Adam Hochschild's novel entitled, King Leopold's Ghost, is a lost historical tale beginning in 1885 continuing into 1908 about the enslavement of the Congo. The book tells of a selfish king named Leopold and his pursuit to find rubber for the production of cars and bicycles, as the Congo Free State had the world’s largest amount of wild rubber. He was determined to get as much rubber to Europe as he could, and as fast as possible. This was all done under an elaborate scheme hidden behind a “charitable" image, deceiving many countries. The novel shows the themes of the greed of colonialism, slavery and racism, desire for fame and power, as well as moral responsibility and human rights. In King Leopold's Ghost, Hochschild teaches the lesson of standing up for what we believe in. We cannot stand by and let corruptive behavior continue in front of our eyes. We must be strong enough and educated enough, to protect what we know is right.
Leopold was very sly in gaining and sustaining his control over the Congo. Leopold grew obsessed with the idea of how much profit the colonies could bring to Belgium. As Hochschild writes, “His drive for colonies, however, was shaped by a desire not only for money but for power” (39). This quote shows just how much Leopold hated being a king of a monarchy where his powers were limited. He loved having absolute power over the Congo. In the novel, Leopold also says that for him and Henry Morton Stanley, a British journalist and explorer of central Africa, “Africa was a chance to gain upward mobility towards wealth and glory” (63).
King Leopold and his allies’ had great power over the Congo, which he soon exploited for its large supply of rubber. As said in the King Leopold’s Ghost, “For Europ...
... middle of paper ...
...”. Though I do believe that this is a very interesting topic, and it is truly unfortunate that this is not a very well-known story. It is obvious to me that Hochschild has explored deeply into the matter at hand and wanted to do his part of standing up and being heroic by writing this information-packed novel on the genocide.
Works Cited
Works Cited
Hochschild, Adam. King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial
Africa. Boston: Mariner, 1999. Print.
Kakutani, Michiko. "'King Leopold's Ghost': Genocide With Spin Control." Book of Times. New
York Times. The New York Times Company, 1 Sept. 1998. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.
Rapando Murunga, Godwin. "King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in
Colonial Africa." African Studies Quarterly: The Online Journal for African Studies 12th ser. 3.2 (n.d.): n. pag. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.
The book mainly chronicles the efforts of King Leopold II of Belgium which is to make the Congo into a colonial empire. During the period that the European powers were carving up Africa, King Leopold II of Belgium seized for himself the vast and mostly unexplored territory surrounding the Congo River.
Alas, in 1961 Patrice Lumumba was assassinated by a US- sponsored plot 7 months after independence, and replaced him with a “puppet dictator named Mobutu” (Kingsolver). In her book, Barbara Kingsolver surfaces a forgotten part of our nation’s history in the exploitation of the Congo through her main characters, the Price family, who are missionaries sent to the Kilanga village. Through characters’ narratives that “double as allegories for the uneasy colonial marriage between the West and Africa” (Hamilton, Jones), Kingsolver creates a relatable way for her readers to understand the theme she is trying to convey, which is “‘what did we do to Africa, and how do we feel about it?’” (Snyder). Kingsolver began with this theme and developed the rest of the novel around it, just as she does with her other works, and sticking with her trademark technique, she utilizes her book as a vessel for “political activism, an extension of the anti-Vietnam protests” she participated in college (Snyder).
Another important character is King Leopold's, as Hochschild puts it, "Stagehand" Henry Morton Stanley. He was a surprisingly cruel person, killing many natives of the Congo in his sophomore voyage through the interior of Africa. The first was to find Livingston. Leopold used Stanley to discuss treaties with African leaders granting Leopold control over the Congo. Some of the natives he talked to weren't even in the position to sign the treaties, or they didn't know what they were signing.
Leopold paid a large monthly price to a journalist to ensure a stream of sympathetic articles about his activities in the Congo. The French did not feel threatened by Belgium or by Leopold’s claims. Their main fear was that when the king ran out of money, as they were sure he would, in his expensive plan to build a railway, he might sell the whole territory to their rival, Britain. When talking to the British, Leopold hinted that if he didn’t get all the land he wanted, he would leave Africa completely, which meant he would sell the Congo to France. The bluff worked, and Britain gave in. Staff in place and tools in hand, Leopold set out to build the infrastructure necessary to exploit his colony. Leopold’s will treated the Congo as if it were just a piece of uninhabited land to be disposed of by its owner. Leopold established the capital of his new Congo state at the port town of
Hochschild concludes that the world must never forget the events of Leopold’s Congo. This event is evidence that it is the result of human greed that led to so much suffering, injustice, and corruption.
In King Leopold`s Ghost, the author Adam Hochschild conveys many attempts to challenge the actions of King Leopold`s control in the Congo. This was to reach an international audience at the time of the 20th century. Protestors depended on a variety of writing techniques to make their case successful. For example the use of direct letters to officials, published “open letters”, articles in newspapers, and public speeches. These protesters were George Washington Williams, William Sheppard, Edmund Dene Morel, and Roger Casement. These protesters became aware of the situation in the Congo in different ways. They also had diversity in how they protested through their writing. Although Edmund Dene Morel and Roger Casement share a comparative approach.
As this novel is told entry by entry, narrated by the women of the family a clear picture of life in the Congo is very accurately represented as well as the influences of faith on each character. Leah clearly points out, “We've all ended up giving up body and soul to Africa, one way or another." Each of us, she adds, "got our heart buried in six feet of African dirt; we are all co-conspirators here." This is true of each and every character throughout the novel, as their faith is altered and influenced by the events within their stay in the Belgian Congo. Kingsolver presents to her reader many separate versions of faith, from Nathan’s forever devoted, to Orleanna’s incredibly subtle but morally strong. While reading the passages narrated by the women of the family it is realized, that without your own personal beliefs a life filled with success is unfathomable.
The land Leopold had obtained was about eighty times larger than that of Belgium itself. Plus, Leopold was proclaimed the “sovereign” ruler of all the Congo Free Sta...
During the 17th century, slavery was a widely used commodity with the Europeans, little do people know however that African kings also had and accepted slavery in their own nations. King Nzinga Mbemba of Congo and the King of Ouidah had similarities on the issue of slavery; they tolerated the use of slaves. Congo’s king had no contingency with slavery; in fact, he had slaves in his country. When the Portuguese were purchasing goods in Congo, the king had men “investigate if the mentioned goods are captives or free men” (NZ, 622). The fact that the king differentiates the men between ‘free’ and ‘captives’ illustrates that not all people in Congo are free. Whether these captives are from the country of Congo or not, they are still caught and held all across the nation against their will. King Mbemba kept slaves because the population of Congo was vastly declining due to the slave trade. In his letter, he pleads with the king of Portug...
As a political figure, King Leopold of Belgium had minimal power, yet he acknowledged the political and financial advantages of colonization, and acquired the Congo as a private colony whereas Britain snatched up colonies globally, including the “crown jewel” of all colonies, India. Belgium and Britain demonstrated a stark contradiction of two opposing methods of colonization. These two countries methods’ of domination ultimately decide the fates of each party, conqueror and conquered, in the precarious gamble that is imperialism.... ... middle of paper ...
Over the course of human history, many believe that the “Congo Free State”, which lasted from the 1880s to the early 1900s, was one of the worst colonial states in the age of Imperialism and was one of the worst humanitarian disasters over time. Brutal methods of collecting rubber, which led to the deaths of countless Africans along with Europeans, as well as a lack of concern from the Belgian government aside from the King, combined to create the most potent example of the evils of colonialism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century’s. The Congo colonial experience, first as the Congo Free State then later as Belgian Congo, was harmful to that region of Africa both then and now because of the lack of Belgian and International attention on the colony except for short times, the widespread economic exploitation of the rubber resources of the region, and the brutal mistreatment and near-genocide of the Congolese by those in charge of rubber collecting.
Springer, Jane. Genocide: A Groundwork Guide. Toronto, Ontario: Groundwood Books / House of Anansi Press, 2006. (Accessed March 7, 2014).
Using these ironic terms shows that Conrad wanted to exploit the Native people of Africa and the European people working in Africa through a postcolonial analysis. Whether or not this story has some truth to it as to when Conrad did travel to the Congo is not known. But there is not escaping the premeditated attempts by Conrad to illustrate these two separate cultures as ones whose qualities intersected and overlapped.
Although numerous critics (including Johanna M. Smith, Peter Hyland, Herbert Klein, and Garrett Stewart) have drawn attention to how Marlow's lie to the Intended informs the whole preceding text and how that culminating scene with the Intended is connected to Marlow's initial impression of Brussels as a whited sepulchre (how appropriate in light of Belgian King Leopold II's hypocritical defense of his private company's rapacious exploitation of the ludicrously- named Congo Free State!), few have until recently focussed on how the lie affects the reader's reaction to Marlow as the protagonist and narrator of Conrad's Congo tale.
While the economic and political damage of the scramble for Africa crippled the continent’s social structure, the mental warfare and system of hierarchy instituted by the Europeans, made the continent more susceptible to division and conquest. The scramble for partition commenced a psychological warfare, as many Africans were now thrust between the cultural barriers of two identities. As a result, institutions for racial inferiority became rooted in the cultural identity of the continent. This paper will expound on the impact of colonialism on the mental psyche of Africans and the employment of the mind as a means to seize control. I will outline how the mental hierarchy inculcated by the Europeans paved the way for their “divide and conquer” tactic, a tool essential for European success. Through evidence from a primary source by Edgar Canisius and the novel, King Leopold’s Ghost, I will show how colonial influences heightened the victimization of Africans through psychological means. I will culminate by showing how Robert Collins fails to provide a holistic account of colonialism, due to his inability to factor in the use of psychological warfare as a means to the end. By dissecting the minds of both the colonizer and the colonized, I hope to illustrate the susceptibility of African minds to European influences and how psychological warfare transformed Africans from survivors to victims during colonialism.