Heart of Darkness Blog Directions

Welcome to the beginning of our Heart of Darkness journey!!  Over the next couple weeks we will be reading and responding to Conrad’s novella.  And here’s what you need to do:

 

1. Peruse the prompts for discussion (included below).  These are key elements within the novel to consider while you read.
2. Carefully read and thoroughly annotate the text.  It’s short but dense!
3. BLOG!

·         Make sure you have the active and correct google account from Summer Reading.  If, at anytime, you have questions, please email us.  If you need to create a new account do so immediately and then turn it in to us so we can invite you to the blog.

·         Go to the Blog Address:  http://apliteraturehhs2013-1014.blogspot.com/2013_05_01_archive.html?zx=84076a0d154f4b90  (This is the same one from our Summer Work).  Log in with your username (Google Account) and password.

·         Click on “View Blog.”  This will take you to our secure, academic Blog!

·         Click on “Comments.”  You will be able to read your peers’ comments and respond.

4. Choose two Prompts from the sheet to initiate two different responses for the text.  These should be a minimum of 200 words each.
5. You are to post a minimum of four other student responses (relating to any of the topics/prompts for H of D).  These should be a minimum of 100 words and should all be for different students; at least two of these postings should be for students in the other class. 
6. Feel free to blog as much as you want.  We’ll talk bonus later!
7. Your faithful instructors will visit the Blog to join in the conversation and monitor the discussion.  All responses must be posted by Friday, January 10, 2014; a print off of posts/comments must be turned in by Monday, January 13, 2014.

 

Prompt Seventeen

• What is the significance of Kurtz’ soul going mad?  What caused his insanity?

Kurtz, having been away from "civilization" for so long, began his own demise when appointing himself basically ruler of the natives. While he was playing jungle god, he slowly began to deteriorate from the inside. Without being caught up in the hustle of actually encountering any authority, the corporate fears of being reprimanded and consequences of abandoning a moral code were non-existent. So, Kurtz did just that. His self-regard as well as his empathy were completely removed by his thirst for power and once he quenched it, his former sanity was reduced to a void full of corruption. However, to say that it was merely his own doing is incorrect. The human condition is what renders Kurtz a mindless maniac. Humans are over calculating and analyzing of everything they come across, more subconsciously than conscious. The internal conflicts proved to be the infliction on the way he was used to function. He thought about his life back home, he thought about the position of power he was in, he thought about survival, then his brain shut down and reverted to primal instinct. No more worry. No more pain. Just the soulless body and it's instinct to exist.

Prompt Fifteen

• What is the importance of ivory throughout the novel?  How does it function as both a literal and figurative image?

In all honesty, the first thing I thought of when I read this prompt was the song Ebony and Ivory by Stevie Wonder and Paul McCartney, which isn't that far off from the figurative representation of the ivory in this novel. Though the resonating line of "ebony, ivory, living in perfect harmony" is comically ironic with reference to my theory, it made me think of the contrast between the skin color of the two men and the natives. Ivory represents the white men themselves; the desirable aspect of the literal ivory exists only amongst them, in a way further exploiting the racist tendencies of all involved in the industry. White and black in relation to color definition is interestingly employed in this novel. Black is technically the absence of color, while white is the entire spectrum gathered and intensified. This symbolizes the natives having "nothing" in terms of worldly possessions while traders along with Marlow and Kurtz have "everything", or at least wish to have it all. 

Heart of Darkness Prompt #2

     In two distinct instances near the beginning of Heart of Darkness, Marlow describes the Congo river as a snake. The first time is as he is deciding to go into the Congo, when he sees the map of Africa in the shop window. He elaborates on the metaphor of the snake, saying the river resembled “an immense snake uncoiled, with its head in the sea, its body at rest curving afar over a vast country, and its tail lost in the depths of the land.” This image is repeated for emphasis while he is in the Company’s office in Brussels, again looking at a map of Africa. There he calls the river “fascinating--deadly--like a snake.”

     The image of a snake is an ancient one rich in symbolism. Generally, it represents evil, “darkness” as the book’s title suggests, and fittingly the Company men along the river are dark and corrupted. However, snakes also hold a seductive or tempting element--Marlow says “the snake had charmed me” at one point. As Marlow is an explorer by nature, this snake-like river tempts him to enter it, offering him greater knowledge of the world--but at a price. Marlow is clearly changed by this experience, having greater knowledge not only of Africa as a place but of the violent and exploitative goings-on there. In this sense, Heart of Darkness mimics the biblical story of the garden of Eden, one of the richest, most commonly alluded-to sources of snake symbolism in the Western world.

Heart of Darkness prompt #9

The question of whether a controversial book has a place in the canon is difficult, if not impossible to answer. Certainly books carry the mark of the ideology of their own time, yet one hopes that the great works provided in literature classes are to some degree universal, holding true even hundreds of years later. While parts of Heart of Darkness may certainly achieve this lasting effect, one hopes the racism inherent in its treatment of imperialism will not.

By itself, the more unpleasant aspects of Heart of Darkness do not warrant its removal from the canon. Many excellent books have problematic elements--would we avoid Kurt Vonnegut for his blandly rendered, objectified, and stereotypical women and skip Ezra Pound for his antisemitism when these unsavory elements are products of the time? While individual people may choose to, it’s clear that we as a society have agreed they are still worthwhile to read.

That is not to say, however, that those books, or Heart of Darkness, are so intrinsically valuable as to excuse their problems. It must be acknowledged that all elements of western society, literature included, have for thousands of years been dominated by white men. Were this not the case, it’s perfectly possible that Heart of Darkness never would have found its way onto lists of classic novels. The unoppressed by nature find it easier to excuse oppression--a white person will be less offended by racism than a black one, regardless of their level of sympathy for the struggle of those less privileged.

The problem with this book being taught is not its racism alone--when taught well, that can be acknowledged, discussed, dealt with in a reasonable way. The problem is that it is mostly white men who have decided it is worthy of being taught, when they’re not the ones affected by its problematic elements. The problem is that it’s the sixth book we have read in AP Literature this year written by a white male author. The problem is that even though equally excellent books which do not share its racism exist, they are not taught because they don’t hold the same place in the literary canon. The world of literature is vast. For every good book with problematic elements, there are equal books on similar subjects and without those elements--one only needs to look a little closer at the library shelves. That we have chosen to read Heart of Darkness instead of The Poisonwood Bible is a commentary on the unjustifiably dominant place white male voices still hold in the world of literature and on the ease with which privileged people such as ourselves swallow oppressive ideas as long as they don’t affect us.

Marlow and Kurtz

Marlow and Kurtz are two characters are two parallel lines that, somehow, also cross at some points. Ignoring the oblivious fallacy in that metaphor i would like to expound upon that concept. so first, what is the main difference between the two? Simple life and death. Delving further life and death become intangible and tangible. Marlow is present, Marlow is real, Marlow is a person, but Kurtz is different. Kurtz is no longer a person. He is a corpse, a legend, a name. He is stagnant while Marlow flows through the world, and because of this Kurtz becomes larger than Life. He becomes "Zeus". A mythical figure that carries "Thunderbolts","two shot-guns, a heavy rifle, and a light revolver-carbine." A God that has been chalked up to myth only to be told in past tense stories. While Marlow is more a likened to "Buddha". Interesting because this religious figure was a god, but also a man. Buddha was a real person who reached enlightenment. an idle that is not just for stories but also anchored in reality. So both are human gods, arrogant and powerful. 

Alluding to snakes

The symbol of a snake or serpent has changed throughout time, the most prevalent of which being the Judeo-Christian interpretation  of a great deceiver, the embodiment of temptation, lust, and even evil. While reading with this in mind one sees Marlow as depicting the river as and object of lust. His infatuation with the river is shown in the lines  “the snake had charmed me"  and calling it "Fascinating" and at the same time "Deadly". However, the snake also has further depth when alluding to the Greek/Latin Connotation of the snake. Snakes where omens of the gods, sacred in their own right, that appeared several times in the three great western epics. They represented wrath when a serpent rose from the sea to devour Laocoon and his sons, divine favor during the Trojan War as shown by a snake eating nine birds, and redemption illustrated when a snake emerged from under a monument to consume the offerings left by Aneaus. One theme that is relevant to the novella, that is also present in the epics, is the snake taking something into it, just as the river or "Giant serpent" takes Marlow into it. This  invokes a undertone of spiritual awaking, perhaps for Marlow, perhaps for the audience. It is interesting to find this juxtaposition of connotation within the same symbol. On one hand we see the snake as a symbol for corruption on the other we see a messanger of divine will. This could possibly foreshadow to the conflicting attitude that Marlow will face in the African wild.