurtz has become this powerful figure, admired by he natives, and distinguishes himself form the rest of the members of the company, taking Marlow along with him. We discover Kurtz has a lover, and Marlow seems to dive deeper and deeper in the nightmares of his journey.
[...]
Marlow still occupies the same ambiguous position like in the beginning of the novel when he was ironic at times, and not so much at other times. In the end, although he is obviously disturbed by his journey in the African continent, he has acquired something the other men had not been seeking when they decided to board on the Nellie: experience, almost wisdom. It seems as if Marlow has deeply changed, matured during his expedition. However, he still views the events that have occurred during the journey as justifiable, because he has reached a certain status by confronting such hardships. In fact, he feels elevated by his experience, and feels he can judge and excuse the horror and violence of colonialism, because the men that participate in this mission come out of it with something bigger than wealth. This notion is very controversial, and Conrad concludes by leaving us to think about this outrageous issue.
Firstly, Marlow describes with great detail the appearance of the “chain-gang”. The choice of words of Marlow paints a frightening and impressive portrait of the natives: “erect”, “criminals”, “outraged”, “violently”, “deathlike” (p.18). This creates a great contrast with Marlow: while they seem tall, strong, and dangerous, Marlow is alone, and seems much weaker; however, Marlow is not chained.
Moreover, the group is led by a white man: “ Behind this raw matter one of the reclaimed, the product of the new forces at work, strolled despondently, carrying a rifle by its middle.” Therefore, on top of the fist sentiment of indifference is added that of fear and incomprehension: Marlow seems unsympathetic of the bond that naturally exists between the white leader of the group and himself simply because of the color of his skin. Marlow emphasizes this with an ironic tone: “ After all, I also was a part of the great cause of these high and just proceedings.” (p.19). It is as if Marlow is automatically considered an ally because he is European, and is therefore expected to fully support the colonizing mission in the African continent.
Here's my response to Kurtz's words, "The horror! The horror!". I didn't write about what I said in class today...I didn't exactly have that opinion or think about that when writing...
“The horror! The horror!”
“The horror! The horror!” is the last phrase uttered by Kurtz before he dies. There can, of course, be several interpretations for why Kurtz says this before he dies. First, it could be that he senses his death approaching quite fast, and he says “The horror! The horror!” because he doesn’t want to die (which would be an obvious reason), or because he thinks of his life, how he went about his business, and he knows he’s being punished for havoc he caused in the
Secondly, this phrase could be a way to warn Marlow about what he has yet to experience: life after the
In the whole of the book, I think Kurtz represents the dark side in our selves that is admiring because our dark side is always in a way thrilling and appealing. There is a certain admiration that people feel for him even when they know he is highly capable of doing dark things. The harlequin is in complete admiration of Kurtz even though he threatened to kill him. Even Marlow who knows what Kurtz is capable of and has no boundaries, still thinks highly of Kurtz. When he talks about the “choice of nightmares” which represents either following the manager and the company or Kurtz, Marlow chooses to follow Kurtz because by choosing Kurtz, Marlow will be able to discover himself in the purpose of his life, just as Kurtz did in the forest since he was shown to be so attached and interdependent of it. Marlow also chooses to keep Kurtz story safe because the story deserves to be told in an honorable way.
In the end, when Marlow meets Kurtz fiancée to present her his letters, she equally shows a strong admiration from Kurtz. We also see that Marlow was indeed affected by Kurtz’s death because he was mad at himself for just having sat there eating while Kurtz was dying in the next cabin. I think when she asks Marlow what his last words, Marlow does not want to tell her the truth about his last words being “The horror! The horror!” and says Kurtz’s last word were her name, because he does not to stop the illusion that Kurtz was this amazing and admirable person. In reality Kurtz was not thinking about his fiancée but rather that he was leaving his home forever and that his home no longer resided in Europe.
What I first realized directly after reading these first two parts was the ambiguity of the character of Marlow. Marlow is a character that has travelled around the world, but I have no idea what his job entails, and I don’t know why he decides to embark on these trips, other than to satisfy his desire to fill out the blank spots on maps. Other than Marlow’s motive to travel, I’m drawn to Marlow’s view on colonization, which remains extremely ambiguous. I’m sure Marlow is a character who is critical of the way the Belgian Congo is run because of his repeated use of irony. Throughout the first part of the novel, Marlow relies heavily on showing the inefficiency of the way the colonies are run. The opposition of the colonizers to the vastness of the African continent is described in order to show the futility of dominating and colonizing efficiently the entire continent. When Marlow encounters the French battleship off the coast of Africa, he is surprised by their inefficiency. They hope to simply eliminate a small “enemy” village (savages) by destroying the entire environment surrounding them, and shooting blindly onto the African continent thought the hope of destroying a small village. The French warship is describe in a semi-humorous way, using the diction of small and insignificance, compared to the immensity of the African landscape stretched in front of it: “Pop, would go one of the eight-inch guns; a small flame would dart and vanish, a little white smoke would disappear, a tiny projectile would give a feeble screech- and nothing happened”. Through this, Marlow provides an indirect criticism of the ways of colonization. Its as if this small French vessel was fighting against the entire continent, hoping to destroy it. Marlow takes a more direct approach quickly after: “There was a touch of insanity in the proceeding, a sense of lugubrious drollery (…)”. Marlow remains critical of the process of colonization throughout this part, and the means by which colonization is carried out.
However, if Marlow is actually critical of colonization, he never offers any sort of alternative way of governing, or never puts into question the European presence in Africa in the first place. He talks indirectly about every thing he is critical of, and I’m not sure what side he is on. Personally, I don’t think Marlow is a fervent racist but he doesn’t take into account the effects of colonization on colonized people. For example, when he see’s the group of African prisoners chained together, and being guarded by another African, he feel’s uneasy. He is critical of the treatment of the African workers, when their masters beat for the slightest wrongs. However, Marlow is more concerned by the effects of Africa on the colonizers than the effects of the colonizers on Africa. Marlow hears the story of Freslevin, the man who held his position before him. He was always described as a tender man, yet he was “changed” by Africa, and died in a conflict with local people. In truth, Freslevin died because he killed a local villager over hens, and the local village revolted. Freslevin wasn’t as tender and gentle a person as one could have believed.
Marlow doesn’t explicitly show his emotions, but there is a sense that he is concerned and just doesn’t know how to deal with his emotions. He isn’t acting impressed like the other fellow there with him or showing that he is shocked in any way. The way the helmsman died “without uttering a sound, without moving a limb, without twitching a muscle” reveals to be unexpected for the two white men because they are just standing over him. It looks as If they are waiting for the helmsman to act in response. It is not until the helmsman frowns that Marlow reacts. Marlow is affected by this death in a strange way. He eagerly asks the other guy to steer the wheel with no other choice, so that he can take his shoes and socks off that are soaked in blood. In addition, Marlow adds “to tell you the truth”, which shows that he is conscience of affection towards this death. Marlow is trying to get rid of the thought of this death by eagerly trying to take his shoes off, “tugging like mad at the shoe-laces”. This reminded me of Lady Macbeth washing “the blood” off her hands to try to rub off her guilt , and here Marlow is trying very hard to forget what happened and lose all evidence of the death. The noun “mad” reveals how and concerned he was. This can also be a foreshadowing of what the journey is going to do to Marlow and how it will affect him in becoming somewhat “mad”.
Cannibals
The cannibals are natives who were hired by the whites to work on Marlow’s steamship that had just gotten repaired and which was sailing on a two month trip to get to Kurtz. Marlow was actually impressed by the good work of the natives, called cannibals by the whites, done on the steamer as well as their patience, resistance, their attitude; not till that point showing their animalistic character. What seemed to confuse Marlow about these natives was the fact that they were maybe normal and not inhuman. This should prove to be a further step in Marlow’s detachment from the colonists’ beliefs about the natives. Furthermore, Marlow not being on very good terms with the manager and the other Europeans, he could see, from a different and closer perspective, the work of the natives on the steamer, their alertness, despite being very hungry. Marlow showed some admiration towards them after taking a closer look as well as more respect. Moreover, there seems to be a contradiction, as when the steamship seemed to be attacked, it is actually the pilgrims who acted like savages and started shooting everywhere while, on the other hand, the cannibals remained calm and did not turn against the people on the ship but instead defended them, stood by them and did not resort to violence as the pilgrims did.
Ivory may usually be found on elephants, as it is the main component of their tusks. In effect, in Africa there are a lot of elephants and at the time this novel was written, the ivory was quite important. In the passage we have read, Marlow compares the ivory to a religion that the white people are worshiping. He describes the men as: “faithless pilgrims bewitched inside a rotten fence. (…) You would think they were
praying to it [Ivory].” In fact we can say that Ivory represents the white men’s desire to come to Africa and take everything precious they have, everything that has some value in Europe or elsewhere. It somewhat represents the avarice of the white men. I think Ivory is a strong symbol as for Marlow; it represents the God most men are worshipping at the Company. It may have another meaning later in the books as Ivory may have different signification or a stronger one than just the desire of wealth.
Marlow ironically criticizes the essence of the relation between European and African. The narrator does so by creating a indifferent tone, in order to accentuate the banal manner in which cruelty took place during the colonialist period. As seen at the start of the chapter, Fresleven, a Danish sailor brutally murders a native individual for a feeble cause. The notions implemented within the narration relate to white men having incited acts of non-justifiable violence, which in return contradict the principles of their initial mission. Indeed, in the passage, several black men are chained up, seen through the usage of the term “chain-gang”. The black man was considered essentially portrayed as the “nemesis”, however Marlow demonstrates his skeptical vision of the situation by valorizing, the illogical faculty of this political system: “These men could by no stretch of imagination be called enemies. They were called criminals”, an emphasis on the corruption of the presumed order is created, as Marlow realizes the violation of all forms of justice. Above all, the man in charge of the chain-gang is European as well, an image of the perversion of white men as well as the immoral complicity, due to illusions of dominance and power, between them. This passage epitomizes Marlow’s first realization of the existing relation between both opposing groups of individuals. He does so by firstly, criticizing and mocking the essence of the white man’s principle: “After all, I also was a part of the great cause of these high and just proceedings”, in this citation he discovers the hypocrisy of Europeans as well as his by simply being a part of the imperialistic movement as well. Secondly, Marlow dictates a strong contrast between two types of devils in the world: the devils of violence, greed, and hot desire are an image of the white man’s utter immoral presence on the African continent, in the illogical nature of his acts, his want yet impossible control over all objective elements, as well as his dark desire to attain in. However, the narrator opposes this satanic entity to the flabby devil, an individual, characterized as being blinded by illusions of higher principles. Concretely, Marlow implies that such an individual has no use over his reason; therefore he lives in his lost sense of humanity which intensifies the actual bestiality of his perverted mind. Marlow however characterizes himself as being in complete disdain, the psychological mutation within him is taking place.
A few reminders/developments for the upcoming week:As Marlow arrives to the First Station, we can already tell that the atmosphere is not pleasant, “an undersized railway-truck lying there on its back with its wheels in the air…the thing looked as dead as the carcass of some animal”. The railway-truck is used as a metaphor to describe the environment that Marlow is seeing, which are “dead animals”. The diction in this passage is negative and dark, “dark things, smoke, war, enemies, deathlike, devil, greed, violence, Inferno.” The way I imagine what Marlow is describing this place to be is an image of a hell-like place. He perceives the station to be this horrible place of violence and when he wants to get away from it by “going under the trees for shade” he realizes that he is in a place of no good. When Marlow encounters the six men, “they walked erect and slow, black rags were wound round their loins, I could see every rib, the joints of their limbs were like knots in a rope; each had an iron collar on his neck, and all were connected together with a chain”, it is revealed that they are treated like animals, chained together with iron collars around their neck. Marlow doesn’t understand how these people can be called enemies, when they are treated as criminals in their own country. These six men pass Marlow with “deathlike indifference of unhappy savages”, which suggests these men are treated like animals. In addition, we know that Marlow is completely horrified by what he sees because he says, “I’ve seen the devil of violence, greed and hot desire…But…” the conjunction “but” shows Marlow’s change in emotion and that this place is in fact the “heart of darkness” controlled by men with no morals. As Marlow is completely appalled with what he sees, he seeks a place to go away from all this nonsense and finds a hole and Marlow realizes that he has stepped into a “gloomy circle of some Inferno”.
Marlow’s aunt: Marlow talks about his aunt in the beginning of the novel, stating that it was her influence that led him to obtain this job; becoming skipper of a river steamboat. Marlow’s aunt had friends in the Company’s administration and thus used her connections to let her nephew Marlow obtain a job in the Company, after the death of one of the Company’s captains in Congo. It seemed like Marlow’s aunt loved him and wanted to do anything that would make him happy. Marlow shared that same feeling at first and was anxious to go to Congo, after being appointed quickly following Fresleven’s death and following the request made by his aunt. She doesn’t play a big role in the novel, except for the fact that she is the one who allowed and made possible for Marlow to be able to go on his adventure to Africa and meet Kurtz. Without her, it would have been harder for Marlow to have obtained this position and achieve his aspirations and there would have not been a story maybe, or at least things would have been very different and more complicated for him. Marlow’s aunt made matters easier for him, using her influence to get him a job.
Marlow changes a bit his opinion of his aunt when he goes to tell her goodbye and when she tells her nephew that hopefully he will help in civilizing the population of Congo except the fact that she used harsher words, making Marlow “uncomfortable” and labeling his aunt like women in general in Charles’ opinion as out of touch with truth. It is a bit of a critique as Marlow seems against Imperialism so his aunt’s words didn’t really make him happy. Marlow’s aunt also plays a motherly figure to him, worrying about him. She plays her role well as an aunt or a mother.
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. [...].
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.
Although Ann-Sophie has just posted her interpretation of the papier-maché Mephistopheles, I too wanted to contribute my take on the comparison.
The papier maché Mephistopheles is an interesting comparison. The allusion is to the legend about the damnation of Faust, where Faust is a character who trades his soul to devil in exchange for limitless knowledge. Faust's pact is an act of ignorance, especially in its irony in which Faust was actually seeking more knowledge. Mephistopheles in the legend is a messenger or representative of the devil who meets with Faust to seal the pact, and serves his end of the bargain for 24 years. Also, papier maché is a material that can be molded and hardens when dry. In this case it seems that the so-called Mephistopheles is a manipulated character who then will serve the same purpose as the Mephistopheles as the one in the old German legend. The scene that Marlow describes evidently makes him out to be Faust and the other man (I forgot who he is) is Mephistopheles. Marlow had said before on page 25 "I fancy I see it now." The note talks about some kind of plot to eliminate Kurtz, who was next in line to become manager of the Station. Marlow apparently feels himself being dragged into this so-called plot as Faust.
The papier-mâché Mephistopheles
The papier-mâché Mephistopheles is the name Marlow gives the brick-maker of the Central Station. He, at first glance, appears to be a kind soul, but it doesn’t take long for Marlow to discover that he isn’t: he is a “devil”, more than an enabler or the grim-reaper, but less than Lucifer (who, I anticipate, is Mr. Kurtz himself). This is therefore the second level of the “Inferno”. He is in papier-mâché because he is not real, though he could very well be: he is not really Mephistopheles, merely because he wants to be wants to be this type of character. They have the same traits but the difference between them is that the actual character of Mephistopheles is not discovered, whereas Marlow perceptively calls the brick-maker out in his mind, though the latter is very stealthy and smug in his position of power. Furthermore, Marlow claims:
“[…] and it seemed to me that if I tried I could poke my forefinger
through him, and find nothing inside but a little loose dirt, maybe.” (31)
The brick-maker therefore not only has an agenda, but is not even “pure” enough to be entirely composed of dirt. In terms of substance, purity (that is, complete dedication of a specific ideal, for instance), and allegiance, he has nothing to offer. He is made of “a little loose dirt” not only because he is “dirt”, but because his existence is not even worth being in possession of a lot of it. The papier-mâché Mephistopheles is but a shell. His role is, not to corrupt white men who enter the Congo, but to further their corruption, for he sees it in their souls (the proof is that they are physically on the continent in search for glory, money, and such): he pushes them to accept the horrid conditions in the Congo for his benefit and to assert his influence on incoming men.
