Racism vs. the True Meaning of Heart of Darkness
The meaning found within Heart of Darkness far outweighs its racist undertones.
According to Patrick Brantlinger, Heart of Darkness ?Offers a powerful critique of . . . imperialism and racism . . . in ways that can only be characterized as both imperialist and racist.? Chinua Achebe claimed Conrad to be ?a bloody racist,? in his highly acclaimed lecture, ?An Image of Africa,? but the very essence of Heart of Darkness lies in the fact that it does not condone imperialism in the Congo. In his essay Achebe states that, ?there is a preposterous and perverse kind of arrogance in . . . reducing Africa to the role of props for the breakup of one petty European mind? (Achebe 788). This ?European mind? is that of the character Kurtz, whom Marlow greatly idolizes throughout his narrative. Furthermore, in regards to Conrad using a narrator behind a narrator, Achebe claims that he ?appears to go to considerable pains to set up layers of insulation between himself and the moral universe of his story,? in order to ?draw a cordon sanitaire between himself and the moral and psychological malaise of his narrator.? Achebe does not believe that Conrad?s distancing himself from Marlow allows the reader to ?judge the actions and opinions of his characters? (Achebe 787). Achebe?s accusations are very important to debate in determining how successful Conrad was in his critique of Imperialism.
Heart of Darkness is a summation and derived conclusion of the experiences Conrad received as a result of his visit to the Congo during the imperialistic reign of King Leopold II of Belgium. Marlow?s first-person narrative is used to show Conrad?s anti-imperialist attitude. There are two very key factors in interpreting whether Conrad presented this attitude in a manner that can be deemed racist and imperialist. First, the character of Kurtz is of great importance because it is his character and the ?breakup? of his ?European mind? that defines Conrad?s anti-imperialist views. It is important to understand how, through Kurtz, Marlow has come to the truth in his journey of discovery, and why Kurtz is portrayed as a hero. Second, how the reader interprets the relationship between Conrad and Marlow is also of great importance because Marlow?s narrative at times carries strong racist undertones. Correctly interpreting these two factors can determine the extent to which Conrad?s critique comes across as being racist and imperialist.
The title of the novella plays an extremely large role in the overall interpretation of meaning, as it has several different meanings and applications. Marlow?s account of his experiences is a glimpse into his journey of discovery. On the surface, the phrase ?heart of darkness? refers to Congo because it is the wild and untamed area of truth and discovery. While the Congo does symbolize a heart of darkness, the title implies meaning far beyond the dense confusion of the jungle that constantly surrounds Marlow. Marlow is seeking the truth in his journey, and it is finally found in Kurtz. Kurtz has come to embrace the heart of darkness and has reverted back to his savage state. The heart of darkness is the symbol of Marlow?s journey into truth and discovery, and it is very necessary to distinguish it as meaning more than simply the wild frenzy of the Congo because the meaning of the story lies within this heart of darkness.
The character of Kurtz is a very crucial one in the interpretation of the story as a whole. Marlow tells his listeners that ?All Europe contributed to the making of Kurtz? (66). He was one of the best of the best, but had somehow become the worst. Furthermore, in this quotation it is seen how Conrad shows Kurtz as a representative of Europe?s men. As the story unfolds to its end, Kurtz is found to be an artist, a great intellectual, a lover, a man on a philanthropic mission, and a writer. By ascribing all of these attributes to Kurtz, Conrad shows that he is a great man, but also a common man. Kurtz was not like the other ?pilgrims? that Marlow encounters, for he was sent down to redeem the imperialist motives of the country by civilizing the natives. As Marlow states it is this very ?Idea at the back of it,? that redeems the conquering of these peoples (21). However, Kurtz is overcome by the land of darkness, and returns to the very savage beginnings that Marlow sees in the natives: ?He had taken a high seat amongst the devils of the land? (65). In describing Kurtz, Marlow also says that:
The fact that Marlow calls Kurtz a hollow man is extremely revealing. As Fred L. Milne says, ?[Kurtz] is the embodiment of civilization -- its end product -- and he is revealed to be a sham? (Milne 110). Even in his report to the International Society for the Suppression of Savage Customs, his post-script prescribes that they ?Exterminate all the Brutes!? (66). Kurtz has truly fallen, so the question remains: why does Marlow remain loyal to him?
James Dahl answers this question saying that ?For Marlow the triumph of Kurtz is that in spite of his savage acts and ideas, he has pronounced a judgment on himself and on life itself? (Dahl 36). Kurtz?s final words ?The horror! The horror!? are his true redemption and the sole reason that allows Marlow and Conrad to portray him as a hero. He may have fallen a long way in his return to his savage ways, but he realizes this on his deathbed. As Patrick Brantlinger says, ?Kurtz?s dying words can be seen as something more than an outcry of guilt, and certainly more than a mere expression of the fear of death or of loathing for African ?savagery.? They can be seen as referring to the sort of lying idealism that can rationalize any behavior? (Brantlinger 295). This ?lying idealism? is exactly what Marlow had stated as being the only thing that could redeem the imperialistic efforts of Europe. In his death, Kurtz is redeemed because he realizes the real horror of hiding behind the nobility of bringing the light to these people, masking the true brutality of what really happened. Marlow sums up the redemption of Kurtz in saying that:
Through Kurtz, Conrad offers a very valid critique of imperialism. Imperialism as he saw it hid behind the pretenses of ?weaning those ignorant millions from their horrid ways,? as Marlow?s aunt says (27). Even men as great as Kurtz had succumbed to this brutal imperialism.
Marlow is distinguished from all of the other characters in the story by his unique purpose of adventure and discovery. He knows that the company he is going to work for is ?run for profit? (27). Even though Marlow is told that he is ?of the new gang -- the gang of virtue,? along with Kurtz, he is far different (41). This is why Marlow?s listeners are able to objectively see all of the horrors of imperialism.
In all, ?the breakup of one petty European mind,? is truly more than Achebe stated it to be, yet Achebe does bring up a valid point in pointing out the fact that Africa merely seems to serve as a backdrop to the redemption of Kurtz. It is truly in observing Marlow?s attitude, and subsequently Conrad?s attitude, towards the background natives that one finds the racial undertones of Heart of Darkness. There are several passages in the novel that present these natives in very different lights, and it is in the interpretation of these sometimes ambiguous areas of Marlow?s narrative that it can be determined how racist he and Conrad are.
Before looking into these passages, however, it is important to distinguish between Marlow?s words and Conrad?s true opinions. Marlow is Conrad?s narrator, but he is a narrator behind a narrator. Achebe asserts that Conrad is ineffective in presenting the story in this manner. However, it can be seen how this method allows Conrad to effectively distance himself from the thoughts and actions of Marlow, while at the same time allowing the reader to objectively analyze Marlow?s tale and thereby grasp the underlying meaning.
The story almost appears autobiographical as Conrad drew upon many of his own personal experiences when he wrote Heart of Darkness. For instance, the journey that Marlow makes into the inner station (34-35) is very similar in facts to the details of a trip that Conrad himself had experienced and told in ?The Congo Diary.? Encounters such as dead bodies along the path and the overall misery of the experience come through in Marlow?s account. However, there are some striking differences between Marlow?s and Conrad?s account. In Conrad?s trip, he alludes to the fact that he himself was carried at least part of the way during his trek, yet Marlow?s account makes no mention of this at all. In fact, the accompanying white man in Marlow?s trek has to be carried, and Marlow asserts that this was a great nuisance to the whole company. Furthermore, the impression is given that Marlow perhaps instructs the natives ?With gestures, not one of which was lost before the sixty pairs of eyes before [him],? to desert the man along the side of the road the next day (35). Conrad drew upon his own experiences in writing Heart of Darkness, but also makes crucial changes to them also. So although the story may be semi-autobiographical, Conrad makes key changes that distance Marlow?s experiences and ideas from his own.
Furthermore, although Marlow?s career greatly mirrors that of Conrad?s, it is not to be assumed that all of his opinions and words resemble those of Conrad?s. Conrad visited the Congo in his youth, most likely at the same age that Marlow?s experiences take place. Therefore, it can be assumed that Marlow?s experiences and views are those of Conrad?s when he was in the Congo. The story, then, serves as a reflection upon which, Marlow, Conrad and the listeners all can objectively see the horrors of imperialism.
Two passages within the story are of great importance in interpreting Conrad?s anti-imperialist, yet allegedly racist style. At the outset of his story, Marlow is talking about the conquest of the earth, relating the experiences of the Congo with those of the Romans. It is here, at the outset of the story, that Conrad sets the anti-imperialist tone that characterizes the rest of the novel. Marlow states:
This quotation has a very important purpose. Conrad is not saying that imperialism can be easily redeemed and is thus justifiable. He is saying that the only thing that can redeem any imperialist mission is through this ?idea at the back of it?. This idea is the same one Kurtz carried with him into the Congo; the idea of weaning these ?ignorant millions from their horrid ways.? While Marlow was not on this mission, Kurtz was, and it is in Kurtz?s failure of this mission that the importance of this quote lies. Marlow trails off at the end of this passage because his words remind him of Kurtz. Kurtz had believed in this idea, but eventually became the object of worship and sacrifice to the natives. In essence, the message that is conveyed is that not even the best of men could redeem imperialism.
One of the quotations that represents what appears to be Conrad?s truly racist side is in actuality very ambiguous. As Marlow is traveling down the river, captaining his steamboat, he is pondering his surroundings, trying to understand the ?incomprehensible frenzy? (51). He states:
On the surface, this passage appears very racist, but there also lies a deep ambiguity within it that is often overlooked. The interpretation of this quote is very important because it is a generalization of the African spirit and the heart of darkness that lies within it.
On the surface this quote appears to being an example of Conrad?s racist attitude. In it Marlow asserts that this is something ?ugly? about the thought of ?your remote kinship with this wild and passionate uproar.? This gives the impression that he views these natives as being of lesser kinship to the whites in the novel, and does not quite want to face the reality of what this could possibly mean. However, as this racist idea does not fit well within the context of the rest of the story, the quote can also take on another meaning. What Conrad is truly trying to assert is that within every man there lies the capability of reverting to this wild state. The essence of Kurtz?s character is found in this quote. His great European ?mind is capable of anything, because everything is in it, all the past as well as all the future.? As a result, this passage is far more than just an ignorant racist comment on the peoples of this wild land. It still has racist undertones, but it has a much deeper meaning than what actually appears on the surface.
There are several more areas within the novel that appear to be very racist. Most of these deal with how Marlow depicts the natives, such as the fireman on the steamboat, the ?wild-eyed? African woman, the cannibal on the steamship, and the numerous dying natives that lie in the shade throughout the novel. Conrad?s treatment of these characters does appear to be racist, but not to the extent that Achebe would like to believe. Describing them in the way that he does, Conrad allows the reader to see the truth of what is happening in the Congo. The fireman has been forced to work behind an instrument that he sees as witchcraft. The countless numbers of dying natives serves to evoke great emotions of pity from the reader towards these people. Furthermore, Conrad is also very harsh in his depiction of they white ?pilgrims? that are in the Congo. He shows no respect for them, and does not elevate them above the natives at all. So, Conrad may represent the natives in stereotypical images, and while this is a racist mannerism, he does so with a purpose and fairly across all racial lines.
In his conclusion Patrick Brantlinger states that ?As social criticism, its anti-imperialist message is undercut both by its racism and by its impressionism (Brantlinger 296).? Heart of Darkness may contain various racist undertones, however, they all serve a purpose on conveying the greater message. It is important to overlook this aspect of the novel, not in ignorance, but in order to see the true meaning that lies within the darkness.
In all, Conrad?s critique of imperialism is very effective. Kurtz?s redemption at the forefront of a very ugly imperialistic world in which blacks are greatly mistreated shows how in essence the one ideal that can redeem the imperialistic motives of Europe is never really attained. As a result, imperialism is depicted as a very unnecessary evil. As Cedric Watts says, ?The moral value of literary works may lie in their dialectical rather than their exemplary force? (Watts 207). So, while Heart of Darkness may at times appear to be a racist commentary, its dialectical message far outweighs its relative shortcomings.
Bibliography
Achebe, Chinua. ?An Image of Africa.? Massachusetts Review 18. 1977.
Brantlinger, Patrick. ?Heart of Darkness: Anti-Imperialism, Racism, or Impressionism.? Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism: Heart of Darkness. Ed. Ross C. Murfin. New York: Bedford Books, 1996.
Conrad, Joseph. Congo Diary and Other Uncollected Pieces. Ed. Zdzistaw Najder. New York: Doubleday & Co., 1978.
Dahl, James C. ?Kurtz Marlow, Conrad and the Human Heart of Darkness.? Studies in the Literary Imagination 1. Atlanta: Georgia state college, 1968.
Milne, Fred L. ?Marlow?s Lie and the Intended: Civilization as the lie in Heart of Darkness.?
The Arizona Quarterly 44. Tucson: University of Arizona, 1988.
Watts, Cedric. ? ?A Bloody Racist?: About Achebe?s View of Conrad.? The Yearbook of English Studies 13. London: Modern Humanities Research Association, 1983.
