Heart Of Darkness Imperialism Research Paper
Imperialism: A Lack of Accountability and Efficiency in Heart of Darkness
Imperialism that started with the idea of civilizing the world ended as an act of ‘pure dominance and land grabbing’1. The idea behind imperialism was to populate the uninhabited lands, and to educate the primitive people of the ‘dark lands’ [i]. But when we study the history of the colonized countries or lands it is evident that imperialism never proved to be a good idea. No good has ever been done to those colonized lands and people. Rather the colonizers themselves were badly affected by it.
“It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'.”2 This idea led to the act of colonization in the world. The act of colonizing other countries was justified by the idea of civilization and this social efficiency. Many European and British countries considering themselves efficient and civilized, thought it their duty to spread “the spark from the sacred fire”, along with “the seeds of commonwealths, the germs of empire”3 to the “dark” and primitive uncivilized nations[ii]. How far they succeeded in their sacred mission is another question.
Conrad’s Heart of Darkness relates well the effects of imperialism …show more content…
The difference between these two words is that the latter follows the “idea”. This “idea” is interpreted as something ‘that distinguishes the colonist as commitment to the role, to the place, and to the men among whom he lives.” According to this definition all the imperialists in Heart of Darkness are “conquerors” rather than “colonists” as none of them shows any commitment to the “idea”. At times it is suggested in the novel that white men were not doing anything good in Congo. They were not there for the betterment of the natives and the land
Imperialism that started with the idea of civilizing the world ended as an act of ‘pure dominance and land grabbing’1. The idea behind imperialism was to populate the uninhabited lands, and to educate the primitive people of the ‘dark lands’ [i]. But when we study the history of the colonized countries or lands it is evident that imperialism never proved to be a good idea. No good has ever been done to those colonized lands and people. Rather the colonizers themselves were badly affected by it.
“It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'.”2 This idea led to the act of colonization in the world. The act of colonizing other countries was justified by the idea of civilization and this social efficiency. Many European and British countries considering themselves efficient and civilized, thought it their duty to spread “the spark from the sacred fire”, along with “the seeds of commonwealths, the germs of empire”3 to the “dark” and primitive uncivilized nations[ii]. How far they succeeded in their sacred mission is another question.
Conrad’s Heart of Darkness relates well the effects of imperialism …show more content…
The difference between these two words is that the latter follows the “idea”. This “idea” is interpreted as something ‘that distinguishes the colonist as commitment to the role, to the place, and to the men among whom he lives.” According to this definition all the imperialists in Heart of Darkness are “conquerors” rather than “colonists” as none of them shows any commitment to the “idea”. At times it is suggested in the novel that white men were not doing anything good in Congo. They were not there for the betterment of the natives and the land