For example, when the Russian is attempting to defend the reputation of Kurtz he states, “Kurtz declared he would shoot me unless I gave him the ivory…” (Conrad 51). It is certain that the darkness has axiomatically surrounded Kurtz. Kurtz has been surrounded by the evil of the Congo for such an elongated period of time that he has become consumed by his greed, becoming blind to truth. Furthermore, immediately after Marlow lies to the brickmaker about who requested the rivets he proclaims, “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” (Conrad 25). In this text it is clear that Marlow absolutely detests lying; yet, he continues to do so despite his morals. The unambiguous reason for this conundrum is the fact that Marlow, now surrounded by evil, has become unable to see the …show more content…
For instance, after the Helmsmen is murdered on the boat, Marlow states, "To tell you the truth, I was morbidly anxious to change my shoes and socks" (Conrad 42). Conrad begins his novel by conveying Marlow's altruism, describing the event in which he sacrifices his own biscuit for a native, though at this point he has become desensitized. This demonstrates a Marlow who is consumed with the blood on his shoes, rather than the death of his helmsman. Moreover, when Marlow is discussing Kurtz he states, “But his soul was mad. Being alone in the wilderness, it had looked within itself, and, by heavens! I tell you, it had gone mad” (Conrad 61). Kurtz was a successful agent and was even described as a prodigy, although his time in the jungle quickly changed that. The wickedness of the jungle overtook Kurtz, filling his heart with greed and an overwhelming lust for ivory, ultimately causing his soul to become blind to truth and go