One of Achebe's main points in his argument against the merit in teaching Heart of Darkness is that Conrad demonizes the physical country of Africa and its inhabitants. Conrad uses various aspects of African culture as foils for the evidently superior Western (white) culture. From pinning the UK's Thames river against the Congo's Congo river to placing the African woman, "a savage" to the "refined European woman", Conrad is degrading all aspects of African culture and labeling them as inferior to that of Westerners. As Achebe noted, Conrad characterizes the physical African continent as being horrible and dangerous. The sacred white man is noble and brave to enter the forbidden land of the black savages. This brings me to another one of Achebe's points and one of my reasons why the book should not be taught.
Heart of Darkness dehumanizes the African people. Although it is clear the Conrad, voiced through Marlow, knows that the Africans are people just like the white men, they refuse to admit that they are the same. As Achebe notes, the Africans are junior brothers. Achebe criticizes Conrad for inadvertently characterizing the African as lacking humanity. The fact of the matter is that Conrad was a racist. His book is racist. It is another example of white men thinking they are better than literally everyone else on the planet.
It is notable that Achebe addresses the issue of the role of fiction. Fiction is written to fascinate people and entertain them. When fiction is used to reduce "Africa to the role pf props for the break-up of one petty European mind" it is not just for entertainment. It is conveying a statement that is outdated and disgusting. '
By the time one reaches high school age, they are (or should be) aware of the existence of racism, the problems with imperialism, and how white people really suck sometimes. Heart of Darkness really feels like a broken record at this point in time. Its only real benefit is the richness and depth of its literal language. It forces one to think. However, it is time to retire Heart of Darkness.
This is a really strong post. I like that you combine Achebe's thoughts and your own to create a really assertive position. It seems like Achebe confirmed all of the opinions that you had while reading the book, which is just about what happened for me. My question is, do you think that Heart of Darkness is good to read in order to understand the evolution of postcolonial criticism and of racial understanding? If it's being considered from a modern perspective, I agree that it's deplorable. But considered in it's own time period and compared to modern literature, could it still have some educational value?
ReplyDeleteI really like how confident your writing is in this post. You have a clear argument and references in supporting the argument. You say that students by now have a solid understanding of the evils of imperialism, but do you think all students do or just those that are concurrently taking advanced history courses? If so, do you think the book should be introduced earlier in the curriculum, or taught to a different audience? I agree that parts of Heart of Darkness seem to go too far in its racism. Maybe there is another book that brings up imperialism without dehumanizing an entire continent.
ReplyDelete