"His mother was half-English, his father was half-French. All
Europe contributed to the making of Kurtz, and by and by I learned that
most appropriately the International Society for the Suppression of
Savage Customs had entrusted him with the making of a report for its
future guidance"(49).
"The thing was to know what he belonged to, how many powers of
darkness claimed him for their own. That was the reflection that made
you creepy all over. It was impossible to imagine—it was not good for
one either—trying to imagine. He had taken a high seat amongst the
devils of the land—l mean literally. You can't understand? How could
you—with solid pavement under your feet, surrounded by kind neighbors
ready to cheer you or to fall om you, stepping delicately between the
butcher and the policeman, in the holy terror of scandal and gallows and
lunatic asylums—how can you imagine what particular region of the first
ages a man's untrammelled feet may take him into by way of
solitude—utter solitude without a policeman—by the way of silence—utter
silence, where no warning voice of a kind neighbour can be heard
whispering of public opinion. These little things make all the great
difference." (49-50)
"Seventeen pages of close writing. He had found time for it. But this must have been before his—let us say—nerves went wrong and caused him to preside at certain midnight dances ending with unspeakable rites, which–as far as I reluctantly gathered from what I heard at various times—were offered up to him—do you understand—to Mr. Kurtz himself" (50).
"'Exterminate all the brutes!'" (50).
We're close. We see Kurtz's house surrounded by "a dozen slim posts...ornamented with round carved balls" (52). We meet a wildly garbed "harlequin" who reveals that Kurtz "has enlarged [his] mind" (54). We've read some of what Kurtz has written. We know his lineage. All we have left is to see him in the flesh.
1.
As we talked about the first day of discussing the book, we recognized that it is an adventure tale—a genre that includes
Indiana Jones, as well as a zillion Kipling stories and bad, grade Z
Hollywood and Brit movies of the 30s and 40s (by the 50s they were
pretty much dead, unless it was George Lucas reliving his childhood
movie watching habits in the Indiana Jones series: and who can complain
when the bad guys are Nazis?). The story, as we said in class, is the
intrepid adventurer goes into the wild and makes things right. While not
a parody in the way Voltaire approached the picaresque, this is a
warped adventure story. How so—and to what purpose?
2. The significance of Kurtz's lineage, as quoted above?
3. What is Marlow trying to impress on his listeners in the second quote above? Quote a couple times from the passage.
Tomorrow I want to hear about your discussion in class yesterday. I hope you all are doing well: juniors, survived the PSAT and seniors...well, survived sleeping late I assume. See you folks tomorrow.
1. The adventure tale is warped because usually the adventurer had a set purpose, and that purpose is related to doing good. In this book, Marlow is on an adventure, but his only purpose is to find a man he knows little about (until recently). There is no sign that the work (if you could call it that) he is doing is helping anybody, or that it has any end goal. The most obvious purpose of this lack of a goal is to show the flaws in colonialism. Just as this adventure is not actually helping anybody and seems to be pointless in a certain way, colonialism does not appear to actually be helping anyone and the only point of it is to give money and power to Europeans.
ReplyDelete2. Kurtz is half French and half English which are two of the most major powers in Europe. From what we hear, Kurtz is capitalizing on colonialism quite a bit. He seems to have no appreciation for the Africans who work for him. All these factors make Kurtz a good symbol of the civilized people of Europe. He could be used to represent the European power or the perspective of Europeans being the 'superior' and 'civilized' beings.
3. I think Marlow is trying to explain how solitude can change a man significantly and make him do terrible things or at least things that differ from conventions of society. When he says, "You can't understand? How could you--with solid pavement under your feet, surrounded by kind neighbors ready to cheer you or to fall on you" he is explaining all the little things in life that keep someone in line. Pavement, neighbors, police, and asylums all keep members of society from doing certain thing and from acting in certain ways. The norms of society keep your mind focused on specific topics. Then Marlow explains that as people living in civilization, his listeners can't understand " what particular region of the first ages a man's untrammeled feet may take him into by way of solitude". I think he is saying that once you are alone and away from civilization, you start to think differently. You are less restricted by the "little things" in civilization that keep you in line. That solitude can allow " powers of darkness" to infiltrate your mind and change you.
1. This adventure story is warped in that the hero is aware of how futile his adventure is and of the fact that he shouldn’t even be there. Though Marlow was optimistic and idealistic initially, as most heroes are, this quickly fades when he arrives and witnesses the “objectless blasting” taking place and the “men strolling aimlessly about in the sunshine of the yard.” From this point forward, I think that Marlow stops romanticising his journey and sees his coworkers as the profit-making pansies they are. The only person on whom Marlow still projects his dream of rugged manliness and exploration is Kurtz, and even that is short-lived. Additionally, the classic adventure story is a story of conquest, of the hero taking what is rightfully his. This sense of entitlement to that which he conquers is missing in Marlow, who remarks at the beginning of the book that “a queer feeling came to me that I was an imposter.” Marlow later ridicules Kurtz’s notion that he owns nature and is the rightful possessor of all of his ivory, showing that Marlow is skeptical of this entitlement.
ReplyDelete2. I think the significance of this lineage is the Kurtz is representative of all of Europe, and so his sense of superiority and entitlement isn’t limited to one country, if that makes any sense. He doesn’t just symbolize the predation of one nation, but of europe at large, which makes the significance of his actions that much more amplified. It’s interesting to me that Marlow only accounts for half of Kurtz’s total ancestry, as though the rest is insignificant. I suppose that, compared to other european countries, England and France were the most powerful nations, so maybe Marlow feels that any other countries that went into Kurtz’s heritage weren’t worth mentioning.
3. I believe that Marlow is trying to impress upon his listeners both the absurdity of our notion of ownership and the extent to which the listeners have been sheltered by society. Immediately before this quote, Marlow describes Kurtz’s habit of referring to everything around him as his. This claim makes Marlow “hold my breath in expectation of hearing the wilderness burst into a prodigious peal of laughter.” Marlow then applies Kurtz’s reasoning to a larger scale and wonders who or what claims to own him as Kurtz claims to own nature, “how many powers of darkness claimed him for their own.” Marlow then goes on to try to impress upon his listeners the difficulty of existing apart from society and operating with no structure or authority to fall back on. He describes the challenge of making one’s own moral code in the wilderness, “where no warning voice of a kind neighbour can be heard whispering of public opinions.”
1. I generally think of adventure stories as quick, light reads, which Heart of Darkness certainly is not. Adventure stories involve a hero attempting to do good in the world, to achieve something that will benefit the protagonists, the ‘good guys’. Usually the narrator is the one affecting change in their society. Perhaps this story is warped because one of the perspectives through which we view the story (Marlow’s) is one that Conrad wants to change. As Mira says, the work Marlow and his companions are doing is not good; the point Conrad is trying to get across is one he is trying to get his main character, perhaps the ‘protagonist’ (in addition to the audience) to understand. It is not something that his main character understands from the beginning (at least in the way the story is being told).
ReplyDelete2. Kurtz’s lineage seems to supply him with a sense of entitlement, and supplies people like Marlow (people who believe Europe to be doing good by colonizing Africa) with a reason to trust him. Perhaps a rich background is supposed to render Kurtz as experienced and worldly, as all the more prepared to take on the job requested of him.
3. I think Marlow is nudging his audience to think about relying on oneself versus relying on others. It seems Marlow appreciates the importance of independence as it relates to solitude: “When they are gone you must fall back upon your own innate strength, upon your own capacity for faithfulness” (49). And he insinuates that the members of his audience perhaps do not understand true solitude and therefore have not learned independence and complete self-reliance: “how can you imagine what particular region of the first ages a man’s untrammelled feet may take him into by the way of solitude – utter solitude without a policeman – by the way of silence – utter silence, where no warning voice of a kind neighbour may be heard whispering of public opinion” (49). I think Marlow also wants his readers to think about belonging: “The thing was to know what he belonged to, how many powers of darkness claimed him for their own” (48). Perhaps Marlow thinks that if one belongs to someone or something, they cannot be in solitude (as he might be claiming with Kurtz) and so his audience members must realize who or what they belong to, whether it is the strict confines of English society, or the city, or England. My answer to this question (which revolves around independence, solitude, and belonging) also reminds me of Nell referring to this book as a coming of age story.
1. I think that this adventure story is a warped one because there is no purpose, no meaning, in his journey. Marlow does not know why he is in Africa, really. He has some vague sense of a righteous cause, a bettering of the uncivilized African people, but he is really just there to make money. His is a selfish mission, like all the Europeans we have encountered in this book. The reader (or at least I, as a reader) is not rooting for Marlow. He is just taking, mooching off of the Africans, enslaving them to work for him and not even feeding them. The way he tells this story, he is a passive member of a larger group, but in reality he has power, the power to do good, and he does not use it.
ReplyDelete2. I think that Kurtz represents Europe as a whole. He—Europe—conquers Africa, colonizes peoples who were previously free. Kurtz is glorified in this story just as Europe is glorified by colonists. England and France took the vast majority of Africa, so his being half English and half French shows that he is a manifestation of colonialism.
3. The men on the yacht with Marlow have not been to Africa. They cannot know the horrors he has seen. They “can’t understand” what it is like. They live sheltered lives, protected by policemen, surrounded by neighbors. They are insulated from brutality. A big theme running through this book is silence, the oppressiveness of silence. In the jungle, in the heart of darkness, Marlow feels how loud the silence is, feels how alone he is. There is no “public opinion” in the wilderness. Others’ opinions do not matter, status does not matter, class and wealth do not matter. It is humans and nature and survival. The “powers of darkness” can overwhelm a human, a human alone without the cushy protections of civilized society.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. It is an adventure story, but not a very happy one. There aren’t any victories - we’ve had plenty of activity, but nothing that could be described as joyful. In Candide the classic “once upon a time” beginning set us up for a cheerful story with a neat conclusion, and surprised us with neither. The result is a provoking lack of satisfaction because we anticipated one thing and got another, so we are forced to further consider the story we got. Here we anticipate an adventure in a foreign land - a blank space on the map. Marlow settles down with his (assumed) friends on a yacht to tell them about the time he went up a river in a far away land, and generally such stories are filled with glory and curious findings. Instead we have slavery, insanity, starvation, and blood-soaked socks. That’s not particularly glorious - in fact, it’s outright disturbing. "What sort of adventure is this?!” horrified readers think - and THAT’S the purpose. This was set up as an adventure to highlight how very NOT glorious it is. Conquest is an ugly, horrid thing, and England is no different from the empires of old who just happened to be strong because everyone else was weaker.
ReplyDelete2. Kurtz’s lineage makes him a sort of every-man: he is a european, he is Europe. This makes it so that readers in Europe, no matter their country, feel that they may have some sort of investment in the great and mysterious Kurtz. His behavior and personality will thus represent the behaviors and attitudes of the countries themselves. Kurtz was “most appropriately”(49) trusted to write a report intended to guide the “International Society for the Suppression of Savage Customs”(49) - Kurtz is expected to guide the oppression of Native customs, and it is a matter of PRESTIGE. Combine this with the absurdity of the Europeans we have encountered thus far, and it seems that Conrad is displaying a rather unfavorable view of Europe’s invasion of Africa. It is because of his varied lineage that I believe Kurtz will represent Europe, or “any” european, and through his actions and words be used to level accusations against or support the popular opinions of the countries he represents.
3. Marlow wants to impress upon his listeners that there are “powers of darkness,”(49) that control people, and that often the only thing standing between a person and that influence is a neighbor and some pride. In solitude people can be very different. “Fresleven […] thought himself wronged somehow […] so he went ashore and started to hammer the chief of the village with a stick. Oh, it didn’t surprise me in the least to hear this and at the same time to be told that Fresleven was the gentlest, quietest creature that ever walked on two legs.”(9) When in Africa, Englishmen can become brutes, civilized men do bad things, and (perhaps the most grave part of the message) the listeners themselves would be no different if the people around them did not stop them. One’s own civilization - that is, the people, structures, and standards around them, tell them how they should behave. “These little things make all the great difference.”(49) Thus if you are isolated from your neighbors and their opinions of you, your pride does not suffer should you eschew common sense and accepted behaviors. Perhaps the most frightening thing that Conrad is saying is that it is not only a single dark power that controls people, but many, as he wonders “[…] what [Kurtz] belonged to, how many powers of darkness claimed him for their own. That was the reflection that made you creepy all over"(48). Many powers are at work here, and they express themselves through human beings. Civilization is the only thing standing between people and the darkness they are capable of.
Marlow's story is a warped adventure story insomuch that instead of having Marlow act as a bold, intrepid explorer who has set off to conquer the jungle, Marlow seems to be always on the defense, lest the dark, pernicious wilderness conquer him. Marlow isn't sharing his story to boast of what he has accomplished, but rather it seems as though he is trying to convey some vague counsel to his shipmates.
ReplyDeleteThe significance of Kurtz's is that he embodies Europe, and by extension, European colonialism. Both countries of his nationalities have colonized the majority of Africa, do its only fitting that he follows their path and set up in the heart of Africa. Even his two philosophies, as written, reflect two of the largest European doctrines concerning treatment of the natives. The first of these doctrines is that of enlightenment and benevolent rule: “We can exert a power for good practically unbounded.” The second of these doctrines was to kill off the natives to make room for white settlers, reflected by Kurtz's scribble at the end of his paper: “Kill the brutes!” Kurtz reflects the deep extent, both physically and intellectually, that Europe has penetrated into the continent.
Marlow is trying to impress how the wild, the uncivilized places of the Earth can easily undo one's civility, and that one cannot expect to retain one's manners, much less impose them, in the wild. Marlow describes before that the wilderness had “taken [Kurtz], loved him, embraced him, got into his veins, consumed his flesh, and sealed his soul to its own by the inconceivable ceremonies of some devilish initiation.” Here, this “devilish” wild seems to take over one's person, stripping them of his attachment to civilization.
1. In most adventure stories, the adventurer is usually heroic, or at least someone who is trying to be heroic. In no way is Marlow a hero. Another important aspect of adventure stories that is lacking in Heart of Darkness is Marlow’s complete lack of enjoyment of this “adventure.” In most adventure stories the protagonist enjoys meeting an amazing person, or has a good meal or gets some sort of satisfaction at some point during their journey. Even if the adventure itself is not enjoyable, the protagonist usually feels satisfaction after the adventure ends because they are fighting for something and probably ended up accomplishing what they were fighting for. Marlow has not experienced anything that has caused him to feel much satisfaction during his journey. Additionally, Heart of Darkness focuses intensely on the suffering of people who are not the protagonist and I don’t think this is common in adventure stories.
ReplyDelete2. I think Kurtz’s mixed European lineage is Conrad saying that the horrors of European colonization are not the fault of one European nation, and that all the colonial powers in Europe treat their subjects in colonies poorly. The British person reading Heart of Darkness can’t blame Kurtz’s treatment of the Africans on his nationality. Conrad is forcing his readers to think about European colonialism as a whole, without looking at specific nations.
3. Marlow is trying to get his listeners to understand that they don’t know what if feels like to be consumed by the darkness. “It was impossible to imagine—it was not good for one either—trying to imagine.” According to Marlow, it is best if we try not to think about this darkness which I think comes from within. Instead it is best to focus on the things that these rich Londoners probably take for granted like the “solid pavement under your feet.” It is these little things that are what separates a person from the darkness.
1. This story is warped because usually there's a goal to be met in the end and we judge the character's actions based on their actions at getting towards the goal. But in this story it's hard to decipher why Marlow is even out there with all those people. He even questions his own motives after talking about how Kurtz is gone and how he'd literally been chasing him to listen to what he had to say. He says, "I had been striving after something altogether without a substance," (47) after demeaning himself dissapointed and realizing that he'd traveled all that way just to have a conversation. This story is warped because the adventure is within looking for some kind of meaning or understanding of what's going on so that he can absorb the knowledge and then continue on his search for more. But usually in adventure strories, a meaning has already been established that would guide the characters in their search for whatever goal had been set. Marlow has nothing to really guide him and he's basically just wandering around.
ReplyDelete2. I think the significance of Kurtz is the difference of his views and motives among other colonists. He almost represents colonization in a way in how glorified he is while many people don't even really understand why they're looking up to and following this man. He is valued so highly but none of them really have a solid understanding as to why. I think Kurtz just has a very clear and explicit view of things which I think is one of the reasons he's so attractive to so many and is why he's viewed as doing something slightly different from everyone else, because he's really not, he's just very firm in his beliefs and decisions.
3. I think Marlow is speaking to the glorification again and this feeling of false ownership we develop once finding something we're partiuclarily drawn to. He talks about how "disgusted" (47) he was at being so consumed with the thought of talking with Kurtz and how it's literally driven him to travel for a man that's not even going to be there when they arrive. Later in that same paragraph he tries to assign some sort of meaning to Kurtz which I think is his way of dealing with the dissapointment and deciphering what Kurtz really values, but this in some aspects is harmful because he's assigning things to a man he's doesn't really know and doing this is only sort of quieting his drive towards finding a meaning. I think this false ownership is also a result of isolation or the "darkness" taking over because being within your own mind for so long causes you to put things together that might not actually go together, but for the sake of survival you assign meaning as a way of understanding things and not driving yourself crazy with the thought of the unknown.
1. In the typical adventure story, we have our hero and are able to cheer for them and the effects they have on the people around them. Here, however, Marlow is not someone whose actions and are easily discernable as being either right or wrong. The reason for this, I believe, is that Marlow himself hasn’t decided what to make of this world or the world he left behind, the one that is becoming increasingly less black and white with its warped encouragement of the dehumanizing treatment of native people. Marlow, despite his efforts to not think, is fighting himself over the justification his queen and those around him offer for their characteristically barbaric actions. We see him question his “pilgrims” cruelty, yet he himself does nothing to rectify the situation; in fact, he enters into with his constant referral to his non-pilgrim crew as “cannibals”. With this, it does sort of seem as though he exists in this world, on this boat, with these people, without actually affecting them—something a hero always does. With this strange role he plays, the adventure he’s one becomes increasingly strange as well.
ReplyDelete2. I think Kurtz being both English and French gives us a physical representation of European imperialism. As Marlow becomes increasingly disenchanted with Kurtz, as I hope will be the case, he will also call into question the powers that sent him to the Congo, the people paying him to act as he does.
3. I think the idea Marlow is trying to make us consider is that while it may be easy to simply characterize these men, these barbarians, as evil is ignorant. We must find a way to understand what drives these men to take a step back on their humanity. They are trapped in the “utter solitude” (50) that accompanies an absence of “public opinion” (50). With laws to dictate the boundaries of their power nor governing body to see to it that there are laws, these men are left suddenly left alone with supreme power. Marlow is asking us to consider what this truly means for the strength of human character not to justify their behavior, but to give us perspective.
1. This is a wrapped adventure story because the adventurer, Marlow, doesn't really have a set purpose. He also isn't doing anything to help people where ever he goes. He instead realizes the injustice in what's happening to them and talks about it in the future. Its fair to say that not all adventure stories have to have a clear goal or acts of heroism and instead have enjoyment as the main aspect, but as Jake said, Marlow doesn't seem to be enjoying it. It's almost like the purpose of his adventure is to go on an adventure and maybe at the end he'll find some meaning to everything he's seen.
ReplyDelete2. I think Kurtz represents Europe because of his mixed European heritage. It gives most readers a connection to Kurtz. This, like Jake said, makes it hard for any European to dismiss the cruel and inhumane treatment of Africans. They can't blame it on another country because it's plain and clear, with Kurtz as the concrete example, that most European countries were in someway involved.
3. I think Marlow is trying to make the listeners understand that they could never understand what solitude does to a person. They will never truly be alone because their surrounded by “kind neighbors” who can help them. Solitude “make[s] all the great difference”; suffering is one thing but suffering on ones own is a whole lot worse because the silence closes in on you. And not only will they never experience it, the can't and shouldn't because it's “not good for one either”. The darkness is best left alone and it is easier to do with the seemingly small luxuries of London (or Europe).
1. Viewing Marlow as the adventurer, he is off to shed light in the darkness, right the wrongs of the wild, and bring civilization to an uncivilized world. However, Marlow hopes to hear whatever he can learn from a man whose words he describes as "the pulsating stream of light or the deceitful flow from the heart of an impenetrable darkness" (47), a man who has turned his back on the same civilization from which Marlow comes to become a pagan god. This is far from the standard adventure story. The adventurer goes out to teach, not to learn. And yet here we have him learning from a part of the darkness. Indeed, he begins his story by saying that it threw "a kind of light on everything" (7). Instead of having an answer or a witty response ready for everything, Marlow constantly trails off.
ReplyDelete2. As we hear, "All Europe contributed to the making of Kurtz" (49). He is the best Europe has to offer. His deeds aren't just representative of a nation, as those of the Swede and the Russian are. He is a unique product of a variety of European "civilized" nations. Thus, Kurtz is an ideal representative of all Europe. An ideal emissary.
3. Marlow is pointing out that what happened to Kurtz in the jungle is the product of having a solitary man in a position of power. Everything that Kurtz did was a result of his own humanity. Human nature is such that when he leaves behind the structure that reminded him of right and wrong, this is what Kurtz does. There are other people in the jungle who affect this decision, but largely Marlow believes that this is more what naturally happened than what Kurtz was forced into. European society works by constantly reminding everyone involved of its own views of morality. Whenever one might let go of these there's someone else to push them back into the conventional view. When Kurtz leaves this, he loses track of that and redefines his own morality. A morality in which what he says is what is right. This goes to the point where he actually deifies himself and is offered sacrifices. Marlow wants to remind everyone listening of the humanity of this decision.
1. This adventure is warped because unlike other heroes of adventure stories who have some central goal, like to find treasure or to conquer a foreign land, Marlow quickly becomes disillusioned with European imperialism. The expectation Marlow has of an exciting expedition down a remote river, a display of rugged individualism turns out to be a cold money-making scheme totally without romanticism. Without the romantic search for something, Marlow has nothing to guide him through his journey, besides his hope that Kurtz will embody the rugged individualism she desired. Instead he just wanders aimlessly, with no clear ending to the plot in sight.
ReplyDelete2. I think this means that Kurtz symbolizes European imperialism as a whole; his clear link to the royal families of Europe means he is directly tied to the aristocracy that is currently exploiting Africa. Kurtz's lineage is linked to how, like colonialism, he is glorified. If this is true, as we meet Kurtz we will discover his is not the romantic hero that Marlow hoped for.
3. Marlow is trying to impress the illusory nature of society onto his listeners. The listeners on the yacht have been protected from the darkness for their entire lives, living a privileged lifestyle in upper-class England. Marlow, by critiquing Kurtz' belief that he can own nature and showing the widespread nature of suffering "asylums," "butcher," etc. Marlow makes it clear that the power is reversed and the "darkness controls," not the people.
1) This tale is missing some of the core components of a common adventure. There is no suspense or tension. While reading this story, I'm not constantly thinking “what is going to happen next,” and there's a lot that contributes to this. First, we’re being told the story in the present by Marlow himself, so we already know ultimately everything turns out fine for him. Considering he's a European In a colonized Africa, it would've been hard for things to go terribly wrong anyways. I am not worried for Marlow at any point in this story. Also, this is not an action oriented story. Its only an adventure in the sense that Marlow is going from one place to the next, but it's mostly him just walking around giving vivid descriptions of things. The most “adventure like” thing !allow has done is traverse a difficult River on a near-dead steamboat. But like I said before, there is no suspense in this.
ReplyDelete2) I think Conrad is trying to use Kurtz as a representation of where he's from – Europe. It would be even more obvious if Kurtz had heritage in even more European countries, but France and England were enough. Matter of fact, he may have other European countries in his heritage, because France and England only account for half. I'm curious what his other half is made up of. I think it also ties back to Marlow’s original comments on Europe’s colonization of Africa in contrast to Roman’s imperialism (which included French and British land).
3) I feel like this is Kurtz ultimate criticism of the work being done in Africa. Kurtz, a very powerful person, has essentially claimed the land and everything around, or at least that's what we get from the way he speaks. Marlow criticizes this, and in turn the entire company, saying “He had taken a high seat amongst the devils of the land…” The use of “devil” holds even more weight and magnitude considering Christianity is a core element that Europenas try to bring into the “heart of the darkness.” Marlow, who on his trip in the steamboat was constantly swallowed by the land and jungle, thinks it's absurd that he could claim this land, wondering “how many powers of darkness claimed him for their own.”