Discuss the narrative style, structure, and tone of the novel. How does it
impact the effect and the meaning?
The narrative style of the novel plays a large role in the tone of the
piece as a whole. Marlow, the central narrator, becomes the filter to
everything that is seen, heard and felt after the first part of the novel
(where an unknown narrator speaks). Since Marlow becomes sucked into this
mindless hunt for ivory throughout the novel, this gives the text a tone of
darkness that begins discretely then ends explosively. This darkness spills
over into every aspect of the novel: the tone, the heart of Marlow, and the
heart of the novel.
Having Marlow as the narrator also
has an effect on how the reader sees each character and scene. While many of
the people there may have thought very highly of Kurtz, Marlow didn’t feel the
same way, therefore the reader has a tendency to follow in his mindset. Or Marlow’s depiction of the wilderness may
distort the reader’s view of it also. While he considered it to be frightening,
if someone else was in his spot they may not have felt that way. Having a
narrative view puts a slant on the events and people within the story.
The structure of the novel as a whole also plays into the thematic gradual
destruction; the slow fade. The text broken up into three parts allows for
steps towards the ultimate destruction. With each step closer to the end, the tone
darkens and the heart of the narrator hardens. Through this structure the
reader can clearly see what was meant to be a discrete fade.
I disagree with the assertion that Marlow’s narration creates an extreme bias against Kurts. I found Marlow to be cautious in his judgements. To me he seemed indifferent and served as a good window to peer through into the Congo. I liked the fact that he did not allow himself to be sucked into the stories surrounding the enigma that was Kurtz. Concerning Kurtz, Marlow gave credit where it was deserved, but wasn’t reluctant. He only made declarations after he had concrete evidence of what he was addressing. For example, he did not begin concluding about the jungle’s essence until he saw it and experienced it for himself. The same with Kurtz. He did not believe in such a story until he was face to face with Kurtz himself.
ReplyDeleteIn the novel Marlow says that him at Kurtz share “a common fate,” death. As Molly mentions the narrative style creates a sort of bias, for the reader sees through Marlow’s eyes and feels through Marlow’s heart. The three parts are significant because they do progress the novel farther and farther into destruction. The darker the jungle becomes, the darker Marlow’s heart becomes. Marlow contains the darkness during the first part and second part but in the latter half of the second part and third part of the novel the darkness oozes over into all aspects of the story, Marlow, and the tone as a whole.
ReplyDeleteMolly,
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with what you were saying about there being a filter and that due to the narrative style we are seeing the story as Marlow is seeing it. Evan, while I agree with what you were saying about Marlow being cautious against judging Kurtz, everyone passes judgment sometimes, whether meant to or not. Therefore, I think that Molly's assertion about seeing it as Marlow sees it, and not how an omniscient narrator sees it, is accurate. To further the argument, why would Conrad have written the story with Marlow as the narrator if he didn't intend for there to be some scrutiny of Kurtz?
I'm not sure that there is an ultimate destruction within Marlow or his telling of the story, as he is objective for the most part. He is a cultural sponge in this novel, soaking in everything he can of the lifestyles he sees throughout his journey. This continual telling of the story from Marlow's perspective has some bias, sure, but that's how first-person novels are designed. I honestly do not believe that Marlow was sucked into the corruption of the imperialistic trading company. He looked at the natives slightly differently. He looked down on them, and saw them as a somewhat lesser people, but he also saw the mistake in harming them and making them violent.
ReplyDelete