From Chinua Achebe’s “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s ‘Heart of Darkness’”
Published June 7th, 2006 in UncategorizedAs we begin to discuss Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart, it may prove generative to think about his quote below in order to frame our discussion of this novel in relationship to Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. Additionally, let’s read the excerpt from “Colonialist Criticism” in the Readings section of the blog in order to examine the question of universality in these two works.
…
The point of my observations should be quite clear by now, namely that Joseph Conrad was a thoroughgoing racist. That this simple truth is glossed over in criticisms of his work is due to the fact that white racism against Africa is such a normal way of thinking that its manifestations go completely unremarked. Students of Heart of Darkness will often tell you that Conrad is concerned not so much with Africa as with the deterioration of one European mind caused by solitude and sickness. They will point out to you that Conrad is, if anything, less charitable to the Europeans in the story than he is to the natives, that the point of the story is to ridicule Europe’s civilizing mission in Africa. A Conrad student informed me in Scotland that Africa is merely a setting for the disintegration of the mind of Mr. Kurtz.
Which is partly the point. Africa as setting and backdrop which eliminates the African as human factor. Africa as a metaphysical battlefield devoid of all recognizable humanity, into which the wandering European enters at his peril. Can nobody see the preposterous and perverse arrogance in thus reducing Africa to the role of props for the break-up of one petty European mind? But that is not even the point. The real question is the dehumanization of Africa and Africans which this age-long attitude has fostered and continues to foster in the world. And the question is whether a novel which celebrates this dehumanization, which depersonalizes a portion of the human race, can be called a great work of art. My answer is: No, it cannot. I do not doubt Conrad’s great talents. Even Heart of Darkness has its memorably good passages and moments:
The reaches opened before us and closed behind, as if the forest had stepped leisurely across tile water to bar the way for our return.
Its exploration of the minds of the European characters is often penetrating and full of insight. But all that has been more than fully discussed in the last fifty years. His obvious racism has, however, not been addressed. And it is high time it was!
You can find the the essay in its entirety here.
Reverend
I think Achebe’s opinion on Conrad is correct in the fact that he abandons making Africans into anything other than objects in Heart of Darkness, but I do not think this neccessarily makes him a racist. Just because someone doesn’t consider the humanity of a people does not make them racist, but does not mean they are not ignorant. Conrad wants to emphasize that Kurtz has been destroyed by a lack humanity, but he could have just as easily had the story happen in the Amazon, or in the Far East. Chinua ’s assessment is probably based on some other elements of racism where he is so willing to dish out the word. All it makes me think of is when someone believes another person does not like him or her and therefore that person is a racist. The story is a universal one and Conrad’s lack of sensitivity is nothing more than using the generally unknown to tell a larger story that is nothing as trivial as a race story.
I do not think that I entirely agree with Achebe. While the points he makes are valid, I disagree with the fact that Conrad’s Heart of Darkness is a racist novella. On the other hand, I do understand Achebe’s point that it is a novel that regards one man’s mental deterioration, with Africa as its setting. However, when Conrad discusses the natives as chained together, I find that the emotion he revokes is sympathy and sadness towards them. Also, he blatantly makes the Eldorado company look like the “bad guys” since they are the ones who are pulling the treasures from the land. I do not think that any of Conrad’s words are racist, especially not intentionally.
I am a little confused by this quote. I know he was calling him a racist, but at the same time he was also saying that he was more compassionate to the natives than the Europeans. It almost seems like he is pointing the finger and calling racist but leaving his audience wondering why he felt this way. Also the way he comments on how he is not criticizing his writing but in a sense he is, was like the oxymoron, a sweet blow. You can’t call him a racist in one paragraph then in the next say he is an excellent writer with talent. I just don’t understand why Heart of Darkness is a racist book, at least not in the way Achebe does.
I find that Achebe’s is both correct and incorrect. He is correct in that Africa plays more as a setting but it is also a charcater of sorts. The jungle’s of Africa play an important role in the story as do some of the figures that live in the jungle. And while the story does not focus on the Africans that could be simply be because it was written by a white author during a time period when culturs did not mix, not even in literature.
Richard:
“Just because someone doesn’t consider the humanity of a people does not make them racist.”
Listen to yourself.
Depriving someone of their human-ness and depicting them as merely objects or worse, beasts, is an act of racism.
It is not so hard to admit Achebe might be right. By refusing speech to Africans, Conrad is reifying them. Let’s also consider the possibility that it is just a symbolic trip to the darkness of the human heart… which consitutes, at the end of the day, another way to deny Africa and Africans their right to exist. Achebe also points to two of the three female characters depicted in the novella, the AFrican woman and Kurtz’s intended, as another way of showing how the Conrad reifies Africans. It could not be more obvious the only role of the African woman (”savage, superb, wild-eyed, magnificent” epithets that could be better suited for an animal) is a structural one: a savage counterpart to the delicate European woman (pale head, floating towards me).
Also, being an excellent writer does not imply your morals are right or vice versa. For Achebe, a work of art is not a mere beautiful object but it should also be a tool to call our consciences for a change.
I think one of the main issues with the argument that Conrad’s novel is racist, is the fact that Conrad was not writing a story about Africa, or those who lived within it. From a white European male of the time’s perspective, he would not no any better and his journey into the Congo makes him question everything he had previously believed. Achebe fails to see the voice that Conrad is creating. This book was not Things Fall Apart, which happens to be one of my favorite novels, but we can not expect everyone to write the same story. There is also a clear undercurrent of skepticism and sarcasm within Marlow’s words. He never blindly accepts any of the other white character’s opinions of the Africans within the novel. There is also the theme of humanity within the book; Marlow as well as Kurtz see the connection between themselves and those that are being dehumanized, used and neglected because they alone realize that they share the ugliness of humanity. I felt uncomfortable with the way the Africans were portrayed in the novel, but I also had to question what Conrad’s intentions were and thus far I have come to a much different conclusion. Has anyone stopped to consider that Conrad perhaps is such an excellent writer that he conveyed these racist ideas without actually believing them himself? I suppose I am just frustrated with the fact that it appears that racism will never come to an end. I have grown up in a better time and yet I still see the seed of hate and assumed hatred within those of my generation and younger. We should use Conrad as well as Achebe’s novels to see past this, not get stuck by the stories they tell.