The European colonial period went on for centuries and its consequences can still be seen around the world. Colonialism brought with it a huge cost in human lives and arguably a jus a big loss in faith in humanity as so many wrong decisions were made. The time of cruel exploitation and inhumane living conditions for the colonised supposedly ended with the beginning of postcolonialism that sought to settle the issues that had come with world leaders’ colonial greed. However, the conception of the old world was so firmly existent in people’s minds that change would not come overnight and even today there are many steps that could be taken to fully and in actuality separate from the mind-sets of colonialism. Thoughts of ethical superiority, systematic
…show more content…
The actions of the story’s main protagonist Marlow can therefore not be directly connected to Conrad, as Marlow simply remains the character through which Conrad shows his points. The novella raised several points on racism with particular focus on the cruel treatment overseas but has later also revealed several other issues including issues of gender. The novella can be read with several perspectives and were contemporarily mostly read for insight into overseas business and for pure purpose of entertainment. However, when viewed critically, it be becomes clear how the novella includes statements made both directly and indirectly that do not align with how fellow humans should be treated. It also does not require too thorough reading to realise how the discourse created around colonialism along with the justification falls flat and were merely lies to finance and obscure the true nature of colonisation. The supposedly good-natured Europeans seem to undergo a transformation as well, changing from the civilised people they are supposed to be and into something worse than could ever be found in Africa as they continue to exploit Africans without second-guessing their decisions most likely due to the fact that they have left society as they know it and can therefore act as they please without fear of consequences neither socially nor …show more content…
A well-respected author and teacher who challenged Conrad’s text based on accusations of uneducational racism was Chinua Achebe who makes several good points but miss the interpretations that critical eyes should deduce when he states how, ‘Joseph Conrad was a thoroughgoing racists’’ (Achebe, 1975, p. 1789). First of all, Achebe makes the mistake of consistently claiming Marlow and Conrad to be one and the same. Of course, the two share similarities, but Conrad is and will never be Marlow and to believe that is unfair towards Conrad. The easiest way of proving this is when taking a look at Conrad’s own journey which lasted only three months as he returned home two years premature due to not having the mental constitution. Marlow does not back down and can therefore not be Conrad. Secondly, it is no secret that racist events take place throughout all of Heart of Darkness, but not once is Marlow directly caught as an aggressor. While passivity today is considered almost as bad as the crime itself, Marlow takes a stand by not participating and even warns the natives before some Europeans shoot them ‘I pulled the string of the whistle, and I did this because I saw the pilgrims on deck getting out their rifles with an air of anticipating a jolly lark’ (Conrad, 2012, p. 2003). While such an act today is a no-brainer and
The actions of the story’s main protagonist Marlow can therefore not be directly connected to Conrad, as Marlow simply remains the character through which Conrad shows his points. The novella raised several points on racism with particular focus on the cruel treatment overseas but has later also revealed several other issues including issues of gender. The novella can be read with several perspectives and were contemporarily mostly read for insight into overseas business and for pure purpose of entertainment. However, when viewed critically, it be becomes clear how the novella includes statements made both directly and indirectly that do not align with how fellow humans should be treated. It also does not require too thorough reading to realise how the discourse created around colonialism along with the justification falls flat and were merely lies to finance and obscure the true nature of colonisation. The supposedly good-natured Europeans seem to undergo a transformation as well, changing from the civilised people they are supposed to be and into something worse than could ever be found in Africa as they continue to exploit Africans without second-guessing their decisions most likely due to the fact that they have left society as they know it and can therefore act as they please without fear of consequences neither socially nor …show more content…
A well-respected author and teacher who challenged Conrad’s text based on accusations of uneducational racism was Chinua Achebe who makes several good points but miss the interpretations that critical eyes should deduce when he states how, ‘Joseph Conrad was a thoroughgoing racists’’ (Achebe, 1975, p. 1789). First of all, Achebe makes the mistake of consistently claiming Marlow and Conrad to be one and the same. Of course, the two share similarities, but Conrad is and will never be Marlow and to believe that is unfair towards Conrad. The easiest way of proving this is when taking a look at Conrad’s own journey which lasted only three months as he returned home two years premature due to not having the mental constitution. Marlow does not back down and can therefore not be Conrad. Secondly, it is no secret that racist events take place throughout all of Heart of Darkness, but not once is Marlow directly caught as an aggressor. While passivity today is considered almost as bad as the crime itself, Marlow takes a stand by not participating and even warns the natives before some Europeans shoot them ‘I pulled the string of the whistle, and I did this because I saw the pilgrims on deck getting out their rifles with an air of anticipating a jolly lark’ (Conrad, 2012, p. 2003). While such an act today is a no-brainer and