“Take up the White Man’s burden/send forth the best ye breed/ Go send your sons to exile/ to serve your captive’s need,” reads Rudyard Kipling’s poem: “The White Man’s Burden.” The white man’s burden was the popular idea that white men were morally and intellectually superior to other races, and were, therefore, responsible for civilizing lesser peoples, and“serving their captive’s need.” Often, this concept was used to justify imperialism by disguising an otherwise exploitative institution with an air of morality. Joseph Conrad explores the insincere nature of imperialism in “Heart of Darkness” through Marlow: a steamboat captain, and his journey into the heart of the Congo to extract a violent, greedy, ivory trader named Kurtz. Marlow encounters …show more content…
Marlow first describes the noble endeavor that is imperialism. He says, “Hunters for gold or pursuers of fame...messengers of the might...The dreams of men...the germs of empires…”(Conrad 11). The imperialists are described as brave, altruistic pioneers of goodness, bringing light and civilization to other lands, carrying the white man’s burden. However, the actual system of European imperialism does not live up to this grandiose ideas, as shown in Marlow’s subsequent interactions with Africans. For example, Marlow receives his position only after the violent death of another Company …show more content…
The first thing that Marlow sees upon entering Kurtz’s station is rows of African heads on stakes He states, “these round knobs were not simply ornamental, but symbolic...I was not so shocked as you may think” (Conrad 87). Once again, Marlow has no reaction to this carnage; however, he is still critical of Kurtz’s behavior. The Russian tells Marlow: “The camps of [the natives] surrounded the place, and the chiefs came every day to see him. They would crawl…”(Conrad 88). Kurtz forces the natives chiefs, the original rulers of the region, to crawl through a path of the decapitated heads of their own people, and subjugate themselves to a greedy, ruthless, imposed leader who cares for nothing but his lust for wealth. Kurtz has taken the embedded racism toward the natives to an extreme, and while he understands that his actions are horrific, he also knows that it doesn’t matter because the system has only rewarded him with more power and wealth for his violence. What Marlow refuses to acknowledge is that, while in Africa, he participates in the same system of dehumanization and exploitation, but in his delusions of moral superiority, dismisses Kurtz’s actions as anecdotal evidence, and once again, can absolve himself of ethical responsibility without ever truly
In Heart of Darkness, cultural identity and the dominance of the European, white male is constructed and asserted through the constructions of the "other", that is the African natives and females, largely through language and setting. Thus, while claims of Conrad's forwardness in producing a text that critiques colonialism may be valid, Heart of Darkness is ultimately a product of it's time and therefore confirms the contextual notions of difference.
Marlow reinforces that Kurtz represents “ ‘all [of] Europe’ ” and that his immense wealth in ivory and including his role as a figurehead upon the natives serves as a representation of the European society as well. This representation of Kurtz by Marlow helps unravel his mystery by describing Kurtz as an emissary for Europe that will hopefully also unravel the problematic nuances of Europe in the future. Marlow arrives in the inner station and meets the Russian before Kurtz, the narrator on the Nellie with Marlow claims that the Russian “nodded with a nod full of mystery and wisdom” when he had told Marlow about his experiences with Kurtz (52). The Russian supports the mystery behind Kurtz as well by explaining impact he leaves upon him. This claim by the narrator elucidates that some of Kurtz’s “charm” rubs off on those who are fortunate enough to meet him, therefore describing Kurtz as a some kind of enrichment to life
In the present era of decolonization, Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness presents one of fictions strongest accounts of British imperialism. Conrad’s attitude towards imperialism and race has been the subject of much literary and historical debate. Many literary critics view Conrad as accepting blindly the arrogant attitude of the white male European and condemn Conrad to be a racist and imperialists. The other side vehemently defends Conrad, perceiving the novel to be an attack on imperialism and the colonial experience. Understanding the two viewpoints side by side provides a unique understanding that leads to a commonality that both share; the novel simply presents a criticism of colonialists in Africa. The novel merely portrays a fictional account of British imperialism in the African jungle, where fiction offers maximum entertainment it lacks in focus. The novel is not a critique of European colonialism and imperialism, but rather a presentation of colonialism and the theme of darkness throughout the novel sheds a negative light on the selfishness of humanity and the system that was taking advantage of the native peoples. In Joseph Conrad’s novel, Heart of Darkness, Conrad presents a criticism of British imperial colonization not for the purpose of taking sides, but with aims of bettering the system that was in place during Conrad’s experience in the African Congo. Conrad uses the character of Marlow and his original justification of imperialism so long as it was efficient and unselfish that was later transformed when the reality of colonialism displayed the selfishness of man, to show that colonialism throughout history displaces the needs of the mother country over the colonized peoples and is thus always selfish.
There is one absolute certainty in life --death. Often euphemized as the “great equalizer”, death transcends all things that divide people: be it race, gender, religion, etc., and effects everyone that has: ever lived, is living, or will live. Joseph Conrad in his novella “Heart of Darkness”, shares the death of an imperial ivory tradesman, in order to uncover the dehumanizing subterfuge of justifying Imperialism.
In the 1900s novella Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, the protagonist often encounters women at landmarks of his life. Charlie Marlow is a sailor and imperialist who sets out along the Congo River to “civilize” the “savages.” The novella begins with a crew on the Thames waiting for the tides to change. During their wait, a character named Marlow tells of his exploits on the African continent. In his recounted travels, Marlow meets other imperialists such as Mr. Kurtz, a man who is obsessed with the pursuit of ivory and riches. Like Mr. Kurtz, Marlow embarks across the African continent in hopes of earning both money and respect. One early critic of the novel, Edward Garnett, wrote in his review that “[Heart of Darkness] is simply a piece of art…the artist is intent on presenting his sensations in that sequence and arrangements whereby the meaning or meaninglessness of the white man in uncivilized Africa can be felt in its really significant aspects,” (Garnett). What Garnett fails to observe is that Heart of Darkness is not only an observation of “the white man,” but the white woman as well.
“ The conquest of the earth, which mostly means 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.” (Conrad 65) So stated Marlow as though this was his justification for ravaging the Congo in his search for ivory. Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness shows the disparity between the European ideal of civilization and the reality of it as is evidenced by the domination, torture, exploitation and dehumanization of the African population. Heart of Darkness is indicative of the evil and greed in humanity as personified by Kurtz and Marlow.
The importance of cultural context within any type of text is essential in order to elucidate a distinct argument. In Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, a novella starring the experiences of an ivory trader in Central Africa named Charles Marlow, various themes of racism and human cruelty are discussed in relation to its contextual features. The film “Apocalypse Now” by Francis Ford Coppola adapts this idea of implementing a correlation between its central ideas to a specific cultural context as well. The central research question this extended essay focuses on is how do different features used in Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad and the film version of "Apocalypse Now" by Francis Ford Coppola help criticize imperialism? In Heart of Darkness and “Apocalypse Now,” the struggle between the barbaric nature of the natives and the oppressive nature of Imperialism is questioned through the use of characterization of various factors.
Imperialism sprung from an altruistic and unselfish aim to "take up the white man's burden"1 and “wean [the] ignorant millions from their horrid ways.”2 These two citations are, of course, from Kipling’s “White Man’s Burden” and Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, respectively, and they splendidly encompass what British and European imperialism was about – at least seen from the late-nineteenth century point of view. This essay seeks to explore the comparisons and contrasts between Conrad’s and Kipling’s view of imperialism in, respectively, Heart of Darkness and “White Man’s Burden” and “Recessional.”
One interpretation of Marlow's relationship to colonialism is that he does not support it. Conrad writes, "They were not enemies, they were not criminals, they were nothing earthly now,-nothing but black shadows of disease and starvation, lying confusedly in the greenish gloom" (p. 27-28). Marlow says this and is stressing that the so-called "savages", or Africans, are being treated and punished like they are criminals or enemies when in fact they never did anything. He observes the slow torture of these people and is disgusted with it. Marlow feels sympathy for the black people being slaved around by the Europeans but doesn't do anything to change it because that is the way things are. One can see the sympathy by the way that he gives a starving black man one of his biscuits. "To tear treasure out of the bowels of the land was their desire, with no moral purpose at the back of it than there is in burglars breaking into a safe" (p. 54). This statement by Marlow conveys that he doesn't believe that the Europeans have a right to be stripping Africa of its riches. He views the Jungles of Africa as almost it's own living, breathing monster.
Kurtz was the chief of the Inner Station, where he was in charge of a very important ivory-trading post. Marlow learns that because of Kurtz’s ability to obtain more ivory than anybody else, he is of “greatest importance to the Company” and is to become a “somebody in the Administration” (Conrad 143). However, a critical aspect is the way in which he went about his business, as it was ruthless and selfish, characteristics that go hand-in-hand with European colonization.
On one hand, Marlow is saved by his self-discipline while on the other hand Kurtz is doomed by his lack of it. Before Marlow embarked on his voyage to Africa, he had a different view. Due to propaganda, he believed that the colonization of the Congo was for the greater good. In his head, he judged that the people of Africa were savages and that colonization would bring them the elation and riches of civilization. Despite an apparent uneasiness, he assumed that restraint would function there.
In Conrad's Heart of Darkness Marlow, the main character, symbolizes the positiveness of Imperialism. Marlow, as a character realizes the evil that negative Imperialism has caused and decides it is truly unnecessary. When Marlow states, "I had got a heavenly mission to civilize you," he expresses his good intentions to help the Africans progress and advance. Furthermore, when he says, "I was an impostor," Marlow recognizes the fact that he is an invader into a foreign land, yet he sticks to his moral values.
At the beginning of the novel, Marlow is traveling the jungle and the many scenes of life can be seen. Africa has seems to be taken over by many travelers which makes one wonder what is there ulterior motive? Africa is a third world country, which makes it easy for someone to come in and talk on their soapbox. It is very easy to tell that these men are not the biggest fans of colored people, so it is plausible that they have come to instill a sense of imperialism. As Marlow passes through the waters of the Congo it is easily visible the trouble of the natives. “Black shapes crouched, lay, sat between the trees, leaning against the trunks, clinging to the earth half coming out, half effaced with the dim light, in all the attitudes of pain, abandonment, and despair.” (20) Show that the holding of these colonies has started. The soldiers have come in and taken the inhabitants and are destroying them and taking from them the one thing they deserve over everything, life. The imperialists seem to not care about the Africans and are just there for their land.
“ The Marxists hate imperialism and consider it as the highest stage, the peak of capitalism and coincidently Heart of Darkness has been considered as an anti-imperialist work, so the work invites a Marxist approach in itself.” (Sardar) The natives were basically stripped of their agency and were forced under the European influence to do hard labor with the ivory. “This imperial relationship between Europe and the underdeveloped world as defined by Lenin is certainly detectable in the historical setting of Heart of Darkness.” (Sardar) They weren’t given the same opportunities as the others. “European imperialism would suggest that this is a utopia considering they can exploit the African masses for maximum gain and they believe that they bring civilization and light to a dark and savage area…” (Rodarte101litcrit 1) And this is kind of topsy turvy because Marlow dreamed of having a utopia. Now that he has met Mr. Kurtz and has seen, and personally worked with his many wonders that he so powerfully possessed, he’s convinced that what he is doing is right. Marlow was naive and hopeless, and Mr. Kurtz seemed all powerful and glorified. Yet we see through the hands of Mr. Kurtz, power is not to be dealt with people who do not know how to control
By the time Marlow and Kurtz meet, Marlow is already well aware of the similarities they share. Both are imperialists, and while Marlow detests the treatment of the natives by his employers (Belgian colonists), he also makes apparent his abhorrence toward the Africans. On the other hand, Kurtz abandons the pretense of helping the natives achieve civilization, as displayed by the Europeans. Instead, he adopts their customs and becomes their leader in the never-ending quest for ivory. "He began with the argument that we whites, from the point of development we had arrived at, 'must necessarily appear to them [savages] in the nature of the supernatural beings- we approach them with the might as of a deity' (Longman, 2000, p. 2226). Marlow also admired Kurtz' resourcefulness and survival skills, especially his perseverence through jungle fever. "The wilderness had patted him on the head....it had taken him, loved him, embraced him, got into his veins, consumed his flesh, and sealed his soul to its own by the inconceivable ceremonies of some devilish initiation. He was its spoiled and pampered favorite." (Longman, 2000, p. 2225).