Heart of Darkness

Conflicting feelings about this book.

There's a lot that I did like about it. I liked the story and the meandering structure of it.

I liked the darkness of it.

I liked how dammit it was of colonialism.

But I did not enjoy the writing style very much. I felt overwhelmingly like I didn't know who was saying what, who they were saying it to, what they were referring to.

This feeling grew more and more as the book went on and I suppose that's more or less the point isn't it - that we're feeling the descent into the madness of the narrator. But it was just a challenging read for me, and without enough reward to pay off the effort.

I really wanted to like this book. It's a classic isn't it? You're supposed to like it. Everyone talks about how great it is. But I just couldn't quite gel with it; honestly if it weren't so short I probably wouldn't have even finished it.

Puoi trovare questa recensione anche sul mio blog, La siepe di more

Cosa può dire Cuore di tenebra a unǝ lettorǝ oggi? Cosa può dirci di significativo un romanzo scritto da un uomo che sosteneva il colonialismo in quanto portatore di civiltà (sic) a popolazioni che a suo dire non lo erano? Ha ancora qualcosa da dirci il punto di vista razzista e sessista di Conrad quando sappiamo benissimo che la sua benevolenza è solo la facciata più presentabile di quell’orrore che lo sconvolse così tanto del Congo sotto l’oppressione di Leopoldo II del Belgio?

Ecco, secondo me sì, anche se non riesco a biasimare chi lo bolla come feccia razzista, perché il punto di vista di Conrad, veicolato attraverso il racconto di Marlow, oggi è inaccettabile e il fastidio che provoca può facilmente annegare quello che Cuore di tenebra è ancora capace di dirci, cioè che la nostra civiltà è ben lungi dall’essere conquistata per sempre.

Per quanto, infatti, ci raccontiamo di aver superato la nostra disumanità e averla cancellata a colpi di progresso, basta un nonnulla per far cadere la nostra facciata di popoli civili e ripiombare nell’oscurità della ferocia. Conrad racconta molto bene la perdita di ogni freno inibitorio dettata dall’avidità di materie prime, dal razzismo e dalla lontananza fisica da ogni giudizio morale vincolante, che rende inutile anche il mantenimento di una parvenza di civiltà.

Cuore di tenebra è ancora rilevante per il modo in cui espone quell’orrore che sta dentro di noi, appena sotto la superficie dei nostri principi cosiddetti inviolabili, che non sono riusciti affatto a tenerlo a bada; un orrore che riaffiora ancora e ancora, stupendoci ogni volta, nonostante le annose denuncie delle persone razzializzate.

Eh già. Noi oggi, in più di Conrad, abbiamo le testimonianze e le denuncie delle vittime di quell’orrore: iniziare a prenderle sul serio e ad ascolterle, invece di liquidarle come esagerazioni, potrebbe essere un buon modo per non cadere dal pero davanti a certi sopprusi.

It's a precious thing to be able to read a 115-year-old story, and one which is based on personal experience, at that. This novella sheds an unflattering light on imperialism, a culture of greed that led some men to travel to foreign places to mistreat, torture, and murder the natives and sometimes each other. Specifically, it recounts the tale of Charles Marlowe, who had had the experience of sailing down the Congo River, in the employ of an ivory trading company, in search of an agent named Mr. Kurtz, who is known to be very ill. Marlowe hears much about this man, but when he actually meets Kurtz, it is obvious that all he has left is his voice; Kurtz has become devoid of any qualities he might have had in his life. He is already dead. Marlowe returns to England a very disillusioned young man, having witnessed the full scope of petty jealousies, greed, and racism inherent in his culture.

I found this to be a powerful read, even though the writing style was an adjustment for me; Conrad does not write in the detail I've grown accustomed to, but then, that's part of the experience of reading a story that's more than a century old.

With it being one of the many classics I had left unread, I finally started reading Heart of Darkness a couple of days ago, and quickly moved through this little gem. There are more than enough summaries, analyses and critiques of this story on the internet, so I'll just make a few comments.

On Goodreads, a number of people are complaining about the cliched, cheap use of dark Africa as a metaphor for the darkness of protagonist Marlow's darkened soul. While I don't think it's wrong to see this as a metaphor, I find it a bit superficial to keep it at that. It is the darkness and savagery of the jungle that bring Marlow - and all other characters that venture into its depths - to according states. The African land is not as much a metaphor for, as a causal explanation of the darkness of Marlow, Kurtz and others.

That power of the environment is ultimately the message that Conrad tries to convey. Kurtz may have wanted to bring light to the heart of Africa - so that it may look the way the Thames looks at the higher level of the framed narrative - but instead he became corrupted himself. Enlightenment, it seems, is not in the minds of the Europeans, but in the civilization that they occupy. Once outside this environment, they are as much savages as those whom they try to convert. Take civilization away from a man, and all you have left is a cold, primal core.

Whether Conrad did indeed take such a Hobbesian view of humanity, I don't know. I found it telling that Marlow showed compassion for his killed crew member, saving the corpse from cannibalism because "there had been some mutual dependency". It seems Conrad was also open to the idea that social structure can be sufficient for moral behavior.

In any case, the story has much more to offer than some reviewers on Goodreads are giving it credit for. Heart of Darkness tries to go to the heart of the human condition, and denies the Enlightenment idea of western man having reached a "civilized stage". I don't subscribe to the view of humanity as being fundamentally dark, but I have greatly enjoyed the way in which Conrad tried to make its case. And, given that western powers are still sending troops into "savage lands" in order to export their values and politics, it is worth considering to what extent Conrad was correct.