Heart of Whiteness

    Chinua Achebe's "An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad's 'Heart of Darkness'" certainly altered my view of the novel. Achebe experienced Africa in an entirely different way than Conrad, and in a more intimate and personal way at that. Where Conrad came to Africa through an imperialist trading company and experienced it for only three years. If Heart of Darkness holds any clues, he likely didn't have any intimate interpersonal experiences with any African people. The value I find in teaching this novel is exactly that contrast. When there novels out there like Heart of Darkness (and there definitely isn't a shortage), it allows for the analysis of white perceptions of imperialism, and how being anti-imperialist does not at all mean thoughts of or a desire for the equality of the victims of imperialism. In a classroom setting though, especially one comprised entirely of white people, it is important to be careful how we go about this analysis.
    There has been a growing desire in academia for the analysis of whiteness as an identity. Toni Morrison offers some analysis of the role of whiteness in the 2016 U.S. presidential election in her article "Mourning for Whiteness" that was published by The New Yorker. Here, Morrison examines how a white identity influenced both the outcome of the elections, as well as the actions of white people in positions of authority and why they acted the way they did. A similar approach can be taken in regards to Conrad's work. When we pose questions such as, "How might Conrad's identity as a white European have influenced his language in regards to Africans in Heart of Darkness?" one can take away valuable insight. Achebe points out Conrad's apparent obsession with blackness, shown through his overuse of the word as an adjective. If we pose that question while thinking of that obsession with blackness, one can surmise that it may have been used as a way to distance and dehumanize. In a Western world that values whiteness, what better way for Conrad to dehumanize African people than by highlighting their lack of white skin? In questioning this way, we can gain valuable insight from the novel on topics still applicable today while not overlooking its explicitly racist content as many critics have chosen to in the past.
    What I struggled with in Achebe's essay is that Heart of Darkness "is today the most commonly prescribed novel in twentieth-century literature courses in English Departments of American universities." At first I thought, there must be many unique aspects of this novella that make it so widely taught in the United States. Then, I thought about how academia in the United States is still overwhelmingly white. Is this fact partially due to the United States is mostly white? Heart of Darkness has much value as a piece of literature, as Conrad is a skilled writer and linguist, something Achebe mentions in his essay. Part of me, however, wonders if there are not other great twentieth-century novelists that could not fill his space in classrooms, and without the aggressive racism. If racial demographics in this country were different, would this novella still survive (and thrive) in the American classroom? It's impossible to tell, but important nonetheless.
    To be frank, I don't think Heart of Darkness should or should not be taught in schools. I think value can be found throughout it, especially if one is attentive to the complexities of the novel. I'm not, however, convinced that it is irreplaceable. To me, it doesn't appear as an essential novel in and of itself, despite being studied so broadly. It, like every other literary work, has its benefits and downfalls, and for many nonwhite people, the downfalls outweigh its benefits. I find that a valid reason for an educator to choose another novel over it, and it is, ultimately, up to the educator.