Marlow’s Contemplation during his Journey
In one of his novels, Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad depicts the tale of a man who reflects upon the meaning of life as well as all of its intricasies and implications. Indeed, Marlow, the main character of this story, questions several existential topics and explores his own personal curiosity about the solidarity and darkness of the jungle he finds himself in. At one point in the storyline, Marlow and his crew depart towards the station where the enigmatic Kurtz resides. An interesting aspect of this portion of the adventure is that Marlow’s crew is mostly composed of cannibals. Upon realizing how famished these natives are, Marlow contemplates how incredible it seems that the cannibals have restrained themselves from giving in to their hunger and eating the European men onboard. It is this speculation that will be the topic of discussion in the following paper. Marlow’s thoughts and perception of the native tribe will be examined in order to provide a more concise understanding of his analysis of the cannibals.
During their trip towards Kurtz’s station, Marlow describes the inequality of power and discrimination that the natives must live with. They constantly receive unfair treatments, such as beatings and the lack of food and medical support, as well as being paid in ridiculous manner that can only fuel their hate towards the European conquerors. Upon suggesting that the cannibals on his crew are treated in a disingenuous way, Marlow truly questions why their motives have not been violent so far : ‘’Why in the name of all gnawing devils of hunger they didn’t go for us – they were thirty to five – and have a good tuck in for once, amazes me now when I think of it’’ (Conrad 37). Further analysis provided by Marlow explores the underlying reason why the natives refuse to attack their opressors. He manages to pinpoint one particular aspect that is responsible for such behaviour : ‘’And I saw that something restraining, one of those human secrets that baffle probability, had come into play here’’ (37). The human act of restraint, according to our narrator, is the simple yet bafling evidence which he stipulates. But what truly surprises Marlow is the fact that there shouldn’t be any logical reason for the starving cannibals not to attack, and consequently eat, him and his crew. He believes that hunger can by no means be deterred by any reasonalble explanation :
Conrad’s character Marlow describes the natives as having “a wild vitality” and their “faces like grotesque masks.” These remarks demonstrate his fear and reinforces the distinction between himself and the natives.
Heart of Darkness is a kind of little world unto itself. The reader of Conrad’s Heart of Darkness should take the time to consider this work from a psychological point of view. There are, after all, an awful lot of heads and skulls in the book, and Conrad goes out of his way to suggest that in some sense Marlow's journey is like a dream or a return to our primitive past--an exploration of the dark recesses of the human mind.
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...
Alexander was Great because of his leadership. When Alexander went into battle, he used lots of complicated strategies to win. Due to the teachings of Aristotle, he was a force to reckoned with. One example comes from Doc B.The battle was set in India, against a king named Porus. He had more than 30 elephants under his control. The one thing that separated them was a shallow river. The document tells us that he would “Take his cavalry to various positions along the river bank where he would create a clamor… This went on for quite a time until Porus no longer reacted” Alexander used great strategy to outsmart his enemy.
so this is why it is memorable as it now sticks in the readers head.
Alexander The Great , With the courage of a tiger and the ferocity of a Lion, Alexander III swept through Eastern Europe and Asia. Alexander the Great as he would be called was believed to a descendant of the God's! He was a military genius because his battles throughout Asia Minor, against Darius, the King of the Empire of Persia, would bring him fame, fortune, and eternal glorification as the greatest king to have ruled in all of history. The Macedonian king's level of intelligence, the amount of land that he acquired, and the fact that he was a military genius, is some of the most important aspects to the life of Alexander the Great.
the pool when you drank, so the water tasted cold; or used a tube like
effort and that she's doing him a favour. She makes Pip feel he is a
...Conrad removes Marlow’s bias, but through the inclusion of careful details he is able to establish his themes. The cruelty of white man to the natives, appearances being deceiving, the nobility of the Africans – all are clear messages of this text that come across not from Marlow’s opinion, but rather the careful inclusion of details and symbolism. No bigger symbol helps Conrad reinforce his theme than the continuous battle of light and dark, and his use of the two is the cornerstone from which he builds meaning from symbolism.
The two main characters in Heart of Darkness, Marlow and Kurtz are used to show the true nature of man, that is, the capacity for good and evil within humanity. The central character is a thirty two year old sailor, Charlie Marlow. Marlow is the primary narrator in the novel, therefore his thought’s, opinions, experiences and revelations, shape the entire novels themes and the value system put forward. Marlow illustrates how forces of light and darkness serve to weave the human soul together; thus, essentially how good and evil are reflected in an individual. This is particularly important regarding the construction of Marlow, who is essentially a biased narrator, and a product of his European upbringing. An example is his inability to deal with the dying natives at the “grove of death”, offering a native a biscuit as an apparent kind gesture. Yet this is only due to him not being confronted with situations like this previously where his own values, and the whole premise behind colonialism, the exploitation is revealed. The patriarchial views of women he displays also outline the background of Marlow and the a...
...hrough the confident and mediating narrative account the reader receives through Marlow and the unnamed First narration Conrad is able to interrogate the theme of the corruption and economic motivations behind colonids praxis in the novel Heart of Darkness. It is, however, unconsciously, also made clear that this text, its narrator and its author are products of their time and ideology, as it consistantly represents characters and situations in racist and patriarchal terms, so that the reader is also aware of the Eurocentric and ethnocentric themes running through the novella.
to London, he meets her, but she tries to warn Pip to stay away from her because she might hurt his
Later, Marlow encounters cannibals who are characterized by restraint. They outnumber the whites “thirty to five” and were “big powerful men, with not much capacity to weigh the consequences.” Marlow describes them as being utterly capable of simply overpowering and consuming the Europeans. He even considers that he would have as soon expected such restraint fro...
Have you ever wondered why Alexander from Macedonia is called Alexander the Great. According to history, it is because he is the most glorious general in the history who conquered Persia, Greece, Egypt and Babylon in a very inexperienced age. He became the commander of Macedonian armies at age eighteen and the king of Macedonia at age twenty. After six years of preparation, he conquered the great Persian empire. Unfortunately, he died at age thirty-three. He would have conquered many lands if he hadn’t died at a such young age. He was a legend and an icon for great kings like Charlemagne, Julius Caesar, and Pompey. World’s most famous generals tried to compete with him but they couldn’t accomplish. After years, his tomb
Thus, in this novel, the characters of Marlow and Kurtz, are, at one time, shown to have been dominated by their super-ego, brought up in the British society believing in the White man’s burden. Then, both the characters journey through the African jungles, where they are confronted by horrors that they struggle to stay human and civilized. While Kurtz gives in completely to his id and becomes an inhumane barbarian, controlled by his wants and wishes; Marlow doesn’t completely give in as much as Kurtz but does remain psychologically affected from his experiences. Finally, through this intense struggle between the personalities of the characters, Conrad tries to tell us that human personality is indeed very fragile, and can be compromised without restraint.