QUESTION: Throughout the story Conrad uses a number of different opposites to illustrate the differences between the pilgrims, the crew, and the savages. How do you think he uses these opposites to minimize the cruelty and greediness of the pilgrims and emphasize the primative nature of the crew and natives?
I think Conrad mainly used opposites in describing the behaviors of the different groups of people in Heart of Darkness. He never really had to come out and say that the pilgrims were greedy and cruel, or that the crew and natives were primitive. He implied through the description of their behavior the type of people these groups were composed of. However, I think he blended them together in such a way that it hid exactly how greedy and cruel the pilgrims were. He mainly focused on bad events that occurred with the crew or the natives. It seems that in the story Conrad tried to justify the cruelty of the pilgrims by making a poor example of the crew and natives. He elaborated on the fact that the crew had turned to cannibalism, for example, and never went into too much depth of anything bad the pilgrims had done. The pilgrims treated the crew poorly and never gave them food, but he never directly made note of it. When the natives kept attacking the steamer, the pilgrims would automatically start shooting and try to kill them. In reality, the pilgrims were very cruel and greedy, considering the fact they only went on the journey for ivory, but it is overshadowed by the authors elaboration of the crew and natives faults.
Conrad uses “opposites” to compare the groups of people in the story. Not only does he compare differences of the pilgrims, the crew, and the savages by contrasting their physical appearances, he also contrasts their behaviors. The pilgrims were white, money-hungry workers of the Central Station. In addition, they all yearned and clung to an aspiration of maneuvering themselves into a position that they could trade ivory and earn money. The viewed the black crew as inferior. The second group, the black cannibals, were natives in Africa who were hired as the crew of Marlow’s steamboat. From Marlow’s point of view, the crew consisted of hardworking, respectable people. For example, Marlow was impressed with the starving crew’s ability to “restrain” themselves from lashing out against the pilgrims, who were extremely unreasonable and hateful towards them. They were primitive people in dress and behavior as noted when Marlow stated, these men “still belonged to the beginnings of time.” The natives, which were the third group, were savage people. They too were natives of Africa like Marlow’s black crew, but they were not a part of Marlow’s steamer crew. In appearance, they were black and wore little or no clothing. However, unlike the pilgrims or the crew aboard Marlow’s steamer, they spoke a different, evil-like language, which sounded like spells to Marlow. They were protective and territorial of their land, and they were fearful when Marlow and his crew approached them. By highlighting the negative attributes of all three groups, Conrad minimizes the full impact of the true bad natures of the pilgrims, the crew, and the savages. Possibly, Conrad’s intent was to show that all people have bad, sinful natures. Some people could argue that the pilgrims were the worst group because they were self-centered, greedy, and hateful. However, the unjustifiable cannibalism of the black crewmen cannot be ignored, even though, they were hardworking, starving people. The savages territory was being invaded; therefore, Conrad could have had taken this opportunity to allow the reader to sympathize with this group of people, yet the reader only views them as savage people starting war and firing arrows on Marlow and his crew. The author could have given the reader a glimpse of the thoughts and feelings of one of the groups, even the pilgrims, so the reader could have sympathized with them, but he did not. Every group seems bad, with the negatives outweighing the positives. Therefore, Conrad’s objective was not to have one group come out on top and look like the “good group.” No, his aim was to have the reader engaged in Marlow’s inner struggle that lasted the course of the story and to show the true natures of the three groups of people.
3 comments:
QUESTION:
Throughout the story Conrad uses a number of different opposites to illustrate the differences between the pilgrims, the crew, and the savages. How do you think he uses these opposites to minimize the cruelty and greediness of the pilgrims and emphasize the primative nature of the crew and natives?
I think Conrad mainly used opposites in describing the behaviors of the different groups of people in Heart of Darkness. He never really had to come out and say that the pilgrims were greedy and cruel, or that the crew and natives were primitive. He implied through the description of their behavior the type of people these groups were composed of. However, I think he blended them together in such a way that it hid exactly how greedy and cruel the pilgrims were. He mainly focused on bad events that occurred with the crew or the natives. It seems that in the story Conrad tried to justify the cruelty of the pilgrims by making a poor example of the crew and natives. He elaborated on the fact that the crew had turned to cannibalism, for example, and never went into too much depth of anything bad the pilgrims had done. The pilgrims treated the crew poorly and never gave them food, but he never directly made note of it. When the natives kept attacking the steamer, the pilgrims would automatically start shooting and try to kill them. In reality, the pilgrims were very cruel and greedy, considering the fact they only went on the journey for ivory, but it is overshadowed by the authors elaboration of the crew and natives faults.
Conrad uses “opposites” to compare the groups of people in the story. Not only does he compare differences of the pilgrims, the crew, and the savages by contrasting their physical appearances, he also contrasts their behaviors. The pilgrims were white, money-hungry workers of the Central Station. In addition, they all yearned and clung to an aspiration of maneuvering themselves into a position that they could trade ivory and earn money. The viewed the black crew as inferior. The second group, the black cannibals, were natives in Africa who were hired as the crew of Marlow’s steamboat. From Marlow’s point of view, the crew consisted of hardworking, respectable people. For example, Marlow was impressed with the starving crew’s ability to “restrain” themselves from lashing out against the pilgrims, who were extremely unreasonable and hateful towards them. They were primitive people in dress and behavior as noted when Marlow stated, these men “still belonged to the beginnings of time.” The natives, which were the third group, were savage people. They too were natives of Africa like Marlow’s black crew, but they were not a part of Marlow’s steamer crew. In appearance, they were black and wore little or no clothing. However, unlike the pilgrims or the crew aboard Marlow’s steamer, they spoke a different, evil-like language, which sounded like spells to Marlow. They were protective and territorial of their land, and they were fearful when Marlow and his crew approached them.
By highlighting the negative attributes of all three groups, Conrad minimizes the full impact of the true bad natures of the pilgrims, the crew, and the savages. Possibly, Conrad’s intent was to show that all people have bad, sinful natures. Some people could argue that the pilgrims were the worst group because they were self-centered, greedy, and hateful. However, the unjustifiable cannibalism of the black crewmen cannot be ignored, even though, they were hardworking, starving people. The savages territory was being invaded; therefore, Conrad could have had taken this opportunity to allow the reader to sympathize with this group of people, yet the reader only views them as savage people starting war and firing arrows on Marlow and his crew. The author could have given the reader a glimpse of the thoughts and feelings of one of the groups, even the pilgrims, so the reader could have sympathized with them, but he did not. Every group seems bad, with the negatives outweighing the positives. Therefore, Conrad’s objective was not to have one group come out on top and look like the “good group.” No, his aim was to have the reader engaged in Marlow’s inner struggle that lasted the course of the story and to show the true natures of the three groups of people.
Post a Comment