An essay arguing that Joseph Conrad is more critical of Whites than Blacks in Heart of Darkness
To the vast majority of Europeans of the 19th century, colonization was a noble cause that brought civilization, Christianity and culture to underdeveloped civilizations. Many Europeans believed that they were welcomed abroad and were improving societies in the name of God. Far ahead of his time, Joseph Conrad saw the hypocrisy with this thinking. In his novella Heart of Darkness Conrad is much more critical of the European characters than the native African characters. Conrad shows this in four different ways. First, he shows he is more critical of the Europeans than the Africans by negatively portraying the European Pilgrims and praising the African Cannibals. Secondly, Conrad attaches many negative traits to the European women of the novel while glorifying the African woman he portrays in the novel. Thirdly, the relationship between Africans and Europeans shows Conrad is more critical of Europeans than Africans. Finally, by portraying the Europeans as aggressors and the Africans as victims, Conrad shows he is more critical of Europeans than Africans.
The first reason why Conrad is more critical of Europeans than Africans in his novella is because of how Conrad negatively portrays the European Pilgrims and praises the African Cannibals by depicting the Pilgrims as evil, ruthless and cruel aggressors who terrorize the Cannibals and Africans. An example of this is when Marlow, the Pilgrims and the Cannibals are ambushed by a group of Africans who attack them possibly on Kurtz's behalf or because they want to protect Kurtz. Using their superior weaponry, the Pilgrims inflict great casualties on the Africans, which lead on...
... middle of paper ...
...is more critical of the Europeans than the Africans. Secondly, Conrad praises the African woman of the novella while attributing negative qualities to the European women. Thirdly, the relationship between Africans and Europeans in Heart of Darkness demonstrates that Conrad is more critical of Europeans than Africans. Lastly, Conrad presents the Europeans as the oppressors and Africans as the oppressed, which makes it clear that Conrad is more critical of the Europeans than Africans. Throughout history there have been many men and women who have voiced their opposition to popular injustice. Conrad proves to be one of these people. Thanks to him many Europeans of his day realized the atrocities that their governments were committing through colonization, and even today his message remains a powerful reminder of the insanity and hypocrisy of imperialism.
The novel gives rise to many questions. The first and important question is about Eurocentricism. How Joseph Conrad exposed Eurocentricism in Heart of Darkness? This Eurocentricism has different aspects. What are the Eurocentric aspects in the novel? The ideology is cruel and cause many problems. What is the real reason of colonization in the novel? The conditions of the colonized people are worse because of this ideology. What are conditions of colonized people in the novel? The nations have suffered badly due to this ideology. How Conrad exposed the exploitation of rights of the natives?
The diaries Conrad kept during his journey through the Congo gives detailed descriptions of the monotonous African landscape. Conrad wrote that the landscape of the African coast looked the same every single day.[1] This is reflected in Marlow’s narration of the jungle where shapes and forms cannot be made out clearly. The monotonous landscape differed from what Conrad had expected of this exotic location. When he was still a young kid, he had once boasted that he would someday journey to the heart of Africa. However, the actual journey was not at all what he expected it to be. Conrad was shocked at the men in the African colony. He was repulsed by the European colonizers because of the horrible treatment of the natives as well as the unlawful aggressive pursuit of loot. Conrad witnessed atrocities committed by the European colonizers, which helped to form his opinions on the colonization of Africa. In the novel, Conrad uses sarcasm to display his displeasure towards the European colonizers’ treatment of the natives. The Europeans in the book are called pilgrims and the natives are called cannibals, however the pilgrims are the ones who are much more willing to use force to resolve their problems.
Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness shows the disparity between the European ideal of civilization and the reality of it, displayed by the domination, torture, exploitation and dehumanization of the African people. Conrad often emphasizes the idea of what is civilized versus what is primitive or savage. While reading the novel, the reader can picture how savage the Europeans seem. They are cruel and devious towards the very people they are supposed to be helping.
"I don't want to bother you much with what happened to me personally,' [Conrad] began, showing in this remark the weakness of many tellers of tales who seem so often unaware of what their audience would most like to hear" (Conrad, 9). Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad's best-known work, has been examined on many bases more than I can possibly list here, but including imperialism, colonialism, and racism. I would reason that all bases of analysis are perfectly acceptable through which to critique Conrad's novella, or any piece of writing. I would reason this, were some of these bases mainly, racism not taken to an extreme level. In arguing racism, many critics seem to take Heart of Darkness as Conrad's unwavering view on Africa, Africans, life, or whatever else one may please to take it as. I, therefore, propose that Heart of Darkness be taken for what it truly is: a work of fiction set in late 19th century Europe and Africa.
Conrad’s main character Marlow is the narrator for most of the story in Heart of Darkness. He is presented as a well-intentioned person, and along his travels he is shocked by the cruelties that he sees inflicted on the native people. Though he is seemingly benevolent and kindly, Marlow shows the racism and ignorance of Conrad and in fact of the majority of white people in his era, in a more subtle way. Marlow uses words to describe the blacks that, though generally accepted in his time, were slanderous and crude. He recalls that some of the first natives he saw in the Congo looked at him “with that complete, deathlike indifference of unhappy savages” (80; part 1). Marlow casually refers to the Africans with the most offensive of language: “Strings of dusty niggers arrived and departed…” (83; part 1). To Marlow, and thus to Conrad, the Africans are savages, dogs, devils, and criminals. Even the stories that Conrad creates for Marlow to narrate are twisted and false. The natives that Marlow deals with in the book are described as cannibals, and they are even given dialogue that affirms th...
Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad is one of the most widely recognized and acclaimed novellas written. But with fame and recognition comes controversy, which is clearly demonstrated by the broad interpretations of the book. Many people believe Heart of Darkness is racist, while others believe the book is perfectly civil. Chinua Achebe, one of Africa's most renowned novelists, strongly believes that the book is dehumanizing and racist; I agree with him, to a certain extent. Three of the most prominent ways that Achebe discusses Conrad’s racism is by the way the African people are portrayed, the African culture, and the comparison of Europe to Africa.
Conrad’s relaxed writing style makes it sound humorous that the natives were treated unfairly and that it is very racist. The unfair treatment of the native African people in Heart of Darkness is extremely racist. Marlow and other Europeans did not treat the natives like humans. Conrad made it sound like the unfair treatment of the Natives was socially acceptable by the European culture. Conrad also wrote about how the natives were unaware of any sense of time.
In recent years, the debate over the merits versus the racial shortcomings of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness has raged hot. Many, notably David Denby and Chinua Achebe, have come down on one side or another of the issue. I contend, with the help of the written opinions of Denby and Achebe, that Heart of Darkness, while racist in its views, is nonetheless a valuable and commendable work of art.
“ 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.” (Conrad 65) So stated Marlow as though this was his justification for ravaging the Congo in his search for ivory. Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness shows the disparity between the European ideal of civilization and the reality of it as is evidenced by the domination, torture, exploitation and dehumanization of the African population. Heart of Darkness is indicative of the evil and greed in humanity as personified by Kurtz and Marlow.
In the novel, Heart of Darkness, the author Joseph Conrad makes some comments, and he uses different terms to describe people of color that may offend some people. Also the readers can see how racist the Europeans were toward blacks not only because they were turned into slaves. We can see how the European people seem to think the Africans are not equal to them. There are many examples of discrimination towards woman in this story. Women were looked down and they were considered to be worth less then men, or even not as important. Racism and discrimination are all over in this novel.
Achebe argues that the racist observed in the Heart of Darkness is expressed due to the western psychology or as Achebe states “desire,” this being to show Africa as an antithesis to Europe. He first states Conrad as “one of the great stylists of modern fiction.” [pg.1] He praises Conrad’s talents in writing but believes Conrad’s obvious racism has not been addressed. He later describes in more detail that Conrad’s “methods amount to no more than a steady, ponderous, fake-ritualistic repetition of two antithetical sentences.”
Through several examples, Conrad often shows the pointlessness and savagery of the English colonization in Africa. Probably the first instance of this is when Marlow comes up to the French-man who is "shelling the bush". In this scene, the French see something move and so they start shelling it for that reason. The shelling really does no good; if fact, it probably does not even kill what is out there. This represents what the English are doing in a way -- they are trying to conquer a land by shelling it to death and by trying to kill all the people who live there. The next example that Conrad gives is when he sees the black guard, who is leading the black slaves in a chain gang, straighten up when he sees a white man. What this shows is how everyone tries to look better than they are when they are in front of a supposed superior person. Also it shows that if a person can suck up enough -- and sometimes betray their own people -- they can move up in the world.
To Joseph Conrad, the Africans were not just characters in his story, but rather props. After reading Achebe’s famous essay and Conrad’s novella, I’ve come to a side with Achebe. Conrad “was a thoroughgoing racist”; Heart of Darkness platforms this clearly. Throughout the novella, Conrad describes and represents the Africans and Africa itself in a patronizing and racist way. Constantly throughout the novel, Joseph Conrad was describing Africans by using words bearing a negative connotation.
By exhibiting the deeds of the Europeans, their portrayal becomes so negative that they become the savages. Conrad clearly is sympathetic to the plight of the Africans, and any racial epithets, if not accepted by progressives of the time, are not meant as attacks directed at the natives. It should be obvious that Conrad is on their side -- or is this "undermined by the mindlessness of its context and the pretty explicit
Joseph Conrad's novel Heart of Darkness portrays an image of Africa that is dark and inhuman. Not only does he describe the actual, physical continent of Africa as "so hopeless and so dark, so impenetrable to human thought, so pitiless to human weakness" (Conrad 94), as though the continent could neither breed nor support any true human life, but he also manages to depict Africans as though they are not worthy of the respect commonly due to the white man. At one point the main character, Marlow, describes one of the paths he follows: "Can't say I saw any road or any upkeep, unless the body of a middle-aged negro, with a bullet-hole in the forehead, upon which I absolutely stumbled three miles farther on, may be considered as a permanent improvement" (48). Conrad's description of Africa and Africans served to misinform the Western world, and went uncontested for many years.