“They passed me with six inches, without a glance, with the complete, deathlike indifference of unhappy savages” (Conrad 19). Achebe, also, detected Conrad’s frequent use of unorthodox name calling, “Certainly Conrad had a problem with n*ggers. His in ordinate love of that word itself should be of interest to psychoanalysts” (Achebe 258). Conrad uses Marlow, the main character in the book, as a narrator so he himself can enter the story and tell it through his own philosophical mind. Conrad used “double speak” throughout his book. Upon arriving at the first station, Marlow commented what he observed. “They were dying slowly – it was very clear. They were not enemies, they were not criminals, they were nothing earthly now, nothing but black shadows of disease and starvation lying confusedly in the greenish gloom” (Conrad 20). Marlow felt pity toward the natives, yet when he met the station’s book keeper he changed his views of the natives. “Moreover I respected the fellow. Yes. I respected his collars, his vast cuffs, his brushed hair. His appearance was certainly great demoralization of the land he kept up his appearance” (Conrad 21). Marlow praised the book keeper as if he felt it’s the natives’ fault for living in such waste. the bureaucracy only cared about how he looked and felt. The bookeeper did not care for the natives who were suffering less than fifty feet from him. He stated the natives weren’t criminals but were being treated as if they were, but at the same time he respected the book keeper on his looks instead of despising him for his indifference. Conrad considered the Africans inferior and doomed people. Frances B. Singh, author of The Colonialistic Bias of Heart of Darkness said “The African natives, victims of Belgian exploitation, are described as ‘shapes,’ ‘shadows,’ and ‘bundles of acute angles,’ so as to show the dehumanizing effect of colonialist rule on the ruled” (269-270). Another similar incident of “double speak” appeared on the death of Marlow’s helmsman. Marlow respected the helmsman, yet when the native’s blood poured into Marlow’s shoes, “To tell you the truth, I was morbidity anxious to change my shoes and socks” (Conrad 47). How can someone respect yet feel disgusted towards someone? Singh looks into this question by stating, “The reason of course, is because he (Marlow) never completely grants them (natives) human status: at the best they are a species of superior hyena” (Singh 273). As I have mentioned before, Conrad was not only racist but also ignorant. He would often mix ignorance with racism when he described the natives. “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” (Conrad 35). “The prehistoric man was cursing us, praying to us, welcoming us – who could tell?” (Conrad 37).
The end result of Conrad’s ignorance of not knowing the behavior of African people concluded his division of the social world into two separate categories: “us,” the Europeans, and “them,” the Africans. Achebe concludes Conrad’s ignorance towards the natives by stating, “Heart of Darkness projects the image of Africa as ‘the other world,’… a place where man’s vaunted intelligence and ferment are finally mocked by triumphant b*stiality” (252). “Heart of Darkness was written, consciously or unconsciously, from a colonialistic point of view” (Singh 278). Conrad didn’t write his book to the extreme of racism. Overall, the natives appeared better humans than the Europeans in Heart of Darkness. Conrad’s ignorance led to his conformity to racism. His ignorance of not completely “granting the natives human status” leads him to social categorization. C. P. Sarvan wrote in his criticism, quoting Achebe, “Racism and the Heart of Darkness,” “Conrad sets up Africa ‘as a foil to Europe, a place of negations… in comparison with which Europe’s own state of spiritual grace will be manifest.’ Africa is ‘the other world,’…” (281).
Achebe, Chinua [An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.] Heart of Darkness. By Joseph Conrad 3rd ed. Ed. Robert Kimbrough. New York: Norton Critical 1988. Conrad, Joseph Heart of Darkness 3rd ed. Ed. Robert Kimbrough. New York: Norton Critical, 1988.
Sarvan, C. P. [Racism and the Heart of Darkness.] Heart of Darkness. By Joseph Conrad 3rd ed. Ed. Robert Kimbrough. New York: Norton Critical 1988.
Singh, Frances B. [The Colonialistic Bias of Heart of Darkness.] Heart of Darkness. By Joseph Conrad 3rd ed. Ed. Robert Kimbrough. New York: Norton Critical 1988.
Racism In "Heart Of Darkness" And "Apocalypse Now"
The book "Heart of Darkness" and the movie "Apocalypse Now" are two works dealing with deep issues of evil. (Beyond imperialism, because the evil of imperialism has a root. For example, crack the nut) They refer places boiling down to a discussion of racism. The Thames River as in any mythology is a source of life. At the end, Marlow comes upon Kurtz's Intended and said, "An object of the fecund". Also, these two works deal with how a man is surrounded by evil acts and evil minds to fight of the fire fueled by the society. They also talks about how a character is a racist, when that character clearly condemns his way of life by leaving the Congo, and confirms the ills of society by lying about them.
Firstly, I think that the racism claims are overstated, in two ways. A) Conrad's racism, such as it is, is directed not at black people as a whole but rather as Africans. I think the prejudice must be recognized as activism, or whatever the proper term is, rather than as racism. B) Conrad is critical, not solely of Africans and their way of life, but also of European culture. He's just as anti-white as he is also anti-black. Additionally, I think that Conrad may be considered a racist if and only if you decide that the definition of racism is thinking your race is better, but I really don't think that he could be considered a white supremacist or that he really contained a deep hatred for Africans. In fact, I don't think that he was even that serious on his own race. It is because that overtime he describes the presence of the white imperialist or any white people in general, he...
Loading: Checking Spelling0%