Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Thoughts on Achebe's Criticism
The Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe has claimed that Heart of Darkness is an "offensive and deplorable book" that "set[s] Africa up as a foil to Europe, as a place of negations at once remote and vaguely familiar, in comparison with which Europe's own state of spiritual grace will be manifest." Achebe says that Conrad does not provide enough of an outside frame of reference to enable the book to be read as ironic or critical of imperialism. Based on the evidence in the text (novella or article), argue for or against Achebe's assertion. Is Conrad a racist? Is the book worthy of study?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
After reading through Achebe's review of The Heart of Darkness, I am given a broader prospective in regards to Conrad's possible thoughts on racism. Achebe comes from the view point of a professor teaching African literature. As seen throughout his commentary, Achebe obviously has a deep passion for the things of Africa and a respect for the people. Achebe writes, "Certainly Conrad appears to go to considerable pains to set up layers of insulation between himself and the moral universe of his history. He has, for example, a narrator behind a narrator. The primary narrator is Marlow but his account is given to us through the filter of a second, shadowy person. But if Conrad's intention is to draw a cordon sanitaire between himself and the moral and psychological malaise of his narrator his care seems to me totally wasted because he neglects to hint however subtly or tentatively at an alternative frame of reference by which we may judge the actions and opinions of his characters."
ReplyDelete"Although Achebe recognizes Conrad's use of multiple narrators, he dismisses any intention on Conrad's part of utilizing the narrators to introduce psychological depth in Heart of Darkness. I believe, however, that Conrad's full objective was to establish a moral and existential tone in his novella; he accomplished this by incorporating a second narrator. Conrad introduces the narrator and his surrounding characters as they navigate the Thames River. As the narrator describes Marlow and the other Seamen the reader begins to question where Marlow stands in this social hierarchy. Conrad thus establishes a tone of uncertainty in the credibility and morality of both Marlow and the narrator. The entire novella is a retelling of Marlow’s tales in Africa, years after they had occurred, which leaves the extent of Marlow’s exaggeration and embellishment of his story up for question." (Commentary taken from online resource.) Personally, I somewhat disagree with Achebe's comments as to Conrad's heart towards racism. Achebe seems to have closed off his mind to any other opinions regarding African heritage/culture and therefore labels Conrad as racist. In giving a fair perspective to both view points, Conrad wrote The Heart of Darkness based on a single journey that he took to the heart of Africa. His experience may have involved a culture where racism was prevalent.
Achebe focuses on the word choice that Conrad often uses to describe a black individual- "nigger". One commentary reads, "Apologists often argue that you have to remember that in 1890, when Conrad did his trip up the Congo River, things were different. But were they? How was the word "nigger" was perceived in 1890? The word "nigger," like Negro, Niger, and the archaic slang word "neger," come from the Latin root for black. According to Stuart Flexner, in his 1976 book I Hear America Talking: ". . . At any rate, "nigger" was a common word in both England and America by the 17th century; it was just considered a pronunciation of "Negro" until around 1825, when both abolitionists and Blacks began to object to it as disparaging. Then after the Civil War "nigger" became the most common contemptuous word for a Black."
As it seems as through there is much controversy over whether or not racism can be seen in The Heart of Darkness, I would enjoy reading/studying Achebe's criticism in order to gain a better perspective.
I liked what you had to say. You seem to really understand this concept and what Achebe had to say. I, also, agree with your disagreement. The diction Conrad used was not considered racist back then, so he technically was not saying anything bad. That was a really good point you made!
DeleteWell put Lindsey, I like the support of your argument, and I agree that a deeper look into both sides would be helpful to gain a better perspective.
DeleteYour post was really really articulate, and you brought up some really interesting points about the material itself. I agree that it's hard to discern if the content is really racist or not.
Deletei agree with all the above answers it is really easy to articulate and the word choice and examples made very bold point about the topic. i also agree no one can really say if it was racist or not.
DeleteIn Achebe's essay, he seems to really respect Africa and its culture. Although, he makes good points, he has closed his mind into thinking nothing other than how Conrad was a racist. When Conrad wrote about his journey to Africa in the Heart of Darkness, I don't think he was trying to be racist towards the African Culture. Some of the things that Conrad wrote about that Achebe claimed was racist, was in fact not considered racist back then. You have to keep in mind that this was written in the 1800's, and certain words or judgments were fine to say in public without being looked down on. It was not until years later when these pieces of diction were considered intolerable. To conclude, I disagree with Achebe's opinion.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your statement that we must keep in mind the time period that the novel was written it. There were differences back then, that we must keep in mind now. I also agree that he seems to be close minded, and maybe even overly offended.
DeleteI do not agree with Achebe's criticisms of Heart of Darkness due to the fact that what Conrad wrote was not false or misleading. I believe that Conrad's writings accurately represented what one would see and experience, if they were in Marlows situation. I think that Achebe's criticisms were unfair because at the time that Heart of Darkness was written, the things that Achebe is complaining about were not actually controversial, and that is something that is important to keep in mind while reading this story. What Conrad implies in his novel may be blunt and debatable in todays society, for instance, if it was written today many people would have serious problems with it. However, it is useful for study for reasons aside from debating racism, and because some people disagree with its point of view today is not a worthy enough reason for it to not be a part of curriculum.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the racism issue isn't enough to ban the book from schools, because it is a useful tool to study with and it's incredibly well written. I disagree with your main points, but I understand your logic and where you're coming from.
DeleteI agree with what you have to say. If this was written today, people would have serious problems with it; but because it was written so long ago, it wasn't really considered racist. I also like your last sentence because it shows the explanation of why it is not part of the curriculum.
DeleteAlthough many of my fellow students seem to disagree with Achebe's opinions, I agree with them. Although the time and place of the novel's writing did account for Conrad's racism, it still doesn't make it okay. Some of you argue that Achebe's mind was closed, while I seem to think yours is. Those of you who disagree seem to have it firm in your mind that it was impossible to sympathize with the Africans given the time frame, however not all people at the time had to be racists. Clearly both Conrad and his characters treated the African natives as inferior, which they were not. You argue that Conrad uses these terms because the society in which he was raised deemed it acceptable, but the native's behavior was justified by the same means; they were not inferior, merely brought up in a different world, in a different way. This reason by itself is not enough to completely detach "Heart of Darkness" from a high school or college curriculum, but it certainly is enough to leave a sour taste in my mouth.
ReplyDeleteEmma~
DeleteAlthough I do not completely agree with your argument, I was greatly inspired by your boldness to share your views as to this topic of racism. Often students lack a spirit of boldness throughout their school work as they are afraid of persecution, but you respectfully demonstrated your beliefs with a spirit of integrity and confidence! For that I say, great job!
Blessings~ Lindsey Rogers
While I agree with your main points, I would like to point out that the "close-minded" nature of Achebe appears with the lack of seceding to the social climate. Yes, racism is wrong, but in that time period it was normal, so the book should be studied. It is necessary to understand, even if you do not accept.
DeleteI see where your coming from Emma. There should not be an excuse to make racism ok. I think both Achebe and us can be close minded at times and it depends on what perspective you come from. If you know more about the subject you are more likely to find even the smallest mistake very significant but if you don't have much knowledge on the subject sometimes you may not even know you are offending people.
DeleteI think that both sides make important arguments; I do think Conrad purposefully put Africans in a lesser position than Europeans? No, but because the novella is relaying the perceptions of an individual of European decent in the late 1800s, I feel that Conrad's views are valid and worthy to be evaluated. "Heart of Darkness" does not claim to be the authority on social opinion, but is the representation of one mans experience in another culture - one vastly different form his own. Especially after learning that Joseph Conrad himself did work on a steam boat on the Congo river, I find that his impressions are all the more valid. He does not claim to be an expert on the native history, culture and society but only shares his perception; and is it not he perception of other people how we learn about them and the way they think? Not so that we can become them, but so we can learn form them. So yes, I disagree with Achebe, and I think this book is worthy of study :).
ReplyDeleteYou make some interesting points here. You are correct in saying that Heart of Darkness does not call itself an authority on this subject, and you bring a good point to the table when you say that this novella represents the experience of culture change. Conrad is just sharing his impression. Even if Conrad was racist, you are right in implying that it does not matter. We can still learn from his work.
DeleteI really like the arguments you brought up here. The part about learning about others and they way they think regardless of our own opinion is a really good point and one that a lot of people don't seem to follow.
DeleteYou make really good points here. We do learn more from different points of view who have different amounts of knowledge on a subject they do not have to be professionals in the areas.
DeleteI understand where Achebe is coming from. On the surface, the book may appear racist. But, Achebe is not correct in his assertion. It is important to acknowledge that Heart of Darkness is based on the experience of Conrad earlier in his life. Maybe, when he wrote Heart of Darkness, he embellished it. But this does not remove the basis of his work: personal experience. Take for instance when Marlow sees the natives as they "Howled, and leaped, and spun, and made horrid faces" in chapter 2 of the novella. Marlow had never seen adults act like this before. It shocked him. Through Marlow, Conrad questions the earthliness of these people based upon their behavior, not their race. When a savage is trained to be a fireman in chapter 2, Conrad names him an "improved specimen." This is not racism. It is instead the fascination that people can change from their former nature into a new nature. Throughout the book, Conrad bases his descriptions of the natives off of first hand experience and creates judgements of them out of fascination at the way that they act. It is not the way that they look that causes Conrad to judge these people; it is the way that they live. So, if racism is judging a group based on their appearance, then Conrad is not a racist as Achebe would like to claim. But, if racism is judging a group based on their actions, then Conrad is a racist. Because judging action is not racism, and Conrad judges based upon actions, not race, it becomes clear that Conrad is not a racist.
ReplyDeleteIt should also be noted that Conrad does not say that Europeans are superior to Africans. Yes, he criticizes the actions of some Africans; but, at the end, he also criticizes the actions of some Europeans. Conrad does label Africa as a place of "darkness." However, with his labeling, he is not calling the Africans inferior. He is just pointing out the mystery of their differences.
Overall, Conrad is not a racist. He is just fascinated with the mystery of the natives' actions.
I believe Heart of Darkness is worthy of study. Even if it were a racist book, it should still be studied. It is important to understand the thinking of those during that time period, or any time period for that matter. It is important to study books, even if they are disagreeable.
The characters themselves and the narration in Heart of Darkness is racist at times, however, I do not think this makes Conrad himself a racist, necessarily. I think it makes the book accurate, during the time period in which heart of darkness is set, African Americans were looked on very poorly by most white people. Therefore there is racism in the novel, but this is for the effect of the book and the characters, it isn't Conrad saying that African Americans are less than white people, it's the narration and characters in the book. So no, I do not consider Conrad a racist for a fiction book he wrote that had racism in it, whether or not he was a racist would be discerned by his real self and how he behaved towards other races, not his works of fiction. Whether or not he was a racist we will probably never know. Regardless, the book is still very worthy of study, even if you don't agree with or condone everything in a book, it is worthy of study. Heart of Darkness brings up very important questions and viewpoint about human nature and evil, the viewpoints that the characters express in it are different from mine, but that doesn't mean it's not worthy of reading.
ReplyDeleteI have conflicting views on Achebe’s opinions. On the one side, I agree, Conrad was racist in his depiction of Africans and African culture. He used blunt and negative comments when unnecessary and closed out the idea of humanity for those people. Racism should have been unacceptable then, but it wasn’t, so I disagree with the idea of banning Heart of Darkness though. Although it is negative and racist, the ideas and language of the book is apropos of the social climate and situation that Marlow would have been in. In 1890 England, all African Americans would be seen as “niggers” and be seen as less than human, also imperialism was exactly how Marlow described it. For Achebe’s comment that Conrad doesn’t provide enough of an outside frame of reference to enable the book to be read as ironic or critical of imperialism, I disagree. The criticism of imperialism is evident through Marlow’s story and the glimpses into his thought process, and I do not believe irony was the goal. Rather than banning the book, a different approach should be taken when teaching it. You can show controversial or even horrific things and use it as a learning experience. The book should be used to show the social climate and what was wrong with it, as well as showing the amazing literary techniques that Conrad employed.
ReplyDeleteGood Job! You're description is really good! I too agree with the fact that Conrad was racist to Africans and their culture.
DeleteHeart of Darkness is clearly racist. Conrad uses Africa and its people as tools for the Europeans as they explore its vast wilderness. he dehumanizes the African characters and brings them down as being animals and savages.
ReplyDeletejust because The Heart of Darkness is clearly racist. That doesn't mean we shouldn't read those works, they are written in the way people felt and saw the world at the time from which it came i think though everyone should before they read the story understand what the work is actually conveying to them.
I agree. While the Heart of Darkness is racist, we should still read these literary juggernauts of the time to gain insight of the ways of thinking during that period. He who does not learn for the past of bound to repeat it.
DeleteI totally agree with you in the sense that Heart of Darkness is indeed racist. There is no other explanation for people to treat anyone the way African Americans were being treated by White, especially when Africans were in their own country.
DeleteDuring this time period racism was very prevalent. Europeans were dominating Africa to harvest resources and destroying the lives of Africans in the process without a care about it. I never really got the inclination during the book that Conrad largely opposed this however, in the sense that African people should be treated differently. Conrad's views never stray to point out how terribly the African people were treated which leads me to believe his ideas did not differ. Because of this, he seems to have similar views to others at the time which are very racist.
DeleteOf course the Heart of Darkness is racist. It sees no problem in using Africans as tools or beasts of labor for the Europeans. Joseph Conrad himself was racist, and just took his ideas and put them into the book. However, what is interesting is that the book also looks at the other side, even though its reaction to these ideas is a little strange. Marlow thought about this in the book, through a monologue talking about how he had this unnerving suspicion that Africans were just like Europeans. The book even takes it into a good light, when it describes the events after the helmsman dies, and Marlow throws the body off the boat, instead of letting the cannibals eat it, or the pilgrims burying it. He did not want the cannibals to eat it because of his European values, but he did not want to bury it like the pilgrims wanted to, showing respect for his way of life.
ReplyDeleteThe story Heart of Darkness can be racist at times but the time period it was written in it was not considered racist. The way it portrays African Americans as labor or tools to just work give it a racist feeling but again the time period it was written in this wasn't given much thought, in a sense the people of this time period "did not know any better."
ReplyDeleteYeah. They were taught to dehumanize Africans so that they when they looked out the cotton field in front of their white-walled mansion, they wouldn't see fellow humans being worked and whipped to death out in the beating sun. No, they'd see their property. Essentially free human service without the human. "Hey, it's not like they're human," they'd reassure themselves. Well, ignorance was bliss.
Delete" The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+racism+%3E&oq=what+is+racism+%3E&aqs=chrome...69i57j0l5.10152j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8 . I have never been able to understand how people don't think that "Heart of Darkness" is racist, when it is clearly racist. This Novella lets us see exactly how Africans aren't being treated human like. They show no respect towards African Americans. Marlow says that he witnesses brutality and hate between the white ivory hunters and the native African people. Marlow becomes entangled in a power struggle within the Company, and finally learns the truth about the mysterious Kurtz, a mad agent who has become both a god and a prisoner of the "native Africans."
ReplyDeleteIn the Heart of Darkness, the majority of the entire story is told from Marlow's own mouth. And who is Marlow? A white man with connections -if his aunt was any indication- who lives in the colloquial times, where slavery and imperialism still remain prominent. With his background, you expect some sort of racism or imperialist attitude. But, surprisingly, Marlow knows that the entire business is twisted up, but it's not like he could do anything. He's just a guy who sails ships. Instead, he observes the different personalities of the ivory traders around them, understanding the typical "white"opinion -such as knowing that his initial thought for the African tribes were "inhumane" because their society implies them as such, because if they start thinking of them as fellow humans, well, that brings a whole slew of anti-slavery groups and human equalists- giving his opinion upon how twisted the entire situation is, and feeling welling sympathy for the African slaves The Heart of Darkness addresses the issue of racism rather than promoting it.
ReplyDeleteOkay, so after reading everyone's comments I have some comments to make that have led me to my own conclusion. Here is the thing, it doesn't matter the time era, racist views are exactly that. We cannot say "Oh well that word was acceptable then" or "that was totally normal view on things back then" because the only thing that is different now and then is how socially acceptable those views are. Conrad's views were the same as many others at that time which was that Europeans were superior to Africans, which is racism. However, this is a historically accurate book and should not be condemned because Conrad expresses his views. Europeans did invade Africa thinking they were better, and that sadly, that is just a historical fact.
ReplyDelete