Who Is Conrad's Heart Of Darkness?
To this day, mankind holds onto its vestigial will to survive which serves as a testament to the dangers mankind faced during its evolution. This will to survive resides inside of the subconscious of all men, yet mankind attempts to suppress these primal desires for once unbound, these desires go against the societal limits developed by mankind to civilize itself. The constant battle between this vestigial and primal darkness and the lightness of society’s mores acts as the fundamental conflict of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness as Conrad explores the effects on mankind when returned to a primal environment where man’s innate darkness loses its societal bounds. Prior to Marlow’s appointment to a steam boat, the station doctor introduces
…show more content…
Marlow to the idea that the darkness of the integration of European societal mores into the primal African colonies creates a divide between the indigenous darkness and the lightness of the invading European culture, which creates uneasiness inside of Marlow’s brain due to the seemingly dichotomic nature of these ideals. When Marlow visits the doctor, the doctor states that “moreover, the changes take place inside, you know” as the doctor warns Marlow that the wilderness of the Congo exemplifies the battle between man’s innate darkness and the strength of the light of one’s societal bounds (Conrad 16). However, Marlow’s personality prevents him from believing this notion as he believes himself insusceptible to the inevitable changes to his psyche the doctor describes. This idea of the opposing lightness and darkness presence in the primal state of the Congo on man’s psyche mirrors that of the European nations reaction to Belgium’s colonization of the Congo as the other European nations believe that they fought for good when opposing Belgium’s actions, however, once these nations realize the economic and political benefits of African colonization, they give into their innate darkness as they feast upon the weakness of the indigenous people to strengthen their power without regard for the human rights violations they commit in the process. The conversation between the doctor and Marlow over the dichotomic nature of lightness and darkness in man’s psyche in the Congo serves as a parallel to the underlying conflict of the novel as a whole - the European nations giving in to their vestigial desire to dominate those lesser than themselves technologically and militarily without regard for the lightness of their own societal mores. Although Europeans maintain the opportunity to spread the lightness of their civilized societal mores, they instead spread primal darkness across the African colonies by enslaving and abusing the African natives. Furthermore, Marlow initially travels to Africa for the sake of adventure, however, once there, the dichotomic battle between lightness and darkness begins to engulf Marlow as his ambitions mutate from that of adventuring to finding Kurtz - one who the darkness completely engulfed, which mirrors the mutation of European colonial ambitions from that of spreading cultural and religious beliefs to that of widespread exploitation. Once Kurtz dies, Marlow comes the realization that Kurtz “was a remarkable man. After all, this was the expression of some sort of belief; it had candour, it had conviction, it had a vibrating note of revolt in its whisper, it had the appalling face of a glimpsed truth—the strange commingling of desire and hate” and that Kurtz’s ideals and the ideals of the European Neo-Imperialists parallel each other for Kurtz’s strongly held convictions of his supposed god-like power matches that of the European leaders who believe themselves the absolute rulers of the world, thus both Kurtz and these European leaders believe in in their right to subjugate those weaker than themselves in the name of furthering their own power (Conrad 118). At one time, the dichotomic battle between lightness and darkness brought Kurtz into its battle as Kurtz once struggles between maintaining his societal mores and giving into his primal instincts, however, much like the European nations, Kurtz gives into his vestigial desire to subjugate and control all those weaker than himself in order to bolster his own power. Even though Marlow acknowledges that desire and hate drove Kurtz’s ambitions, Marlow believes that Kurtz’s convictions were not entirely wrong as Kurtz’s reign as a godlike figure brought lightness in the form of order to the indigenous people, however, at the same time Kurtz perpetuates darkness by engulfing himself fully in the primal culture of the African natives, even inspiring a “witch-dance in his honour” among the natives (Conrad 82). Following this idea, the European leaders who engulf themselves in the darkness of their primal desires do not solely intend to spread darkness across their African colonies as they initially and to some extend do intend to spread the ideals of their culture and their societal mores onto a less culturally and morally developed continent. Although the primal darkness of man’s innate desires mutates these ideals that the European Neo-Imperialists spread from that of developing Africa into a prosperous and European-like society to that of exploitation and profiteering the land and indigenous people, Marlow’s line of logic that justifies Kurtz’s actions of spreading the darkness of savagery under the initial guise of light justifies the Neo-Imperialist actions of Europe for initially desiring to spread the lightness of European society and culture. The overarching theme of the battle between lightness and darkness follows this ideal - as long as one’s initial ambitions abide to spreading lightness rather than darkness, then one’s actions, although not completely vindicated as one’s ambitions still mutated into spreading darkness, may be justified to an extent for maintaining at least some sense of good or lightness. The endless battle between the lightness of spreading developed morality and societal mores and the darkness of mankind’s innate primal desire to survive and dominate those lesser than one’s self perpetuates itself as the primary conflict driving the events throughout Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and throughout mankind’s history.
When man faces the savagery of the unknown, he faces a choice between sticking to his societal values instilled into himself by the limitations society enforces upon mankind or engulfing himself in the darkness of his vestigial primal desire to metamorphosize as a part of the savagery. Prolonged exposure to this dichotomic battle between darkness and lightness may cause man to lose sight of his own self as his heart escapes from the bounds placed upon it by the collective will of society and morphs into a heart tainted by darkness. As Friedrich Nietzsche stated, “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.” as those who attempt to fight their innate darkness must see that exposure to this darkness does not engulf himself for acknowledging one’s innermost vestigial desires may lead to these desires overthrowing the lightness instilled into one’s self by society through an irreversible coup de
grâce.
Marlow to the idea that the darkness of the integration of European societal mores into the primal African colonies creates a divide between the indigenous darkness and the lightness of the invading European culture, which creates uneasiness inside of Marlow’s brain due to the seemingly dichotomic nature of these ideals. When Marlow visits the doctor, the doctor states that “moreover, the changes take place inside, you know” as the doctor warns Marlow that the wilderness of the Congo exemplifies the battle between man’s innate darkness and the strength of the light of one’s societal bounds (Conrad 16). However, Marlow’s personality prevents him from believing this notion as he believes himself insusceptible to the inevitable changes to his psyche the doctor describes. This idea of the opposing lightness and darkness presence in the primal state of the Congo on man’s psyche mirrors that of the European nations reaction to Belgium’s colonization of the Congo as the other European nations believe that they fought for good when opposing Belgium’s actions, however, once these nations realize the economic and political benefits of African colonization, they give into their innate darkness as they feast upon the weakness of the indigenous people to strengthen their power without regard for the human rights violations they commit in the process. The conversation between the doctor and Marlow over the dichotomic nature of lightness and darkness in man’s psyche in the Congo serves as a parallel to the underlying conflict of the novel as a whole - the European nations giving in to their vestigial desire to dominate those lesser than themselves technologically and militarily without regard for the lightness of their own societal mores. Although Europeans maintain the opportunity to spread the lightness of their civilized societal mores, they instead spread primal darkness across the African colonies by enslaving and abusing the African natives. Furthermore, Marlow initially travels to Africa for the sake of adventure, however, once there, the dichotomic battle between lightness and darkness begins to engulf Marlow as his ambitions mutate from that of adventuring to finding Kurtz - one who the darkness completely engulfed, which mirrors the mutation of European colonial ambitions from that of spreading cultural and religious beliefs to that of widespread exploitation. Once Kurtz dies, Marlow comes the realization that Kurtz “was a remarkable man. After all, this was the expression of some sort of belief; it had candour, it had conviction, it had a vibrating note of revolt in its whisper, it had the appalling face of a glimpsed truth—the strange commingling of desire and hate” and that Kurtz’s ideals and the ideals of the European Neo-Imperialists parallel each other for Kurtz’s strongly held convictions of his supposed god-like power matches that of the European leaders who believe themselves the absolute rulers of the world, thus both Kurtz and these European leaders believe in in their right to subjugate those weaker than themselves in the name of furthering their own power (Conrad 118). At one time, the dichotomic battle between lightness and darkness brought Kurtz into its battle as Kurtz once struggles between maintaining his societal mores and giving into his primal instincts, however, much like the European nations, Kurtz gives into his vestigial desire to subjugate and control all those weaker than himself in order to bolster his own power. Even though Marlow acknowledges that desire and hate drove Kurtz’s ambitions, Marlow believes that Kurtz’s convictions were not entirely wrong as Kurtz’s reign as a godlike figure brought lightness in the form of order to the indigenous people, however, at the same time Kurtz perpetuates darkness by engulfing himself fully in the primal culture of the African natives, even inspiring a “witch-dance in his honour” among the natives (Conrad 82). Following this idea, the European leaders who engulf themselves in the darkness of their primal desires do not solely intend to spread darkness across their African colonies as they initially and to some extend do intend to spread the ideals of their culture and their societal mores onto a less culturally and morally developed continent. Although the primal darkness of man’s innate desires mutates these ideals that the European Neo-Imperialists spread from that of developing Africa into a prosperous and European-like society to that of exploitation and profiteering the land and indigenous people, Marlow’s line of logic that justifies Kurtz’s actions of spreading the darkness of savagery under the initial guise of light justifies the Neo-Imperialist actions of Europe for initially desiring to spread the lightness of European society and culture. The overarching theme of the battle between lightness and darkness follows this ideal - as long as one’s initial ambitions abide to spreading lightness rather than darkness, then one’s actions, although not completely vindicated as one’s ambitions still mutated into spreading darkness, may be justified to an extent for maintaining at least some sense of good or lightness. The endless battle between the lightness of spreading developed morality and societal mores and the darkness of mankind’s innate primal desire to survive and dominate those lesser than one’s self perpetuates itself as the primary conflict driving the events throughout Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and throughout mankind’s history.
When man faces the savagery of the unknown, he faces a choice between sticking to his societal values instilled into himself by the limitations society enforces upon mankind or engulfing himself in the darkness of his vestigial primal desire to metamorphosize as a part of the savagery. Prolonged exposure to this dichotomic battle between darkness and lightness may cause man to lose sight of his own self as his heart escapes from the bounds placed upon it by the collective will of society and morphs into a heart tainted by darkness. As Friedrich Nietzsche stated, “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.” as those who attempt to fight their innate darkness must see that exposure to this darkness does not engulf himself for acknowledging one’s innermost vestigial desires may lead to these desires overthrowing the lightness instilled into one’s self by society through an irreversible coup de
grâce.