A fellow human being has just died here, yet Marlow feels the need to justify his remorse for the death of a ‘savage’, not only to justify it but, to do so in such a derogatory manner. Why feel such regret for a being he describes as ‘savage’? Not only did Marlow point out the ‘uncivilized’ behaviour of the Africans, he took time out to spare a thought or two on the African land. He describes the land as a ‘black Sahara’ - a desert filled with blacks and all things vile. Yet he does not pause to reflect on the fact that this ‘black Sahara’ is mercilessly ridiculed but highly sort after by the ‘refined’ Europeans, who never ceased to bicker over it.
I believe that Conrad viewed the Africans as victims in the discourses of imperialism as well as ‘props for the break up of one petty European mind.’
“They were dying slowly – it was very clear. They were not enemies, they were not criminals, they were nothing earthy now, nothing but black shadows of disease and starvation lying confusedly in the greenish gloom. Brought from all the recess of the coast in a the legality of time contracts, lost in uncongenial surroundings fed on unfamiliar food, they sickened, became inefficient, and were then allowed to crawl away and rest.”
It is stated here the conditions and factors Africans were subdued to during the reign of king Leopard of Belgium, when he claimed Congo for the Belgians. For a “racist, offensive and deplorable” book – as described by Achebe – to recount a historical event such as that of an unfair, brutal dehumanization of a race by another race and by the order of numerous empires, will in no doubt raise froth the question why such impartial emphasis on the portrayal of the offended race?
However much on believes Joseph Conrad to be a racist, there is a socially constrained reason for him being so; if at all he is. Conrad was born in 1857 – the time of imperialism, greed and injustice. It is certainly not his fault Conrad lived his life at a time when the black man’s credibility and physical nature was at an all time low and believed to be inhumane.
“ The African is indeed my brother but my junior brother.”
Albert Schweitzer, a European missionary who sacrificed brilliant careers in both music and theology, made this statement despite being a Christian missionary. Therefore if Conrad is at times sound racist, it is because those codes and conventions of his time were racist.
Howbeit there are times at which he mercilessly satirises the Africans.
“ A black figure stood up, strode on black legs waving long black arms…”
As Chinua Achebe correctly pointed out did Conrad expect us to “expect a black figure striding on black legs to wave white arms?” Like Achebe, I believe, I see no point in emphasising in detail the complexion of this individual, once we have already established the fact the he is a “black figure”. This unnecessary description of a black man draws me to conclude the edifying fact of the matter is the Conrad must obviously have some sort of fixation with the word ‘black’.
There is a sense that Conrad holds a great deal of respect for Africa and its’ inhabitants.
“Fine fellows – cannibals – in their place. They were men one could work with and I am grateful to them.”
CANNIBAL – human or animal that eats its own kind, according to the Chambers English Dictionary. If there is nothing else in the entire ‘Heart of Darkness’ novella that proves Conrad is not a racist, then look no further than here. Marlow, an English man in his own rights, has the modesty of calling man-eating man ‘fine fellows’. Not only were they cannibals they were savage and black yet Marlow was ‘grateful to them.’
Apart from these cannibals Marlow does have respect and affinity with a number of the African characters. In particular his ‘late helmsman’
“No; I cannot forget him, though I am not prepared to affirm the fellow was exactly worth the life we lost in getting him.”
That, and a whole page and a half was dedicated in reminisce and sorrow by Marlow for his late ‘helmsman’, to clarify the matter – his late (black) helmsman. Kurtz, a white, symbolic god-figure in European civilization and also in the African society, was not “worth the life [he] lost in getting him”. Does one need to look elsewhere to find Marlow’s/Conrad’s impartiality and respect for the African race?
The two women in the novella show us something about Conrad’s approach to race. Kurtz’s “INTENDED” is portrayed as being the typical weaker vessel on Marlow’s visit to Belgium.
“She came forward, all in black, with a pale head, floating towards me in the dusk. She was in mourning. It was more the a year since his death,…”
This Belgian aristocrat comes across to me as a woman of leisure and glory with the advantage of assistance from a dominant state at a time like this, yet is depicted as the stereotypical weaker vessel; in black and still in mourning more than a year after the death of Kurtz. This illustration of her suggests to me although being a woman of rank and intelligence the distressed and feebleness witnessed by Marlow on his visit will secure the predictable end like that of a grieving widow, patronisingly solemn and melodramatic.
Contrary to Kurtz’s Belgian fiancé his African mistress possesses a more mature, unique conduct. A maturity described as
“…barbarous and superb…”
These two almost ambiguous but supportive description of a woman, I believe would have been an insulting act to the patriarchal society of Conrad’s day. Yet he goes further on to commend the state of a black woman. Now that must have been a criminal offence, an ABOMINATION!!! The end of this woman will in no doubt be in pain but it certainly will not be the pitiful end as that of Kurtz’s Belgian INTENDED, with the knowledge of the tribal presence around and this half masculine half feminine depiction of her it quite clear that she is obviously a leader of some sort and will therefore take up her responsibility of leadership and not dwell too much on the death of the genocidal enigmatic man that Kurtz was.
Conrad’s attitude toward the whites is hardly flattering. In Conrad’s opinion, I believe, he saw them as unwanted intruders exploring then raping forbidden territory.
“I know nothing as to the fate of the less valuable animals.”
He has obviously observed the conditions the whites under gone in their stay in Africa. I believe Conrad took time out to emphasise the immorality of the whole act of imperialism. In his mind I believe he saw the whites as robbers and rapist who would go to any length in search of what they wanted – in this case ivory. I believe Conrad deliberately depicted the Europeans as gold digging whores ready to go through uncertain territories regardless of what it would coast them. He illustrated them as weak invaders with the invaded laughing in their face.
“…they seemed to be tugging painfully uphill their two ridiculous shadow of unequal length, that trailed behind them slowly over the tall grass without bending a single blade.”
He shows here the strength of the African land. Where the grass is so strong men on donkeys mounted with necessities could not even bend ‘a single blade’. He shows the weakness and stupidity of the Europeans as they used donkeys as their means of travel and load bearer as well, it would have been quite obvious to any African that trekking through the jungle with a donkey would make you the butt of everyman’s joke, yet they slumbered on with heat beaten donkeys worn out from the weight on their backs. Conrad goes further on to devalue the state of these two white individuals by calling them ‘less valuable animals’. In calling them this he states that donkeys would have survived the jungle- notorious for its unknown creatures and its merciless massacre of unfamiliar feet.
Apart from Conrad having a particular dislike to the white race in general there is one white character he secludes from the group – the pink pyjamas pilgrim.
“”Say! We must have made a glorious slaughter of them in the bush. Eh? What do you think? Say!” He positively danced, the bloodthirsty little ginger beggar. And he nearly fainted when he saw the wounded man! I could not help saying, “You made a glorious lot of smoke, anyhow””
Obviously Marlow’s opinion of this ginger haired pilgrim is not gratifyingly tasteful. Apart from him being the only white onboard, beside Marlow, one would expect that a novella commonly known for its shocking savagery and predisposed prejudiced, as the ‘Heart of Darkness’ would portray the next civilized individual as a person of magnitude and with at least a greater perceptiveness of their ‘backdrop’. As we can see this is not quite the case. The setting of the scenario illustrates the premeditated surprise attack carried out by the natives of the land. And from the detailed structure of each sentence relating to the scene, I could gather that Marlow was just as surprised as the rest of the crew and thankful that they were lucky enough to escape with only the loss of one crewmember. Yet this pilgrim believe they made a ‘glorious slaughter of them’ (without the aid of ammunition). I can see why Marlow could not help making the sadistic and sardonic remark of the latter sentence.
Opinions are stated from the very beginning of the novella. In particular Conrad’s thoughts about colonialism. He delivers more than two pages on his thoughts and views on the subject. ‘Robbery with violence’.
“The conquest of the earth, which mostly mean 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 is the idea.”
As intelligent a man that Conrad was he still had the moral fibre to write almost three pages of work on such a frenzied topic as colonisation was at that time, despite knowing mass hysteria would prevail and it would be against him. Like him I believe I see Colonisation as a new formed word. Back then it was called exploring or missionary work. Conrad had the insight to look into the deeper meaning of imperialism. I am prepared to admit though that it may have genuinely have set out to be the conversion of one unfamiliar religion to another but as Robert Burns said ‘ the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley’.
During the discovery of the fertileness of the Africa, greed and gold over came their Christian convictions and in turn they turned against their fellow human, covering it up with the justification of their inconceivable skin and the immorality that were practised before the invasion. Conrad sees the deception of it all and states that
“ It was just robbery with violence, aggravated murder on a great scale, and men going at it blind…”
Seeing men killing their own brother, blinded by greed and robbed of any sense of reason by absurd assumptions acquainted with the black culture must have caused Conrad some sort of break down. He saw the intelligence on the African people, and he saw the enlightening knowledge the west could have gained rather than robbed. And I believe he must have seen the fear in western eyes that Africans were a threat to the growing empire established by force and brutality.
“… your strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others.”
Conrad implies a lot about the act of colonising and the mind of the powerful. I see this statement as a brief history of colonisation; I do consider that Conrad believes that colonies could only have occurred because of the weakness of the colonised. Like a bully thrives on the fear of the bullied so also the whole act of colonising depends on the weakness or strength of the targeted nation. I believe ‘Heart of Darkness’ is not a novella justifying the acts of the white man but shaming and condemning the under cover motives they used in seeking their desires.
Ultimately the most fascinating figure in the novella is the enigmatic Kurtz. It is very had to conclude indefinitely what Marlow thought of Kurtz. Having undergone such a remarkable period of time with Kurtz, Marlow himself appears to be recuperating from the haunting experience at being in a critical point of the life of such a man as Mr Kurtz. No doubt the episode is engraved in his mind but it will bring about positive and negative opinions of the man as Kurtz presence was establish to the audience during the last few days of his life.
