Should i read heart of darkness

He had tied a bit of white worsted round his neck—Why? Where did he get it. Was it a badge—an ornament—a charm—a propitiatory act? Was there any idea at all connected with it.

It looked startling round his black neck this bit of white thread from beyond the seas. One, with his chin propped on his knees, stared at nothing in an intolerable and appalling manner. His brother phantom rested its forehead as if overcome with a great weariness; and all about others were scattered in every pose of contorted collapse, as in some picture of a massacre or a pestilence. Despite the last sentence, which links the grove of death to ancient and medieval catastrophes, there is a sense here, as many readers have said, of something unprecedented in horror, something new on earth—what later became known as genocide.

Western man had done this. We had created an Inferno on earth. But if some crimes are irredeemable, a frank acknowledgment of the crime might lead to a partial remission of sin. Conrad had written such an acknowledgment.

Alex was not happy with the way Shapiro and the other students were talking about Kurtz and the moral self-judgment of the West. He thought it was glib. Kurtz was a criminal, an isolated figure.

He was not representative of the West or of anything else. No culture condones what he did. From my corner of the room, I took a hard look at him. He was as tight as a drum, dry, a little supercilious. Kurtz had nothing to do with him —that was his unmistakable attitude. He denied the connection that the other students acknowledged. He was cut off in some way, withholding himself.

Yet I knew this student. Why was he so dense? The other students were not claiming personal responsibility for imperialism or luxuriating in guilt. Henry, leaning back in his chair—against the wall, behind Alex, who sat at the table—insisted on an existential reading. Alex hotly disagreed. They were talking past each other, offering different angles of approach, but there was an edge to their voices which suggested an animus that went beyond mere disagreement.

There was an awkward pause, and some of the students stirred uneasily. I had never seen these two quarrel in the past, and what they said presented no grounds for anger, but when each repeated his position, anger filled the room. Shapiro tried to calm things down, and the other students looked at one another in wonder and alarm.

In a tangent, Henry brought up the way Conrad, reflecting European assumptions of his time, portrayed the Africans as wild and primitive. A greater urgency overcame him—not the racial but the existential issue, his own pressing need for identification not just as an African-American but as an embattled man.

Marlow judges Kurtz; Conrad judges Kurtz. But back in Brussels he is mourned as an apostle of enlightenment. I looked a little closer. I knew him, all right. A pale, narrow face, a bony nose surmounted by glasses, a paucity of flesh, a general air of asexual arrogance.

He was very bright and very young. He was incomparably more self-assured and articulate, but I recognized him all too well. And I was startled. The middle-aged reader, uneasy with earlier versions of himself, little expects his simulacrum to rise up as a walking ghost.

For a while, teacher and students explicated the text in a neutral way. Though Shapiro restored order, something had broken, and the class, which had begun so well, with everyone joining in and expounding, had come unriveted. The following is one of the passages Chinua Achebe deplores as racist:. We could have fancied ourselves the first of men taking possession of an accursed inheritance, to be subdued at the cost of profound anguish and of excessive toil.

But suddenly as we struggled round a bend there would be a glimpse of rush walls, of peaked grass-roofs, a burst of yells, a whirl of black limbs, a mass of and clapping, of feet stamping, of bodies swaying, of eyes rolling under the droop of heavy and motionless foliage. The steamer toiled along slowly on the edge of a black and incomprehensible frenzy. The prehistoric man was cursing us, praying to us, welcoming us—who could tell?

We were cut off from the comprehension of our surroundings; we glided past like phantoms, wondering and secretly appalled, as sane men would be before an enthusiastic outbreak in a madhouse.

We could not understand because we were too far and could not remember because we were travelling in the night of first ages, of those ages that are gone, leaving hardly a sign—and no memories.

We are accustomed to look upon the shackled form of a conquered monster, but there—there you could look at a thing monstrous and free. It was unearthly and the men were. Adult Written by CrotonParent April 5, The novel is a thought-provoking work for juniors and seniors in high school or older readers My 11th grade students found this very challenging but also rewarding in the big ideas that it presents.

Some of them even re-read it because while a short nov Continue reading. Report this review. Adult Written by Nastasia December 13, Darkness from the Devils Hart it is a nice book! Teen, 13 years old Written by Conker22 September 12, Heart of Darkness not too dark anymore Heart of Darkness sure does have some minor violent scenes and people drink and smoke.

The N word is used a few times which is because back then it was okay so Teen, 16 years old Written by Annie S. April 12, Powerful Novel This book had a lot of powerful meanings and themes that will leave readers shocked and question their entire existence.

However, the persecution of the African What's the story? Is it any good? Talk to your kids about There are several layers of darkness in this book.

Can you name three different kinds? Our editors recommend. Vonnegut's time-travel classic makes strong anti-war case. The Grapes of Wrath. Gritty Steinbeck classic brings Great Depression to life. Wuthering Heights. Classic story of love and revenge still captivates. For kids who love history. History TV. Games That Teach History. About these links Common Sense Media, a nonprofit organization, earns a small affiliate fee from Amazon or iTunes when you use our links to make a purchase.

Still, I did my best to convince my mind that it was looking at a new book from a new perspective. Fulfilling both of these promises proved to be difficult at first; I fell asleep exactly four times before I'd gotten halfway through the book.

When I managed to stay awake, I had to re-read just about every paragraph because my mind kept wandering. The main issue was that it took a long, long time for anything to really happen in terms of action. I'm not the kind of person who needs ninjas and fighter jets and fighting ninja jets to be entertained, but I soon figured out that I could skip entire pages of the book and not miss anything in terms of plot.

However, I would have missed lots of instances of words like "black" and "darkness," not to mention plenty of sentences that stretched on way longer than they should have. In fact, the writing itself felt much like the way Mr. Kurtz was perceived by Marlow: stylistically impressive when viewed at the surface level, but seriously lacking in actual substance.

The non-analytical side of me was painfully bored. The part of me that was picking the book apart, however, was having a slightly better time. Heart of Darkness is peppered with powerful and beautiful quotes that are not only still relevant today, but would also make great typographical posts on Instagram.

Taking into account all the different aspects that we discussed racism, sexism, homosexuality , in addition to the occasional importance of the kairotic moment, it is clear that Conrad utilized the novella as a means of self-expression. Like many others here, the essays we read have certainly enlightened me to some extent regarding Heart of Darkness.

They elaborated upon some very possibly major themes or ideas that managed to slip under the radar for me, like it did with many others. Still, something Mr.

Gallagher said in class is still sticking in the back of my head. He said something along the lines that sometimes, we are just plain wrong. But a statement like that certainly makes me treat these essays with a grain of salt. The ideas contained with them are certainly possible and well supported through their words, but they are not infallible. Still, as mentioned previously, the ability for the text to be deciphered in so many ways demonstrates its flexibility.

A flexible book can be approached from so many sides and angles, that a geometry specialist may need to get involved to clear out the mess. But this mess is what I feel makes it great — for it to be able to generated so much controversy and popularity, and to perpetuate arguments between intellectuals is what I consider a great book is capable of.

Human morality too is explored in Heart of Darkness, gathering the interests of readers focused on psychology. Gender, racism, homosexuality, all arguably have their place in the book, and so its audience is expanded even further. Intended or not, the issues that the book tackles or more like bumps into are so wide in scope that many people from all walks of life are able to zoom in and find something that can relate to them, propel their minds, or simply just intrigue them.

But instead, now that I am all too aware of how many ideas are contained in the book, I might try for something a little more complex.

Many themes and topics overlap or connect in some way, and If I could pull that off in a poem that results would probably be very pleasing. Of course, though, easier said than done. Much easier. Over-manipulating it renders it meaningless. Virtually any text can be broken down into its cells, which can be rearranged into whatever the reader wishes to see.

While I still believe that whatever the reader projects onto the text is very revealing about said reader, I think it says much less about the text itself. However, at certain points, even the most brilliant author may subconsciously imbed messages that he did not mean to in his text. Still, it fits, but I have some doubts as to whether or not it was intentional. Alex and Joao both mentioned that we must understand what knowing what the author is saying in order to understand the text; I most definitely agree with this.

Considering his beliefs and opinions before our own helps us put the book in better perspective. I actually feel that this is where Achebe fails in his essay — he takes Heart of Darkness too personally.

I question the wisdom of writing the essay at all. I feel that we must now apply this idea to everything we read. It all goes back to that idea of intertextuality — for everything to be a part of the same huge story, there must be some connecting factor, and I think the similar patterns that continuously pop up in literature do serve to connect the individual parts.

I believe that some women in Africa had to sacrifice themselves to help their children survive. Women were blindfolded maybe because they did not see anything good to live for, except raising their children. I find that this moment is very inspirational since it helps me look into myself more directly. Should we sacrifice ourselves for the greater good of humanity?

This idea connects more to individual serving the nation through military. Language would take on a more personal level where the argument is its facilitator. For literature, it involves more of the big picture for all aspects of what the story itself represents.

The tricky part of writing literature is that you have to keep pace with the themes that you want to present, while keeping pace with the plot development. Authors that can pull off so many ideas in a structure manner are incredible.

You may have very good themes, but how to develop those themes in an orderly fashion is the hard part. In esscence, society always dictates the type of literature produced. Whether the piece of work is a backlash against society, discussing societal structure, or pro- society.

The environment of a writer almost will always dictate the type of writing produced. This thought was also supplemented by Mr. Gallagher who pointed out to me that most modernist writers were actually abroad engaged in WWII when their famous piece of works were produced Hemmingway, Pound, T. We read literature only to compare and examine it against our own beliefs and thoughts, which are evidently influenced and projected by society.

The evolution of imperialism and manifest destiny still resonates today. The United States is a perfect example of imperialism. Evidence of our firm belief in spreading our democracy and politics could be found in Africa, Vietnam, and some parts of Latin America. Racism still exists, although not socially accepted, issues of race and ethnicity, even religion are constantly are being projected.

We live in a world of white supremacists. Boldly stated, but true, look at the ideals of Christianity integrated in our politics- same sex marriage is one. Western ideals of ethics, culture, and beauty are advertised globally through American magazines, advertisements, and products.

Look at Coke and MacDonalds. Like Alex once said, we read to know and learn more about ourselves, as literature forces us to understand by comparison. Heart of Darkness was a foil, a foil to understand why humans think of racism and savagery. The actions of the characters in the novella are true in nature of our natural reaction to things in which we find savage to us Joao.

Conrad explores the complexity of human nature to react so savagely to things in which they themselves found savage.

See the flaw? HOD was a foil to understand the romanticization and blinded ignorance through women in which Europeans used as an excuse to further their selfish and inconsiderate acts of manifest destiny. Conrad, maybe he intended or maybe he did not, served the greater responsibility of literature, in which he produced a work so other human beings could use to further explain OURSELVES.

That is why we write, to learn and to understand. Part B In the first blog, Nidale talked about how although the portrait of the women represents European power and their godlike views of themselves, Conrad does not agree.

However at the same, Conrad also portrays Africa as a place of insanity where people are unmotivated to do work, which presents Africa as a foil to Europe where people are successful. This connects to how these patterns race, femininity, or imperialism occur in the book, but depends on how the reader interprets it.

Although Mr. Gallagher disagrees with reading like a professor, I think it is necessary to use some of tips to accurately understand a text or else readers will absolutely interpret it differently. The blogs, class discussions, and essays have helped me notice the ideas presented by Conrad and the different methods of interpreting it. It has allowed me to realize there are multiple surfaces and layers to a text, but readers can interpret it differently.

Going off from this idea that these works merely offer a different lens with which to analyze the novel and like glasses, we can switch these lenses pretty easily , I especially liked when we discussed women and their roles in both Heart of Darkness and in our contemporary world.

Building off from what many said about the painting—that it represents some negative aspect or another about women—I think that my own interpretation comes from a hybrid of ideas from Nidale, Alfonse, Josh, and Schneider herself.

Like my classmates, I believe that the ultimate intention of the painting is to portray women as the insignificant Other, and it is a pretty good representation of how women function in relation to men. The painting shows that a woman can only come in contact with light, or power, which is symbolized by the torch, by being blindfolded, which is a way of saying that only men are capable of even seeing the light, and the blindfolded woman, who needs guidance since she cannot see, can only come in contact with the light, but she can never truly use it.

In this interlocution of ideas, I was able to look at Heart of Darkness with feminism in mind, and arrive to some pretty worthwhile conclusions. Philip brought up a good point about how books that suggest an idea are just as bad as actually following through with it.

In Heart Of Darkness, Conrad offended many different social groups. Conrad's Heart Of Darkness portrays ideas of racsism, sexism, and homophics that all have deeper meanings. That is why it is hard to understand why Conrad's novella is seen as a great work of writing. Achebe believes this story should be banned because of the simple rascism it provokes.

In today's society thigns are much different obviously, however, there will always be an underlying idea of racism. Connecting this idea to other works of literature, I remember reading Catcher and the Rye by J. D Salinger, which was banned following the time it was published. This was because it wrote against society at the time; conformity. However, this is also a great piece of work because of the way it protests society.

However, at the time, Heart Of Darkness did not go against society, it was saying the same things everyone was thinking. The three major criticisms have always been grand issues in society, and probably always will be.

The only people who want it to be banned or think bad about it are those who are directly attacked by the images and descriptions he detests. Heart Of Darkness is a great piece of literature no matter if it brings negative ideas because that's what books are meant to do. Present an idea to us and see what happens. This might be a little bit late, but i just realised that i accidently deleted my Part B post a few weeks ago.

But here is what i had to say anyway. During the student run discussion that took place on wednesday, Hong elaborated on an idea that women were foils. I really liked her analysis on the subject, because she gave her thoughts on how women had roles, but said roles were only good to assist men in different ways, showing that women just had the purpose of showing men in a brigher light.

Another comment that cought my attention during the student run discussions was what Philip had to say on the idea that Marlow was homosexual. Philip said that he believes that Marlow's relationship and feelings towards Kurtz were solely based off of respect and envy, rather than desire, and that the author of the essay was reading a tad bit too far into the text. I would have to say that i completely agree with Philip about Marlow's relationship with Kurtz only being based off of respect, because it is clear throughout his descriptions of Kurtz that he holds the man in such a high regard.

Lastly, there were a few comments made by my classmates about how interpreting a text can destroy it. After hearing these views, it made me think that interpreting a text can be a good thing, and though a reader should pay attention to what the author is trying to say, they should also incorporate their on views and mix them with what the authhor has to say. This makes the reader relate to the text in a deeper way, and overall, makes the reading experience more enjoyable.

Post a Comment. What Are We? Where Are We Going? This is a painting from a series that was mentioned in the Achebe essay. I took the title of this blog post from J. Hillis Miller's essay in your book on pages - I certainly recommend reading this for more intellectual fodder.