Who's at Fault, Conrad or Marlow?

Who's at Fault, Conrad or Marlow? 

Joseph Conrad is regarded as one of the greatest English writers of all time. That is why it is of no surprise that his novella Heart of Darkness was such a successful work of literature. The story was originally published in 1899, but it is still being talked about up until today. The book itself is filled with dense layers of imagery and symbolism as well as complex theme that’s reveal the darkness that lies within the hearts of mankind. It is a common opinion amongst critics that this novella awe- inspiring. But Chinua Achebe who was a Nigerian critic, novelist, poet, and professor disagrees with this common belief that is widely accepted by many. On the 18^th of February in the year 1975, the great African writer Chinua Achebe presented a Chancellor’s Lecture at the University of Massachusetts, entitled ‘An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.’ The African writer voiced his opinion on how he believed Conrad was, "a thoroughgoing racist" for depicting Africa as "the other world". If you refer to the how Conrad depicts the Congo and the indigenous peoples that are native to that part of the region one can see how Chinua Achebe might have come to this conclusion. Take for example “We were wanderers on a prehistoric earth, on an earth that worse the aspect of an unknown planet... The prehistoric man was curing us… wondering and secretly appalled as sane men would be…” Through Marlow, Conrad portrays the Congo as a place that is completely separate from the world as if it were something that had never been touched and was undeveloped. The people were described as prehistoric as well meaning that they were like the land that they resided on, separate from mankind. In addition, when Marlow refers to himself he calls himself a “sane man.” Nowhere in the text does Conrad paint the natives in a positive light as he does with the Europeans. When I read the book the first time I did not take these descriptions with defense, but now that I am rereading the text through the light of Chinua Achebe I have developed a sense of resentment for the author. The fact that not one African is shown in a positive manner causes me to ask the question why? Even the people who are not important, as long as their European when being explained by Marlow they are always more than “savage” or “black shapes”. It is as if the people are not even human. But the problem with this is this is the story of a fictional character. One cannot jump to the conclusion that this is what Conrad was feeling because he could have just been writing from a European perspective. At the time this is how they viewed anyone who was not European. The purpose of Heart of Darkness was to bring to light the issues that are occurring in areas that people normally do not pay attention to such as the Congo. Because this was written from a European perspective and the author was trying to teach his readers about issues today, could he have used this as a strategy to show how harsh Europeans were to the African. By allowing the reader to know the thinking of Marlow could that have just been Conrad’s way of showing the Europeans how they are unfair towards those who were different from them. I would disagree with Chinua Achebe, but there is one factor that prevents me from doing so. Marlow is the fictional embodiment of Joseph Conrad. The large amount of similarities between the fictional character and the author have caused me to believe that Marlow’s story is really Conrad’s experiences on the Congo. But if that is that case that would mean that Marlow’s thoughts match what the author was thinking. Based on how he describes the Africans, he would be considered racist. “yet to understand the effect of it on me you out to know how I got out here, what I saw, how I went up the river to the place where I first met the poor chap.” In the introduction of the author of Heart of Darkness, it says “Much of what Conrad witnessed on this journey is reflected in Heart of Darkness…” Going back to the point of Marlow, he says that one must understand how he get where he is the things that he saw and where he met the poor chap. That quote and what is said in the introduction is what has persuaded me believe that this is Conrad’s experiences, his thoughts, what he saw. Marlow serves as the cover to what he believed in so that he would not be criticized for his thinking. Everything is not as it seems. There is always another side to the story. This is why I agree with Chinua Achebe in his reasoning that Joseph Conrad was a racist. The fact that this work of literature has been critically analyzed over the course of years has also caused me to believe that white racism is so embedded in our society that we cannot differentiate prejudice when it is masked, just as Conrad masked his thinking by disguising himself as Marlow. Because this story is said be “fiction” no one pays much attention to the offensive language that is used towards the Africans. But behind everything that one says, whether one claims that it untrue, there is always some sort of truth behind it. Conrad being racist is the truth behind the thoughts and ideas of Marlow.

Wuthering Heights Response

IT MIGHT BE SCARY AT FIRST BUT YOU HAVE TO KEEP GOING. 

I am one of those people who like to live in comfort, especially in my world of literature. I have certain books that I like to read and a certain style I enjoy that some authors use. But when your enrolled into an AP English class or any course that requires reading, you will be forced to move out of your comfort zone and into the dangers of the unknown. Upon reading this book I had multiple conflicting feelings. My teacher, luckily, did not spring this dangerous book into our hands. She led us up to the caution tape and later released us to see what was beyond the yellow tape. What I mean by this is I was informed by the way the author Emily Brontё writes and received some background information on the text Wuthering Heights. But even with this prior knowledge I was not prepared for what was to come. Even though someone call tell you about something before you do it, you will never fully understand until you experience it on your own. That is exactly what happened to me. At first I found myself very confused with a very strong dislike towards the text. The switching of narrators, to the all the names being related, and the setting taking place manly in the two homes and the moors aroused great aggravation and impatience. However, when I got my hands on the audio of the story, by the end I actually like the book. What set me back was being confused and not going on, but because I could hear the different characters of the book it became easier for me to follow. In fact the book itself is very interesting in many ways. What I found the most intriguing was the love triangle between the second generation Catherine, Edgar, and Heathcliff in correspondence to the third generation love affairs between Cathy, Linton, and Hareton. The relationship between these two “love triangles” is what I found the most intriguing. Catherine was a beautiful young lady who grew up with Heathcliff. As children they spent a lot of time with each other and eventually found love. But when Edgar came around she eventually ended up marrying him, because of his looks and his wealth as well. But this did not end things for Catherine and Heathcliff they later found love when they were dead. Cathy and Linton began falling for each other but Heathcliff and Edgar got into the way of them being with each other. Eventually Heathcliff won by taking over their relationship and forcing them to get married or would not let Cathy return back to her home. From this what I gained was if love is not meant to be then it will not work. Because at the end the readers saw what type of person Linton was when he gave everything to Heathcliff in his will when he died. Even though death is not a good thing, Linton’s death gave Hareton and Cathy a chance to realize that they were the ones who were meant to be with one another. When Cathy put her ego aside and stopped making fun of Hareton she ended up being very happy in the end. It was interesting to see the effect of death on the characters. Catherine dies and she haunts Heathcliff so that he will not be alone. Edgar died and Hareton got Heathcliff Thrushcross Grange through his will. Linton died Hareton and Cathy find their way to one another. Heathcliff dies and is finally reunited with the love of his life. Normally death has a very negative connotation, but in this book it is one of the driving forces that bring two people together binding them through true love. 

"Base Details" by Siegfried Sassoon

The poem "Base Details" by Siegfried Sassoon uses several literary devices that include but are not limited to diction, irony, diction, and point of view. In this blog post I will be focusing on the authors use of point of view to convey the speaker's attitude. The author writes this poem in first person point of view meaning he is telling a story and is a character in the story as well. Throughout the poem he compares himself to a major by saying if he was one, this is how he would act or this is what he would say. Through this we get to see the truths of what being a major really implies. The beginning of “Base Details” starts off with, “If I were fierce, and bald and short of breath, I’d live with scarlet majors on the base (lines 1 and 2).” He is saying if he were a major he would be bald, fierce, and short of breath. Based on the next line he would also have blood on his hands along with the other majors he would be living with if he were one. With the aid of diction and imagery the author plays off of the stereotype of what a major would look like and where they would live. As the poem continues the next lines read, “And speed glum heroes up to the line to death (line 3).” The majors are the ones who have the power to command a soldier to fight in the line. But what Sassoon is saying is they speed up their time of death by putting them on the fighting line. This shows the power of the major when it comes to a soldier’s life and death. Next he says,” You’d see me with my puffy petulant face… (line 4).” For those who do not know petulant means childishly sulky or bad tempered. Again he is describing another trait of a major. They have puffy faces and are bad tempered. If Sassoon was a major, he would have the same face. In addition, he would also be, “Guzzling and gulping in the best hotel (line 5).” The majors are quickening their men to death while they enjoy the luxuries of eating and drinking in the best hotels. Not only do they have the power of putting men to death but they are also extremely wealthy because they can afford to reside in these hotels. “Reading the Roll of Honour. ”Poor young chap”, I’d say- “I used to know his father well; Yes we’ve lost heavily in this last scrap” (line 6-8).” The Roll of Honour is a list of people whose death or achievements are honored or have died in the battle. In this scenario they people who are now dead are the men of the majors who gave them the order to fight in the line. Normally when someone dies one becomes sad or at least shows that they care about what happened. Even though the majors are partly responsible for the tragedy all they say is poor thing I used to know his father. It is clear that majors do not care about the death of their soldiers. Sassoon in these lines is showing when men who fight in war die, this is how he would react if he were a major. The poem ends with “And when the war is done and the youth stone dead, I’d toddle safely home and die- in bed (line 9 and 10).” As the youth lie dead, the majors go home safely and rather than dying alongside their men on the battlefield they die in bed. Using first person point of view shows the speakers true thoughts about majors. He does not want to be like them. He sets up the poem writing as someone who if they were a major to highlight how corrupt they are. They put their men up to die and when they die they do not care. All that they care about is having power and money. They have the power to dictate a soldier’s life in terms of life and death and they eat and drink in the best hotels. 

Race: Stephen Colbert

RACE 

America as a whole has come a long way since the times of slavery. But since slaves were freed, racism has continued to be a prevailing issue. Racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. Even though racism and discrimination were set in place many years ago, even till this day no one has found a cure for this disease. In the hysterical Political Satire, I Am American (And So Can You), the author Stephen Colbert addresses the issue of racism in society through exaggeration and sarcasm, but issues a need for Americans to change. 

The question, where did racism come from? is a question that has been asked many times by any people, but has a wide variety of interpretations. According to Colbert, before the Civil war skin color was not an issue. But following slaves being free, the use of the word "slave" did not fit anymore. As a result,” ...former slaves started calling themselves “Black” or “Negro” or “colored” (171). In short, the color of one’s skin began to matter. Then came the issue of segregation were everything was split between blacks and whites. "White people had their drinking fountains, and Black people had their drinking fountains. White people had their schools, and Black people had their drinking fountains"(172). Presenting the origins of racism in this way at first glance may seem funny, but what Colbert is saying is true. Before the slaves were free, a slave was just a slave. But when African Americans were no longer slaves they began calling them by the color of their skin. And because of this distinction of color that paved the way for racism. Based on the course of history and what Colbert is saying, the idea of how racism came about can only be depicted in one way, irrational. It simply does not make any sense why this ideology came about or why it is continued to be practiced today. By presenting this point it makes one not only see society in a different way but want to change it. No one wants to follow ideas that do not make any sense, just because they have been around for a long time. And that is the outcome that Colbert wanted. He wants people not to just see color when they look at someone else but see another fellow human simple as color divide us. This goes into the next claim made by the author. The problem in America is not necessarily racism, but race.

In continuation of the origins of racism Colbert discusses the root of this problem, which is race. Without race there would be no racism is an argument that is presented. But this then raises the question, how do you erase race? Luckily this question is answered for us in the book. “NEWS FLASH: I don’t see race. THIS JUST IN: I used to see race” (172). We as humans made the decision to value race which has been linked to a series of problems. If we decide not to see race that would eliminate race along with racism. If we made race important, we can also make race non-existent. The outcome of how society turns out to be lies in the hands of the individuals that are living in it. Colbert is telling the audience that we have the power to do whatever we want. If we want to change things it is not impossible. 

I Am America (And So Can You) by Stephen Colbert

It May Seem Funny at  First Glance....

As of now, I am currently reading I Am America (And So Can You) by Stephen Colbert. You might be reading this thinking I am making this up, but I can assure you I am not. When I first came across this book I was immediately intrigued by just reading the title and that is what led me to read this book. The genre of this book is satire. From previous knowledge I knew satire was using humor to make a comment issues in society in order to promote a change. That is why when I found myself laughing at every other line I was not surprised. But even though the topics that were addressed by the author were humorous, I realized what he was saying was not to be taken lightely. 

One of the sections in this book is title "My American Childhood." Here, he dicusses what makes up a family and the roles of each member of a family. When he started talking about fathers that is when I started to see that although what is being said may seem funny at first glance, if you think a little deeper you will see that he is making a statement. One of the first lines written about fathers is, "America used to live by the motto “Father Knows Best.” Now we’re lucky if “Father Knows He Has Children.” Yes this is funny, but the sad part is this is true. It is widely known that there are many children living today that do not have fathers or never knew of their father. Statistics show that this number is increasing and the affects on fatherless children are becoming more intense.(National Center for Fathering) 

What Stephen Colbert is saying is America has become a country that does not value the idea of family. Instead we teach the ideology of a broken home. To every child there is a mother and a father. It takes two people to produce a child. But instead of promoting family we promote having sperm donors and baby daddies that pay child support. A father is suppose to be present in a childs life and remain there throughout their life. Parenting does not mean producing the child, but being there for the child. 

On social media you see the "Father Starter Pack" which is folllowed by no image avaliable. This is a current issue that is occuring in our society today, but no one is doing anything to change this. You cannot force anyone to do something, but if you do not talk about issues such as this and try finding solutions, no one will ever learn. What we need is to get back to not only "Father Knows Best" but also "Father Stayed." And eliminating the no image available icon in association with fathers. 

Trust No One

Trust No One

       There is common saying that goes do not fear the enemy that attacks you but those who are closest to you. The people that we consider to be our friends are normally the ones we trust. The definition of trust in the dictionary is a firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone. But trust also means giving someone the authority to destroy you completely, but having the confidence they would never do it. In the tragedy Othello by William Shakespeare the tragic hero Othello trust his servant Iago completely. His humble and loyal servant is what he refers to him as. But this is the same humble servant that lies to Othello. As a result of Othello believing that lie Othello kills his wife Desdemona. A common debate is who is to blame for this tragedy, Othello or Iago? I believe Othello is the one to blame for this tragedy. Iago may have instigated the situation, but Othello is the one who took it upon himself to bring it to the next level.

       In the Act 1 Scene 1 Iago talks of the two types of servants. One type of servant is one that is loyal and honest. They kneel down to the one they follow and do whatever is being asked of them. But ultimately they become worthless and are replaced. The others are “… trimm’d in forms and visages of duty, Keep yet their heart attending on themselves, And throwing but shows of service on their lords Do well thrive by them, and when they have lined their coats Do themselves homage…” (2). Iago then confesses that he is the second kind of servant. On the outside he will appear humble and trustworthy but his true agenda is to bring down Othello. And his plan will work because in Act 2 Scene 1 Iago says “The Moor is of a free and open nature, That thinks men honest that but seem to be so...” (20). Othello’s weakness is trust. He is blind to the true intentions of people because he only judges them on who they appear to be.

       Throughout the play we see Iago’s plan unfold. Things start to take off once Iago decides to use Cassio to make Othello jealous by telling Othello Cassio is sleeping with his wife. Iago gets Cassio drunk and this end in Othello firing him. When Cassio gets fired Iago convinces Cassio to ask Desdemona to get his job back. Desdemona constantly bring up Cassio to Othello. Desdemona then loses the handkerchief that Othello gave him and when it turns up again he sees it with Bianca (Cassio’s mistress) who accuses him of having the handkerchief in his chamber. Iago is the cause of all of this chaos and with the help of luck the outcome always comes out better than he anticipated. But, Othello never takes matters into his own hands. He is getting all his information from Iago who repeatedly lies to him and because Othello trust him, he believes everything he says. If Othello did not trust Iago, he would have never believed what he said and as a result would have never killed his wife Desdemona.

       No one can force you to do something. Every decision we make is made by what we chose to do. Regardless of what the situation was or how things seemed to be Othello chose to believe Iago, he chose to trust him. And because of the decision that he made he suffered from the consequences. This is why I believe Othello is the one to blame for the death of Desdemona. 

Culture: The Dictator

CULTURE: THE DICTATOR

Culture is a powerful force that rules over society. Depending on the type of society, culture may rule as a dictator that hinders the development of one’s identity or aids as caring leader who helps one define themselves. There are two sides to the story about culture, but everyone has their own story on how culture has affected them. In the case of the protagonist in Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison the culture of the times he was living in not only hindered, but destroyed the creation of his identity by not allowing him to develop freely and identify himself. Bigger, the protagonist in Native Son by Ralph Ellison, is also a victim.

Even after the African Americans were freed from slavery they still remained as slaves. The attitudes, customs, and beliefs that made up the culture during those times were dominated by the whites. Because of the history of the past with African Americans with their forefathers, white society automatically subjected African Americans to prejudice, discrimination and racism. Blacks were viewed as black inhuman beasts, “black ape” (Wright, 426), unworthy nobodies. Culture in those days said that if you were black you were just that, a color not a person. This made it especially difficult for blacks to survive in this kind of society. But there was a key to survival. “’Live with your heads in the lion’s mouth. I want you to overcome ‘em with yeses, undermine ‘em with grins, agree ’em to death and destruction, let ’em swoller you till they vomit or bust wide open.”(Ellison, 16) That was the advice the protagonist’s grandfather gave on his death bed. But this advice was the code that all blacks lived by whether they knew it or not. In order to be accepted you had to do what the whites told you to do and agree to everything they said. By doing so this required one to put on a mask that showed what others wanted to see. But if you put on a mask you are not being true to who you really are. And after having on a mask for so long you begin to lose a portion of yourself, because you spend so much time being someone that you are not therefore hindering your identity.

Faced with restrictions and lack of opportunities as a result of the culture at the time, African Americans could not grow as individuals. They were limited to the options they had when it came to jobs, schooling, and where they wanted to live. Even if they were successful, African Americans could not be the best that they could be or be who they truly were behind the mask. White society tolerated and in some cases encouraged advancement of African Americans, but they never wanted them to be on the same level as them. This is evident in the conversation carried out by Bigger and his friend Gus. They saw an airplane and Bigger talks about how he could fly a plane if he had the chance. Gus replied,” If you wasn’t black and if you had some money and if they’d let you go to the aviation school you could fly a plane.”(Wright, 20). This may come across as a simple answer, but the meaning behind this statement is much greater.  African Americans did not have a choice when it came to being who they wanted to be. There places in society were already picked out for them and society defined them by their color. With these circumstances there is no room for growth. Discovering who you are was virtually pointless if you were black because the fact was you did not matter.

Oppression, limitations, and discrimination of blacks was instilled into the culture of American during the nineteen twenties and nineteen thirties. As a result African Americans were not given the opportunity to freely be who they were or have a chance to discover their identity. White society, which highly influenced the culture during this time period, took this right away from African Americans. Bigger in Native Son and the protagonist in Invisible Man exemplify how cultures hinders one’s identity. Not only does this pertain to them, but this is true for the other African Americans living around this time period. These two characters represent the struggles that were faced by African Americans then and now. The struggle to be equal, the struggle to be treated equally, and in some cases the suppression of one’s true identity to gain acceptance continues.