When Marlow met with Mr. Kurtz’s intended, she was heartbroken, she felt as if she could not go on without him, and it put Marlow in an extremely uncomfortable position. During their discussion about his actual death, Conrad writes “‘And I was not with him,’ she murmured. My anger subsided before a feeling of infinite pity…‘Repeat them [(his last words)],’ she said in a heart-broken tone. ‘I want—I want—something—something—to—to live with’” (Conrad 94-95). This gave the intended the ultimate power over Marlow. Confronted with having to tell Mr. Kurtz’s intended his last words, Marlow had to make a hard choice: tell her the truth or a lie. By choosing the former, Marlow would have to attempt to answer the numerous questions that he would be …show more content…
In this case, Marlow would represent the colonized, the powerless, and the native people, while Mr. Kurtz’s intended embodies the colonizers, the powerful, and Europe. Even though Marlow has a strong grasp on the truth of Kurtz’s last words, he is obligated not to tell the truth. This can be equated to the fact that the truth behind imperialism is not to enlighten non-Europeans to the “better way” of living, like it is told to be, but it is rather to exploit those people who fall subject to the practice. The intended wanted to know what her husband-to-be said before he died, and instead of being real with Marlow and give him the chance to tell the truth, she puts him in a position to where he must succumb to her wishes and give her something she could live with. In reality, she, like most people whose country is a colonizing power, cannot handle the truth; the realities of imperialism were “too dark” for Europeans to handle. This is why The Company hid their true motives and practices from Europe. Mr. Kurtz’s document will never be released because the people in Europe cannot stand to hear that imperialism is a flawed system and it equates to murdering off the natives that they are trying to “help”. Mr. Kurtz was privy to the truth of the practice and it haunted him until his last breath. Taking these observation’s into account, Marlow’s lack of power due to the intendeds need for her truth, and the power she gained because of it, can amount to the conclusion that Conrad uses Marlow and the intended to depict the harsh imbalance in the colonial landscape in the end of the
What cannot be ignored about the ending of his story, however, is what Marlow ended up doing. When it came down to Marlow telling Kurtz’s Intended about her deceased husband, he continued on to let her believe he lived and died a moral, good-natured man. What strikes deepest is when she asked for his last words, Marlow lied completely and said, “The last word he pronounced was- your name”. He went on to justify himself because it would have been “... too dark altogether” to tell her the truth. Not only did Conrad intend Marlow’s quest for his own self-knowledge, but for that of the reader as well, leaving them to see how in order to keep society functioning, it will never be aware of its true darkness at
In the book “Heart of Darkness”, Joseph Conrad wrote about the horrors that were committed by Leopold’s regime. As one of the first insider to witness these horrors, he wrote “Heart of Darkness”, with this book, he was able to spread the word about the atrocities he had seen in Leopold’s greedy pursuit of rubber and ivory in the congo. This book details closely how Leopold made his humongous profit. Leopold issued decrees on the Congo such as that the native people may only trade with his state agents or with his concessions. Leopold’s concessions were private companies that would sell the ivory and rubber, they would give Leopold 50% of their profits. The Abir Congo Company was one of these concessions that harvest the natural rubber of the Congo.They were granted a large portion of the land in the north and had the right to impose a rubber tax on its inhabitants. It was through concessions like these but also from his personal company (the Congo Free State) that Leopold created his personal wealth. This book brings us one step closer to answering our question since it tells us how Leopold got ahold of all of his profits. But this brings us to another question of, exactly how much money did the Congo bring to Leopold II?
...o, while the novella’s archetypal structure glorifies Marlow’s domination of Kurtz. These two analyses taken together provide a much fuller and more comprehensive interpretation of the work. Conrad presents the idea that there is some darkness within each person. The darkness is is inherited and instinctual, but because it is natural does not make it right. He celebrates – and thereby almost advises – the turn from instinct. By telling Marlow’s tale, Joseph Conrad stresses to his audience the importance of self-knowledge and the unnecessity of instinct in civilization.
The Intended asks Marlow to repeat Kurtz’s last words because she wants “something to live with” (71). Marlow hesitates, realizing that Mr. Kurtz’s actual last words would crush his fiancée. Then, Marlow finally understands that, while he can despise evil and ungodliness, he can also understand why men are evil and ungodly; he understands Mr. Kurtz’s intentions and chooses to respond to the Intended by lying, “The last word he pronounced was—your name” (71). Conrad reveals the goodness in men that society would not expect to be good. Even today, people are racist and prejudice, seeing evil in people that are not necessarily evil. However, it is important to see the goodness in the people that society deems evil, like the Africans in Heart of Darkness, in order to achieve a greater understanding of the world and oneself.
In Joseph Conrad’s short story, “Heart of Darkness,” the narrator, Marlow language, and point of view to convey the conflicting emotions he has about Kurtz due to the image he fabricated Kurtz to be, and the reality of Kurtz. Marlow’s language throughout the piece reveals to the reader how he feels about Kurtz and how he perceives Kurtz’s actions. Marlow’s point of view also allows him to support both of his perceptions of Kurtz because he doesn’t see only bad or only good in
The child’s game had ended. After I nearly ran Kurtz over, we stood facing each other. He was unsteady on his feet, swaying like the trees that surrounded us. What stood before me was a ghost. Each layer of him had been carved away by the jungle, until nothing remained. Despite this, his strength still exceeded that of my own. With the tribal fires burning so close, one shout from him would unleash his natives on me. But in that same realization, I felt my own strength kindle inside me. I could just as easily muffle his command and overtake him. The scene flashed past my eyes as though I was remembering not imagining. The stick that lay two feet from me was beating down on the ghost, as my bloodied hand strangled his cries. My mind abruptly reeled backwards as I realized what unspeakable dark thoughts I had let in. Kurtz seemed to understand where my mind had wandered; it was as though the jungle’s wind has whispered my internal struggles to him. His face twisted into a smile. He seemed to gloat and enjoy standing by to watch my soul begin to destroy itself.
One of the central tragedies of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness is the insanity of Mr. Kurtz. How could a man who seemed so good, so stable, suddenly become so mentally lacking? Through the deterioration of Kurtz’s personality and Marlow’s response to his breakdown, Conrad explores the elements of strong versus weak characters.
Looking at the book from a psychological viewpoint, there are apparent similarities to the psychological theories of Sigmund Freud in its suggestion that dreams are a clue to hidden areas of the mind, and that at the heart of things--which Freud called the Id--we are all primitive brutes and savages, capable of the most appalling wishes and the most horrifying impulses. Through Freud, or other systems of thought that resemble Freud's, we can make sense of “the urge Marlow feels to leave his boat and join the natives for a savage whoop and hollar” (Tessitore, 42). We might even, in this light, notice that Marlow keeps insisting that Kurtz is a voice--a voice who seems to speak to him out of the heart of the immense darkness--and so perhaps he can be thought of, in a sense, as the voice of Marlow's own deepest, psychological self. Of course, we must remember that it is doubtful Conrad had ever heard Sigmund Freud when he set out to write the book. Although a psychological viewpoint is very useful, it does not speak to the whole of our experience of the book.
Anyone can read Heart Of Darkness and easily sense the attitude of Conrad toward English politics. Many times throughout Heart Of Darkness Conrad points out the pointlessness and savagery of English colonization. Conrad also comments a bit on society as a whole. With these two ideas added to the book, there is no wonder of why Heart of Darkness is such a touching novel.
One interpretation of Marlow's relationship to colonialism is that he does not support it. Conrad writes, "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" (p. 27-28). Marlow says this and is stressing that the so-called "savages", or Africans, are being treated and punished like they are criminals or enemies when in fact they never did anything. He observes the slow torture of these people and is disgusted with it. Marlow feels sympathy for the black people being slaved around by the Europeans but doesn't do anything to change it because that is the way things are. One can see the sympathy by the way that he gives a starving black man one of his biscuits. "To tear treasure out of the bowels of the land was their desire, with no moral purpose at the back of it than there is in burglars breaking into a safe" (p. 54). This statement by Marlow conveys that he doesn't believe that the Europeans have a right to be stripping Africa of its riches. He views the Jungles of Africa as almost it's own living, breathing monster.
...s to look at Kurtz as a hero for all that he had accomplished, no matter how evil. Marlow?s obstacles as the hero are not the overcoming of a dragon or evil villain. It is the eternal battle of the story of a Hero versus Antihero. Marlow?s blindness to Kurtz?s impurities are both his strength and weakness. His ignorance to the greatness of his own qualities can best be stated one way: ?The Horror.?
The horror! The horror!” (III, p. 178). There are many horrifying things in the world which are of all different orders of magnitude, from disasters that effect millions to insignificant fears of an individual: from catastrophes such as the holocaust to subtleties such as spiders. Conrad, in the Heart of Darkness shows each order, on it 's own level, all in one statement. The eminent Kurtz uttered the aforementioned quote as he was breathing his last, and incorporated all three levels of despair into his last two words. Through Kurtz ' words “The horror”, Conrad was not only displaying Kurtz ' inner darkness, but also the evil in the society, as well as the evil found in every man.
Marlow tries to explain why he didn't tell Kurtz's Intended at the end of the book:
Modernism began as a movement in that late 19th, early 20th centuries. Artists started to feel restricted by the styles and conventions of the Renaissance period. Thusly came the dawn of Modernism in many different forms, ranging from Impressionism to Cubism.
Conrad uses the character of Marlow to make use of his own thoughts and views about the people in the Congo. He feels pity for them as he sees them falling down carrying heavy packages and Kurtz commanding them like a batallion of troups. This sight angers Marlow and when he gets to Kurtz, it’s too late. Even he has been pulled in by the darkness. Conrad makes an effective distinction between Marlow and Kurtz.