Choose one of the articles You received on Friday, post your comments, and engage in the discussion. This will require logging on more than once.
Reminder: In-class essay on Wed. -- bring all your notes and the book to use. Revised essays are also due Wed. Be sure to staple the original essay with my comments to the back of your revision.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
So, I'd like to kick off the discussion on the article "The Journey Within" by Albert Guerard.
One point Guerard made was that Heart of Darkness "slightly overdoes the kinship with the 'passionate uproar,' slightly undervalues the temptation of inertia" (244). I think he's saying that apathy seemed the greater evil to Conrad, making Heart of Darkness' emphasis on unspeakable desires a minor flaw. After reading it over, I'm inclined to disagree. Actually, I think Conrad did a good job contrasting evil's apathy and its "active energy" (244). Although Kurtz was seduced into fulfilling his unspeakable desires, the "pilgrims" at the station were also apathetic towards everything but the idea of more ivory. The jungle descriptions also make one feel the futility and hopelessness in the Congo, which contrasts the passionate energy and rituals of Kurtz and the natives... What do you guys think?
Guerard also said "it's impossible to say where Conrad's conscious understanding of his story began and ended" (245). I've been wondering - did Conrad already grasp the full meaning of his experiences in the Congo, thus making his message powerful or did he work through his feelings while writing Heart of Darkness, thus making his message powerful?
Anyway, those were a couple things that occurred to me...please discuss/criticize! :)
Diya, in response to your second topic, Conrad did not grasp the full meaning of his adventure. Through Marlow he subtly shows that his revelations, his knowledge gained from the experience is "not very clear" at all. "And yet it seemed to throw a kind of light.
Marlow, as a narrator, allows Conrad to display the acquired knowledge, and "the horror" for others to feel, live through, and come to their own conclusions regarding "it all". You can feel the struggle Marlow goes through trying to narrate the "dream-sensation" and I believe Conrad was having the same trouble giving a purpose to his nightmare of a journey.
I don't think anyone born, nurtured, and functioning in a western mindset, (or possessing a 'heart of darkness') will grasp the 'full meaning' of the experience.
Conrad and his students hope to gain a little more meaning each time they tell the story or read the story, and feel - live through - the "brooding" darkness "over an inscrutable intention."
Erik - I agree with your connection between Conrad's struggle as a writer and Marlow's struggle as a narrator. I think both have a purpose in relaying the story to readers like us, but how each individual chooses to interpret and analyze this story is different. Each passage, each description is completely left for one to interpret it in one's own style. Furthermore, I agree with the fact that most people, especially if raised in a Western state of mind, cannot fully understand this experience as Conrad or Marlow wished them to.
Guerard brings up the exact point which we discussed in class about external and internal checks; how external checks, such as laws and others' perception of us, and the motivation of work "protect" us from being corrupt, and without only inner checks can preserve our character. Conrad describes almost all of the characters, with the exception of Kurtz, as "hollow" or lacking in the strong idea of internal checks. "Heart of Darkness" is Marlow's story, however it is largely overshadowed by Kurtz. So the question I had was if Marlow struggled with his internal checks, if he had any to begin with, while he was in the Congo. It seems like he was just an observer, and he was immune to everything that ruined a man down there. However, Guerard says "...Marlow reiterates often enough that he is recounting a spiritual voyage of self-discovery" (244).
The question that Grace brought up about rather Marlow had any internal checks reminded me of the article “Lying as dying in Heart of Darkness”. I really like how Steward explains Kurtz and Marlow’s relationship as the soul and mind. If such metaphor is true then Marlow does have internal checks, in fact Marlow may have more restraint than Kurtz and many others lack.
My favorite paragraph of this article is the last paragraph on page 363 where Stewart uses terms such as Id, ego, and superego to bring out the psychological meaning of Heart of Darkness. The Id comprises the unorganized part of the personality structure that contains the basic drives which acts unconsciously. Much like an Id, Kurtz acts on behave of his inner lusts and is unable to realize that he is consumed by darkness until the very end. On the other hand, like the ego or superego, Marlow consciously observes and understands what is happening. According to Freud, “the ego is that part of the id which has been modified by the direct influence of the external world”, while “the super-ego tends to stand in opposition to the desires of the id because of their conflicting objectives, and its aggressiveness towards the ego”. I think by having Marlow being both the ego and superego explains why he is fascinated yet disagree with Kurtz.
I think there are many perspectives of heart of darkness so all of you are right. However, the essay by Guerard interested me because one point he made was "this inborn strength appears to include restraint-the restraint that Kurtz lacked and the cannibal crew surprisingly possessed." I agree with this because when the malnourished cannibals were on the ship they had to fight their temptations. Kurtz could not. His greed (the ivory and exploitation of the Natives) tempted him to a point of self-destruction. It’s ironic how Conrad made his characters seem “civilized,” but who were so internally deteriorated they couldn’t recognize what it actually was.
I still wonder if Kurtz managed to judge himself before he died. Guerard said, “A little too much has been made, I think, of the redemptive value of the two words-“The horror!” But none of the company’s pilgrims could have uttered them.” I believe that Kurtz didn’t see what he had done, but what was to become of him.
To Grace I want to say that I had the same question about Marlow. And as I thought about it I decided that for some people, external checks are necessary. For others they are not and the difference is how strong their internal checks are. And internal checks, or morals if that's the connection you agree with, come through meditation and logical thinking. My theory is that Marlow has developed very strong self checks because of his meditation, and that in his "voyage of self discovery" he decides upon his values and standards by which he is going to live, and because of the strength in these things he is able to withstand temptation from the jungle that causes others to go mad.
I agree with what all of you have said. Erik, I really like your comparison of Conrad's struggles as a writer and Marlow's struggles as a narrator. I feel that it is this commonality that brings out the inner meaning of the book.
Grace, your concept of internal checks occurred to me also. External checks can make us portray ourselves differently to the world, but internal checks are the only ways that we are able to preserve our character. Kurtz may be the only character that has any internal checks.
I personally enjoyed Garrett Stewart's essay more. His concept of "lying is dying" really connected with our in-class (or small group?) discussion of lying taking away a part of us. As Mrs. Minor said, "lying kills a small part of you."
Grace: The point from Stewart's analysis which I barely grasped is, I think, that Kurtz becomes Marlow's "weathering of death by a double" on page 367. From this hypothesis, saying that Marlow sort of died through Kurtz, we can say Marlow's internal checks were broken in Kurtz. Since it was Kurtz who suffered, Marlow made it out with internal checks mostly intact.
But, his internal checks did not make it out completely intact. The LIE is definitely proof of a loss of something. Kurtz was Marlow's God but found out he was "something altogether without a substance. I couldn't have been
more disgusted if I had travelled all this way for the sole purpose oftalking with Mr. Kurtz." I think when Kurtz died, Marlow's God died. His God, his belief, - hope even - was exposed to be "hollow at the core". So, Marlow left the Congo without a God, a belief, and lacking the Idea which had lit his way through Darkness. The LIE at the end is proof that Marlow's belief was utterly devastated, and forever lost in the jungle.
I wanted to talk more about "Lying is Dying". In this article Stewart mentions Marlow's encounters with death as being stand-out scenes in his development as a character. I think there are really three big moments in terms of death and Marlow. First, when he finds the discarded skeleton of his Danish predecessor, second, when his helmsmen dies in his arms, and finally when Kurtz dies. Each of these experiences builds on the others, all leading to Marlow's realization that the Congo could bring him the same fate. At the end of the book Marlow too is on the brink of death from malaria. He narrowly survives, and it is the wisdom he acquires from the death of his Congo comrades that saves him. Marlow understands the potential consequences of being tainted by the Congo and his own arrogance, and instead chooses to leave before they cause his death as well.
I thought the point Stewart made about Kurtz's death was interesting, but the way he made it was even better. He introduced the "apothegm", "he died as he had lived," But then Stewart highlighted the disagreement with tense, as applied to Kurtz. That kurtz died when while he lived. Kurtz did die as he lived. He had lost his identity to the forest, as his arrogant pursuit of glory made his original personality vapid.
I read what hengxin said about the id, ego, and superego, and just remembered what those meant. Looking at Kurtz's motivations and actions, it looks like he has a nonexistent primitive drive, and an ego that is very strongly influenced by the ideals of superego, but this superego lost its restrictive agency. His tenure in the forest eroded any moral reservations he had, and therefor removed the influence of morality on his actions.
James I think you are perfectly correct in connecting the deaths Marlow sees as the way to save himself. I also want to tie this into Grace's topic of internal and external checks. I think when Marlow encounters death, his internal checks become much stronger, and more developed. He realizes that the Congo lures people in, and eventually is responsible for their fate. Thus he successfully avoids the fate that many of his fellow Europeans encounter by holding to his strong internal checks. However, like Erik said, the majority of his internal checks escaped the Congo along with him, but some do not. We see this in the end when he lies to Kurtz's fiance and contradicting his belief that lying is dying, and taking out "exterminate all the brutes" from the manuscript he found.
I just noticed this in the book, and compared to "Lying as dying in Heart of Darkness"
It seems Marlow totally agrees that lying is dying: "You know I hate, detest, and can't bear a lie, not because I am straighter than the rest of us, but simply because it appalls me. There is a taint of death, a flavor of mortality in lies-which is exactly what I hate and detest in the world- what I want to forget." (Part I, par. 61)
I think that Stewart has this odd unintentional way of pointing out that while these Kurts and Marlow are lying and consequently dying, that Kurts and Marlow are becoming what they are lying for. Kurts will say anything for ivory and to be promoted to God like status among the natives, and upon his death, his head looks like a huge ball of ivory and to tie into what Erik said, he became Marlow’s God. Marlow’s not entirely sure why he lies, and tried to avoid it all together, and in the end he’s not entirely sure about what has happened. It’s almost like the world is catching up with them.
Grace posed a really good question; did Marlow have any internal checks to begin with? As Albert Guerard explains, "Marlow reiterates often enough that he is recounting a spiritual voyage of self-discover" (244), hinting to us that Marlow recognized that he lacked something in character. I think that Marlow had internal checks before he went to the Congo because wanted to find himself. His internal checks might not have been very strong, but they were still there. Marlow is changed by this experience and felt that he knew more than ordinary people. Through watching Kurtz, Marlow saw what happens to a man without internal checks and therefore developed a stronger awareness of his morality and conscience.
I'll try to talk about something someone hasn't talked about yet. I liked both articles, but I gravitated more towards THE JOURNEY WITHIN, by Guerard because it is quite clear that Marlow is not only on a physical journey, but a very involved emotional/spiritual/mental (something like that)journey of self-discovery as he floats on down the Congo river.
One thing that striked me as interesting was how Guerard discussed the "unspeakable rites and secrets." In class, I think, for a brief period of time we all were wondering exactly what those "rites" entailed. He suggests that they must remain unspoken. This makes sense, because if they are given a name, are they really unspeakable anymore? You might even be able to realate this concept to the fact that Conrad only defines two of his characters by name: Marlow and Kurtz. We have an anonymous narrator, nameless cannibals, and unidentified Company workers. Conrad obviously did this on purpose for a specific reason. Why is that?
Michelle, I really like your take on Marlow. Obviously he had some internal checks guiding him through the Congo or he would have ended up like Kurtz, hollow and souless. However, I don't think Marlow COMPLETELY resisted the darkness brought on by the jungle. He was consumed with the idea of Kurtz all throughout the novel and still, as we hear through his retelling/meditation, is incredibly perplexed. Obviously the "evil" lingering throughout the Congo tainted his own soul. If it hadn't he wouldn't have any questions or emotional problems so many years later. The very idea of riding a boat down the river suddenly sparks this incredible need to regress to a time filled with chaos. He needs to talk about this, to try and clear his head of the horrible things that occured in the past.
Of the two articles, I prefered "Lying as Dying". The headline alone reminded me of Marlow's encounter with Kutz' intended. Death brings so many mixed emotions with it. For Kurtz intended the overwhelming feeling was clearly helplessness. She had wanted to help him in any way she could, but due to the distance she has no power to do so.
To take part in the discussion, I really liked the point that Erik made. Someone who is raised in a Western society has no way to FULLY grasp the meaning of any foriegn situation. Kurtz' merely took advantage of the situation he found himself in. Or, in some sense it took advantage of him.
Elizabeth also made a good point. I like the idea of restraint that flows throughout this novel. I found it sickening that the "civilized" white men in the novel excercised little to no restraint while the "savage" cannibals had quite strong restraint. The difference was most likely those inner checks we discussed as a class. The white men were hollow like Kurtz, while the black men had some kind of "primitive honor". The power within was the power that allowed them to restrain them selves in almost any given tough situation.
I see a lot of lying is dying and how Marlow is touched by Kurtz's death. I'm still in awe of how complex this book is.I found the Steward article to be more interesting, and really loved the analization of the final scene with the Intented. How she has all the light centered around her in an "ashy halo" and how everything else is darkness. Marlow continually tells little lies to her, and the room grows darker. It's like Kurtz's soul is smothering the room...Marlow also notes that the whisper of death has haunted him since Kurtz's death.I interpreted his last lie as the sacrifice you make to the 'idea' mentioned earlier in the book. It was the piece of him that he gave up for the faith and light in the Intended.Nick!!: I never even thought about what an 'unspeakable rite' and the 'unspeakable' characters were! Thta makes sense though. You know how things are always more gruesome when left to your imagination? Maybe that's what Kurtz was trying to do. Also Conrad never refers to the Intended by name. I think it's a tool to make the reader meditate (much like Marlow has to) over what these people really represent.
Wow, there were a lot of interesting things people said that made me think.
Natalie made a good point about Kurtz' Intended, and how lying to her was a way for Marlow to keep that "redeeming idea" alive.
One thing Grace and Erik (Sorry if I forgot anyone else!) mentioned was how people with Western mindsets could never fully understand the experience Conrad wants people to get. I'm confused by what you guys meant...How would you define Western mindsets? It seems to me that any human could at least understand this experience because it explores our psychology, and as Hengxin mentioned, our Id and ego.
I agree with what a lot of people said that Conrad, himself, is unsure about his experiences and this fogginess is seen in Marlow's confusion. I think that's what makes the book really moving.
I agree that although Marlow had internal checks, the jungle tested his strength while he was in there. Some of his checks weakend, especially when he lied to Kurtz' lover. However, I don't think Marlow ever had to resist temptation because he never went into the Congo for selfish reasons; he just wanted to explore. He didn't really have an ideal, but as Michelle said, he learned a LOT about how "unmeditated" belief in an ideal, or a person like Kurtz, can ruin somebody. Marlow feels like part of himself turned dark, and he understand now that it can happen to anyone if they're not careful.
Diya, in response to your question, a Western mindset is when one's mind thinks and judges the world around itself in the now dominant sense of what civilization is and should be. That which originated from Western Europe and spread to the Americas, Asia(the far east), and ironically last to the jungles of the Congo, which is closer to continental Europe than every other destination.
This Western train of thought, set of morals, sense of style(have you ever noticed all the trends begin on the runways of Paris? or how the 'business suit' has conquered every city's downtown in every country?), set of God(s), and even hubris could not possibly comprehend any purpose from the savage state of existence which governed the Congo.
The point I am trying to make when I say no person with a western mindset could truly understand the full meaning of Marlow(Conrad)'s journey is that no one from such a comfortable, savageless existence with "the butcher 'round one corner" and "a policeman round another" could possibly come to any civilized conclusions concerning the "dream-sensation" one experiences in such a foreign, alien environment.
I can be vague...
Erik: Haha, yeah, you make a good point. And no, it's not vague at all; I just didn't understand what you meant.
I agree that a person who's been brought up with a Western mindset would have trouble understanding the full Congo "dream-like" experience.
I just sometimes wish that people didn't assume that just because being "civilized" was their way, that meant that it was better than any other way. If they didn't start with that assumption- "mine is better and it's right" - then it might've been easier for them to comprehend the full Congo lifestyle and experience without prejudice. I agree with what you're saying. I guess I'm just trying to point out that the European colonizers and citizens didn't have a very balanced view on life, and if they had, they would understand places like the Congo better. =) ...Sorry, this is going slightly off-topic.
By the way, thanks for clarifying!
Post a Comment