Although I am still still intrigued by the topics we have discussed through our readings, The Heart of Darkness by far has been my least favorite. I can't completely understand the full concept of what Joseph Conrad was trying to portray. It's as though he's telling his story in so much detail that I often miss the main points made throughout the reading. What I simply mean is what I basically just said (as far as use of words), SIMPLE. There is a phrase that says "less is more," and I believe Conrad didn't receive that message.Yet, with all jokes aside, this reading does stand to be proven a novel of sorts. I had questionable feelings for each of the characters, Marlow being the first to come to mind. His role was a very important one in terms of personifying the ignorance and hatred possessed by many of the European colonialist that refers back to the happenings throughout King Leopold's Ghost. While in the same reference, somehow pure consciousness arrives as Marlow begins to make his own questions about what exactly is taking place which leads to my doubt of his true character. Being as it may, irony strikes my mind as I considered the new thought of these European explorers describing the Africans as inhumane savages, yet the thoughtless actions they committed were far from what they deemed to be "civilized."
All around this, to me, is considered a novel Worthy of attention due to it's meaning and symbolism. Yet, I fear to make it too great of a mention due to it's what one might call "over intelligence" as far as things like word play and tone are concerned. Still, who am I to judge? Maybe it's just me being too far behind instead of Conrad being too far ahead. Yet I think people will agree with my opinion.
4 comments:
It seems like "savage" is a term used by the dominating class, no matter what they did.
I really have to agree with you on this one. Conrad's way of writing was so hard for me to grasp. He reminded me of reading Emerson. He talks so much that I am spending more time trying to figure out what he is talking about, rather than getting his point.
I had to read some of the sections twice because the first time I was just trying to grasp the information. Although I didn't enjoy this as much as King Leopold's Ghost I did like his outside view on what was happening. Marlow kind of just walked into all what was happening. He kinda ignored the fact of what was happening to the Africans and focused on his personal goals in Africa.
It is a tough read in an antiquated style. Reading Conrad is kind of like reading Dickens with the charming and scrappy cast of characters removed. Everyone is Bill Sykes.
Post a Comment