Directions: Choose a passage from the text that WE HAVE NOT discussed in class. Type or cut and paste the passage. Then, discuss what you notice in the passage (consult the analysis sheet to remind you you), and then explain the significance you see in the passage.
You can comment on each others' analysis, and use the comments to help each other with the passages that you are working on.
p. 50-51: “I missed my late helmsman awfully… affirmed in a supreme moment.”
ReplyDeleteMuch of the word choice shows shows that Marlow looks down on blacks and sees them as inhumane. The portrayal of the helmsman using words such as a savage, no more account than a grain of sand in the black sahara, a help, and an instrument, exemplify how Marlow objectifies blacks. In the case of the helmsman, Marlow sees him as a mere tool he used to perform what he sees as his “job” during his trip in Africa, and his using the term “black” connects the idea to others of that color. Marlow further separates himself from blacks when he speaks of his connection to the helmsman and describes it as a “distant kinship” and a “subtle bond.” It seems as if Marlow is unwilling to fully admit the strong emotions he has for the dead seaman.
Marlow again objectifies the helmsman so that he becomes a one-dimensional tool, when he states, “Well, don’t you see, he had done something, he had steered.” By saying the helmsman did “something,” Marlow emphasizes how he believes the helmsman is there to serve function. Marlow precedes that statement by stating, “for months I had him at my back— a help—an instrument.” By saying “at my back,” Marlow’s word choice puts the helmsman at an inferior position, and portrays him as someone who works for Marlow. This creates a binary, as it contrasts against Marlow saying “It was a kind of partnership,” as the relationship is instead seen as not mutualistic, but overwhelmingly in favor of Marlow.
Another binary is created between the shallow image Marlow creates of the African and the “intimate profundity of that look he gave me.” There is a stark contrast between how Marlow’s earlier words create the image of the blacks and what he explicitly says about the helmsman.
Marlow makes an implicit idea explicit when he points out, “Perhaps you will think it passing strange this regret for a savage who was no more account than a grain of sand in a black Sahara.” He clearly points out that his main mindset is that blacks are insignificant, and that it is not normal to feel sympathy as one would towards a “human.” Later, he explains, “It was a kind of partnership. He steered for me—I had to look after him, I worried about his deficiencies.” While the helmsman does a simple job for Marlow—steering—Marlow believes that his own role is much larger, and claims responsibility for the Helmsman in entirety. He assumes that as an inferior being, the helmsman is in need of his care.
The passage appears to have a pattern, in which Marlow makes demeaning/racist comments about the helmsman, but follows by praising the helmsman and suggesting that he is valuable: “missed my late helmsman awfully… it passing strange this regret… I had him at my back… an instrument… It was a kind of partnership… his deficiencies… a subtle bond had been created… intimate profundity” This pattern shapes the structure of the passage, as it starts out with Marlow lamenting that his helmsman is gone. The shallow purpose he perceives in the helmsman is shown, and the passage then ends with him saying that this “distant kinship” was “affirmed in a supreme moment.”
Marlow’s narrative in the passage reveals his attitude towards blacks in general, through the words that he uses to describe his dead helmsman. It is significant because it gives an idea of the extent to which Marlow sees Africans as “human,” and where he draws the line to separate himself from them. On the outside, Marlow claims they are valuable and important, but he covertly expresses his condescending view towards Africans, how he sees them as one-dimensional beings that have a simple purpose and require his care.
“The word ‘ivory’ rang in the air, was whispered, was sighed. You would think they were praying to it. A taint of imbecile rapacity blew through it all, like a whiff from some corpse. By Jove! I’ve never seen anything so unreal in my life. And outside, the silent wilderness surrounding this cleared speck on the earth struck me as something great and invincible, like evil or truth, waiting patiently for the passing away of this fantastic invasion,” (Conrad 23).
ReplyDeleteThe passage begins with the mention of ivory, a motif of the novel. In contrast to the dehumanization of the natives, ivory is humanized by the employees of the inner station; it is given God-like qualities and deemed worthy of worship. There is a binary in the qualities of the ivory and the wilderness. The ivory is ringing through the air, but the wilderness is silent. Another binary appears in the last sentence–evil and truth. The diction used to describe the station consists of words with positive and Holy connotation. The inner station is described as ‘fantastic’ and ‘great’ and ‘invincible,’ but Marlow simultaneously recognizes that this has been a rapacious invasion.
To the men of the inner station ivory is a symbol of economic freedom and social advancement. In the novel it represents white colonial power and authority. Conversely, the wilderness is a symbol for the Congo natives. By saying it ‘rang in the air,’ Conrad is making reference to the fact that white men have a louder voice and heavier influence on the happening in the Congo than the natives who are forced to remain silent. Additionally, the connection formed between ivory, white men, and Truth, suggests that Marlow believes in the notion of the white man’s burden. He sees colonization as a Holy act. However, his claim that ‘imbecile rapacity blew through it all’ would suggest that he sees the immorality of it all. Overall, the inner station seems to leave Marlow confused and seeking answers; he struggles to see the Truth because he has painted this binary in his mind of right and wrong, but in reality they are shades of gray. Marlow is failing to see that there can be darkness inside of the white men’s hearts without discrediting everything he has believed in up to this point.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletep. 69-70 “However, as you see, I...remarkable man.”
ReplyDeleteHere Marlow reaches a perhaps ambiguous epiphany. He states that he did not physically join Kurtz in death, however, he reached the very edge of it through “Kurtz’s extremity” and thus, in a way, lived through death while emphasizing the non-physicality of it. Marlow knew he could not (for an unrevealed reason) come to the same moral summation Kurtz had and, for this, Marlow sought to honor Kurtz and continue the “nightmare” that is life-a “mysterious arrangement of merciless logic for a futile purpose.” There is a repetition in the passage both in saying he did not join Kurtz and that in doing so he was fulfilling some sort of destiny. Kurtz was, among many things, a human embodiment of civilization. (A stark contrast to that of the native women described earlier in the text who embodied nature). In Kurtz’s self-realization of not simply his own life but that of human depravity, Marlow comes to this epiphany of how humanity is in fact hopelessly incognizant of its corrupted psyche. Marlow can see no salvation and though he is, in some ways, a morally re-born Kurtz who has this ability to enlighten others, he does not do so: he knows there is no point in this as he believes that one cannot reach this enlightenment unless on the edge of death as he had been.
Marlow goes on to describe Kurtz’s stare which “could not see the flame of a candle but was wide enough to embrace the whole universe, piercing enough to penetrate all the hearts beating in darkness.” The candle metaphor is a representation of Kurtz as an individual, having been described in this way throughout the story, but now, on the edge of death, Kurtz was able to see beyond his own life. He no longer sees his individual self but is part of a whole-a transcendence. This mental becoming of the whole is also physical as Kurtz had become part of the wilderness (this having been described throughout the story). Death, in this passage, is personified: he “wrestles with” it as an opponent. The repetition of the word “without” underlines the feeling that death is lacking, lacking in everything Marlow thought it would be-some great resolution to the tribulations of life. The repetition indicates that the author is building toward an important insight-this being that ultimate wisdom is not reachable simply in death but is far more complex. He goes on to express physical matters in spiritual terms as a metaphor and there is indeed a strong binary between that of the physical and non-physical throughout the passage and the book. In death in Marlow states there is “nothing underfoot” and “with nothing around”. This emphasized lack of physicality in death suggests there is no black and white portrayal of right and wrong that Marlow had struggled with throughout the novel instead leaving only an impalpable greyness.
"It was unearthly and the men were...No they were not inhuman. Well, you know that was the worst of it-this suspicion of their not being inhuman. It would come slowly to one. They howled and leaped and spun and made horrid faces, but what thrilled you was just the thought of their humanity-like yours-the thought of your remote kinship with this wild and passionate uproar..." (Conrad 36).
ReplyDeleteIn this passage Marlow looks in strange wonder and horror at the natives. His uses the word "inhuman" on various occasions and compares the natives to the wild African jungle. Marlow also switches his narration from first person to second person. Marlow also does not try to make meaning out of the natives behavior and dismisses the whole situation by saying he must concentrate on steering the ship.
Marlow's switch to using you instead of I puts a distance in the situation between what Marlow saw and what it meant to him. Marlow entertains the idea that the Natives are human but he dismisses the idea. Marlow's inability to come to terms with the connection he feels to the natives and their strange ways demonstrates Marlow's inability to break completely away from the European Imperialistic ideology. Similar to scene earlier in the book where he gives a native in the pit a biscuit, Marlow comes close to breaking free from the idea that natives are savage but is unable to fully actualize the idea because Marlow struggles with what he sees and what he already believes.
A connection between two passages:
ReplyDelete"I always ask leave, in the interest of science, to measure the crania of those going out there,' he said. 'And when they come back too?' I asked. 'Oh I never see them,' he remarked, 'and, moreover the changes take place inside, you know (11).'
"But his soul was mad. Being alone in the wilderness, it had looked within itself and, by Heavens I tell you, it had gone mad (66)."
In these two passages there is a connection between how the wilderness of Africa psychologically altered and manipulated the white men who experienced Africa first hand. Even though Europe is believed to be civilized and a central safe haven, the adversity of Africa tapped into a sense that the white men could not apprehend. The uncivilized manner that dominates Africa is to be treated by the Europeans (White Man's Burden). But what they must 'treat’ in Kurtz's case was a "wilderness" that psychologically he couldn't handle. The journey from Europe to Africa, civilized to uncivilized, good to evil, is a journey which Kurtz longs for, but does not succeed. As Kurtz's journey starts his desire is to only obtain ivory, but as time prolongs his mind and goal deteriorates. As we come to know that Kurtz has lost his European civilized ways and has adopted a culture of the 'savages'. Falling to their ways of having his own “savage” mistress and putting decapitated heads on stakes. Which ultimately comes to Kurtz's demise when his final words are "The horror! The horror!" What the horror is we don't exactly know, but to speculate, it could be his failure to fulfill his goal of the White Man's Burden. And also the possibility of the horror that he could let the African wilderness change his life/mind. How could a civilized man from Europe succumb to uncivilized ways of Africa; a horror that the white man could never face no matter the circumstance.
This was an aspect that Conrad himself could not apprehend after his own journey to the Congo. Being there for six months himself he couldn’t bare the inhumanities that plagued Africa. He was said to be disgusted by the ill treatment of the natives, by the vile scramble for loot. In his diary he records a series of disturbing details, “the horrid smell from a dead body lying by the trail, arguments with carriers, the lack of water, the heat, mosquitoes, the shouts and drumming, a skeleton tied to a post.” Conrad himself a European couldn’t handle the experience of the Congo. For many years after returning to England Conrad was haunted by the Congo. He never forgot what he had witnessed of the horror of human corruption. His imagination remained obsessed by visions of native wildness, huge forests, and indescribable evil. Which shows a reflection in Conrad’s personal experiences/thoughts in Marlow and Kurtz . With underlying notion that no matter how civilized you may be there is a limit to where your sanity will hold up. In this case the horrific uncivilized ways of the Congolese overwhelmed Kurtz, Marlow, and Conrad.
“At this moment I heard Kurtz’s deep voice behind the curtain: ‘Save me- save the ivory, you mean. Don’t tell me! Save me! Why, I’ve had to save you. You are interrupting my plans now. Sick. Sick. Not as sick as you would like to believe. Never mind.’”
ReplyDelete(Conrad 61)
This passage, in which Kurtz begs for Marlow’s care in his final hours, marks a turning point for Kurtz’s character and essence. Despite always appearing a strong and intimidating figure, Kurtz becomes the begger here, and his weakness is represented in Conrad’s writing. Conrad repeats the word “save” four times, to emphasize Kurtz’s fragility. He also uses the word “sick” as its own sentence twice in a row. Speaking in sentence fragments contradicts the well-spoken demeanor of Kurtz from earlier sequences. Kurtz’s “deep voice,” which contributed to his ethos throughout “Heart of Darkness,” is juxtaposed with his rambling nature and broken sentence structure.
Through his diction, sentence fragments, and contradictions to earlier points in the novel, Conrad gives us an eye-opening new glimpse of Kurtz. No longer a terrifying and aggressive presence, the Kurtz who’d been spoken of so highly is now looked at in a pitiful, downright pathetic way. Hearing about his achievements throughout the text, one would expect more from him, but in his final stage, Kurtz is viewed as an ailing, weak man.
“‘Ah! I’ll never, never meet such a man again. You ought to have heard him recite poetry-his own too it was, he told me. Poetry!’ he rolled his eyes at the recollection of these delights. ‘Oh, he enlarged my mind!’ ‘Goodbye,’ said I. He shook hands and vanished in the night. Sometimes I ask myself whether I had ever really seen him-whether it was possible to meet such a phenomenon!...” (Conrad 63)
ReplyDeleteAs we all know from from reading Dante’s Inferno, poetry represents a form of communication to educate and to share knowledge. Poetry was equated with logic and reason, and anything which abandons logical morals, such as love, jealousy, lust, or not taking advantage of your life is compared with sin. Poetry, however- the writing, reading, and listening to of poetry, is seen as the ‘right’ way to live life. These ideals are not something of the past- they lived and live on throughout centuries, convincing people to view the spreaders of information (here, poets) as those who are intelligent and are getting the most they can out of life.
The fact that Marlow finds out in this passage that Kurtz was a writer and reciter of poetry is highly significant to how he sees Kurtz. Up until this point, Marlow knows Kurtz as a very successful conqueror of the Congo, and a war hero with complete control over the natives. A little mentally unstable, sure, but still respectable. As of recent, though, his opinion of Kurtz has been declining as he ponders on the transformation that Kurtz has taken. This same path of thought also occurs in the reader, and now both Marlow and the reader are doubting their respect for him.
Now, knowing that Kurtz writes poetry is a huge game-changer. Consciously or unconsciously, both the reader and Marlow develop a new level of respect for Kurtz as an intellectual and as a sharer of information. Because this puts him at the status of an intelligent leader, on some level there is a questioning taking place as to whether or not Kurtz’s ideals are, in fact, good, or whether he is truly doing the right thing and nobody realizes it.
Marlow narrates these suspicions in the last sentence of the passage. He doubts whether he had ever ‘really seen’ Kurtz. In other words, has he been looking over his intelligent ideals because of the results (e.g., heads on poles) that they gave? Should there be more widespread support for Kurtz? Had anyone ever really seen him for the genius that he was? In addition, a level of self-consciousness appears when he questions his ability to even see such greatness. Marlow genuinely wonders if it was possible for him to have known the ‘phenomenon’ that is Kurtz, or if he is somehow below a level of sophistication that would allow him to do so.
The significance of this passage as a whole is that it brings to light the effect that Dante’s ideals have on society as a whole, not only during Dante’s time, but also during the time of Marlow and Kurtz, or even right now in 2016. This passage connects Inferno with Heart of Darkness with a level of subtlety that makes the reader not even realize the outside influences they are placing on their opinion towards Kurtz.
“The business entrusted to this fellow was the making of bricks - so I had been informed; but there wasn’t a fragment of a brick anywhere in the station, and he had been there more than a year - waiting. It seems he could not make bricks without something, I don’t know what - straw maybe. Anyway it could not be found there, and as it was not likely to be sent from Europe it did not appear clear to me what he was waiting for. An act of special creation perhaps. However, they were all waiting - all the sixteen or twenty pilgrims of them - for something; and upon my word it did not seem an uncongenial occupation, from the way they took it, though the only thing that ever came to them was disease - as far as I could see” (Conrad 24).
ReplyDeleteThis man, who was referred to as the manager’s spy, appeared to have a very nonsensical job. His occupation was to make bricks, however the ingredients to make bricks could not even be accessed. This brickmaker as well as the surrounding men were in a state of stagnation as the tasks required of them were unable to be completed. The men were in no way contributing to society nor hurting it either, they were simply there. The only thing resulting in this idle state of theirs was the spread of disease.
The brickmaker is possibly an allusion to Inferno canto three when Dante enters the gates of Hell and notices those numerous individuals who were neither accepted by Heaven nor Hell. Due to their inability to make moral decisions, they simply lived without siding with good or evil. These individuals appear to never cease chasing an empty banner. This is comparable to the brickmaker and surrounding men who do not truly have jobs they can fulfill, they are stuck waiting for something that will never happen. In both situations the individuals will never achieve what they were aiming to accomplish, rather both are in a never-ending task. Just as the people in canto 3 were attacked by bees and mosquitoes, these men were plagued with various diseases.
The final line, “I could see”, re-emphasizes the theme of sight. Marlow is constantly bringing up eyes and vision although he can be thought of as blind to the truth for most of his journey.
p. 17-18: “While I stood horror-struck one of these creatures rose to his hands and knees and went off on all-fours towards the river to drink... Hair parted, brushed, oiled, under a green-lined prasol held in a big white hand. He was amazing and had a pen-holder behind his ear.”
ReplyDeleteThis passage represents an binary contrasting the chief accountant of the company with the natives working outside of the station. Marlow dehumanizes the natives several times, and depicts one native as as an animal when drinking water from the river,”He lapped out of his hand, then sat up in the sunlight crossing his shins in front of him.” This scene appears to Marlow as a “massacre”, indicating that Marlow has never seen such horrific conditions until this point, and is completely shocked by it. Marlow tried to get away from the horror, when he “made haste towards the station” showing the reader how dubious Marlow was about confronting his feelings. The natives in this passage seem to be lifeless creatures, unworthy of being humans.
Immediately after Marlow observes the natives and is “horror-struck”, he is enchanted by his encounter with a man completely different from the natives, the chief accountant. The accountant dresses elegantly despite the heat and the poverty of the black native African workers surrounding him. Marlow depicts the man as having “Hair parted, brushed, oiled” and depicts the working natives in pit as mere “creatures.” To Marlow, the man is a “vision”, someone he has high respect for and wants to emulate. The man with “a clean necktie, and varnished boots” is a stark contrast to the impoverished, “moribund” natives.
Symbolism is also apparent in this passage. The accountant symbolizes the Company as it wants to be seen. The way he dresses elegantly represents the company’s professionalism, and the way he's always immersed in his accounting books, diligently completing his work, represents the Company's devotion to perfection and excellence.
The significance of the passage is that we can see what Marlow is experiencing and how he perceives it. At this point in the story, Marlow has not fully developed a perspective on Africans, but we can see how his experience of seeing their horrific conditions affects him.
"He began to speak as soon as he saw me. I had been very long on the road. He could not wait. Had to start without me. The up-river stations had to be relieved. There had been so many delays already that he did not know who was dead and who was alive, and how they got on--and so on, and so on. He paid no attention to my explanations, and, playing with a stick of sealing-wax, repeated several times that the situation was 'very grave, very grave.' […] All this talk seemed to me so futile […] He was a chattering idiot" (Conrad 22).
ReplyDeleteThe passage begins with a critical choice in sentence structure—the short fragments and phrases spoken by the manager indicate the hasty and haphazard manner in which he voices them. Marlow is relaying the manager’s words to the reader without filter in a way that seems almost mocking and sarcastic. The repetition used when Marlow thinks to himself “and so on, and so on,” indicates that he does not care to communicate everything the manager says to him since he decides that it is unimportant and unworthy of his time. Conrad further emphasizes this point by not quoting the manager directly when he tells his story. The fact that Marlow is telling the reader in hind-sight what the manager said to him expresses of how little importance his words are once again. Conrad makes explicit the manager’s stupidity by only choosing to quote the short phrases that he “repeated several times” in order to make him seem even more foolish.
Here, Conrad uses the manager’s facial expressions to convey the efficacy, or lack thereof, of spoken language as a form of communication. The manager, in this scenario, is largely misusing this form of communication as Marlow sees it, as he rambles on and on in such a way that he renders his words meaningless. This passage is significant as it ties to the idea that language is simply a vehicle for what goes on in the human mind, but not a direct projection. Language does not and cannot convey all the truth that we may wish to share from our minds, or in this case, contribute truth to the things we wish to say. There is a gap between what can be conveyed through language and reality, and the manager exemplifies a person who does not use their language to convey truth. The manager talks to Marlow for what seems to be a reasonably long amount of time, and Marlow indicates to his audience that none of the manager’s words hold any meaning, but are simply a waste of his time.
"The earth seemed unearthly. We are accustomed to look upon the shackled form of a conquered monster, but there--there you could look at a thing monstrous and free. It was unearthly, and the men were--No, they were not inhuman. Well, you know, that was the worst of it--this suspicion of their not being inhuman. It would come slowly to one. They howled, and leaped, and spun, and made horrid faces; but what thrilled you was just the thought of their humanity--like yours--the thought of your remote kinship with this wild and passionate uproar. Ugly. Yes, it was ugly enough; but if you were man enough you would admit to yourself that there was in you just the faintest trace of a response to the terrible frankness of that noise, a dim suspicion of there being a meaning in it which you--you so remote from the night of first ages--could comprehend” (Conrad 36).
ReplyDeleteIn this quote there is repetition of the words inhuman and unearthly. These two words are often used to describe the Congo itself as well as the natives. The monster terminology is referring to the natives. Marlow says we are used to seeing the people conquered but now they could be seen in a free environment. The binary between the shackled and the free portrays the idea of colonialism similar to incarceration not something that would help the natives. Marlow is just beginning to understand this idea on page thirty-six. He understands that the biggest offense is the fact that these natives are thought to be inhuman. He goes onto explain how these natives are people they may be different but they are still humans.
He says that if you were man enough, you would be able to make the connection between the natives and yourself. They had to admit part of the natives were inside themselves. Marlow said there was something exhilarating about the idea of relation to the natives. They were wild but passionate. He says he is able to understand the screams of the natives. All these ideals are in opposition to imperialism and colonialism, in this sense Marlow begins to understand he may be a lot more equivalent to the Congolese people than he once thought.
"Mind, none of us would feel exactly like this. What saves us is efficiency—the devotion to efficiency. But these chaps were not much account, really. They were no colonists; their administration was merely a squeeze, and nothing more, I suspect. They were conquerors, and for that you want only brute force—nothing to boast of, when you have it, since your strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others. They grabbed what they could get for the sake of what was to be got. It was just robbery with violence, aggravated murder on a great scale, and men going at it blind—as is very proper for those who tackle a darkness. The conquest of the earth, which mostly means the taking it away from those who have a different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into it too much. What redeems it's the idea only. An idea at the back of it; not a sentimental pretence but an idea; and an unselfish belief in the idea—something you can set up, and bow down before, and offer a sacrifice to.”
ReplyDeletePage 6-7
In this passage, Conrad seems to be establishing a binary between colonization with brute force and colonization for a higher cause, a reason such as something akin to bringing civilization to Africa. When describing the use of strength to conquer in the name of imperialism and colonization, Conrad uses the words “robbery”, “violence” and “murder” to describe militaristic conquering of territory, and most significantly “blind” and “darkness”. With these words, Conrad begins to associate this kind of destructive imperialism with the congo, which he also describes with darkness, and with evil, as well it should be, considering it seems to be something akin to genocide.
Conrad also seems to be discussing Marlow with this text, saying that men go at the darkness of this colonial genocide blind, as well they should. This sort of blindness can easily be seen in Marlow in various parts in the book. He chooses to be blind to the humanity in the natives, seeing a spark of a mind similar to his in a boy very early into his adventure, and later, as another example, overlooks the heads on stakes at Kurtz’s camp, calling them sticks with ornaments on top. While the second could have been a mistake at first, in “Heart of Darkness”, Marlow is telling his story, so he already knew what they were. He chose to once again be blind to the atrocity and the darkness.
Aside from this, Conrad’s possible anti-imperialist stance only appears to go so far. At the end of this section, Marlow justifies colonization if it is for a greater good, for an important idea, for a singular truth. Perhaps this is why he idolizes Kurtz as much as he does? Marlow, may have feared what he saw in the Congo, desperately looking for solace of some kind, a reason for doing what has been done, so maybe he hoped that Kurtz would be the one to give him a reason, to show him that there was a truth, a reason for killing all of these poor souls that are too human for comfort. But instead, all Marlow got was “The horror, the horror.” possibly venturing to only cement Marlow’s fear that all of what he had seen was for nothing.
"His covering had fallen off and his body emerged from it pitiful and appalling as from a winding-sheet. I could see the cage of his ribs all astir, the bones of his arm waving. It was as though an animated vision of death carved out of old ivory had been shaking its hand with menaces at a motionless crowd of men made of dark and glittering bronze. I saw him open his mouth wide- giving him a weirdly voracious as though he wanted to swallow all the air, all the earth., all the men before him. A deep voice suddenly reached me faintly. He must have been shouting. He fell back suddenly. The stretcher shook as the bearers staggered forward again, and almost at the same time I noticed that the crowd of savages was vanishing without any perceptible movement of retreat, as if the forest that had ejected these beings so suddenly had drawn them in again as the breath is drawn in a long aspiration" (Conrad 59).
ReplyDeleteWhile this passage, on the surface, only describes Marlow's first brief glimpse of Kurtz, it also gives us an intricate, if contradictory glimpse into Kurtz's position in his manufactured fiefdom. Until this point, Marlow has had only the cloaked speech of the company workers and the Russian's bizarre ramblings with which to construct a picture of the goings-on at the Central Station. Having created his own interpretation and assumptions of Kurtz within his mind, Kurtz's true physical condition can only come as a shock, as the man who is said to inspire equal parts love and hate is shown to be the opposite of an imposing figure. His emaciated condition only serves to further separate the conditions at the Central Station from reality, a feeling compounded upon with the statement regarding Kurtz's open "voracious" mouth and booming voice. Kurtz's power is, as it is stated repeatedly throughout the piece, rooted firmly within his words and writing.
Another interesting piece comes from the end of the passage, as the figures of the jungle disappear back from whence they came, bringing with them Kurtz, who is himself symbolic of all of the grand intentions of the reigning European elite. The motion itself seems less the decision of any of the natives themselves and more from the command of a higher power that cares little for the "missions" of any of the parties present.
Lastly, this passage is full of binaries that accurately describe Kurtz's enigmatic character. Kurtz, despite resembling more twig than man, still possesses the power of command, perhaps due to the retention of his voice, his true power. He is also stated to be an animated version of death, one specifically made of ivory, Kurtz's object of trade. To say that Kurtz was made of ivory is to suggest that, despite Kurtz's grand vision and speeches, his purpose was never much more than that of any number of company representatives, and for all of his posturing, he could never live up to Marlow's version of Kurtz that he had created.
"It was unearthly and the men were...No they were not inhuman. Well, you know that was the worst of it-this suspicion of their not being inhuman. It would come slowly to one. They howled and leaped and spun and made horrid faces, but what thrilled you was just the thought of their humanity-like yours-the thought of your remote kinship with this wild and passionate uproar..." (Conrad 36).
ReplyDeleteIn the above passage Marlow is watching the natives in awe of their ways. His use of the words inhuman, howled and wild depicts his views of the natives. To him they are animals; wild and unruly. Marlow's narration also switches from first to second person in this passage. He tries not to make meaning out of the behavior of natives and disregards their whole activity.
Marlow's transition from first to second person exemplifies the difference in what Marlow was seeing versus what he felt about it. FOr a split second Marlow believes that the natives are real people, but then quickly forgets that idea. His lack of connection with the natives show his inability to cut his ties with Europe. Likewise to a scene earlier in the book when he gives the native a biscuit, Marlow comes close to realizing the natives for who they are, but he never fully breaks free from his ideals.