What might the title represent—the heart of darkness—what is this referring to?
Response:
To me, Heart of Darkness, simply put, refers
to the notion that there is darkness within every heart. We all think evil
selfish thoughts. We all commit evil acts. Though we are not always conscious
of the consequences to our actions, that doesn’t mean we aren’t at fault. The
fact that sometimes I don’t realize when I have done something morally wrong
startles me. Then again, who is to dictate what is “moral” or what is more
moral something else? However, I believe I’m thinking too much into it.
From
the book’s standpoint, I believe the ivory company is the “heart of darkness.” it
is its intentions that spawn the events of the book, which for the majority are
yield a negative impact. Again, to whose standards are things negative? In the
eyes of the company, everything they are doing is moral to them. It all relates
back to perception. One man’s junk is another man’s treasure or: one person’s doings
in the Congo are another’s travesty.
I
believe the point in the author even mentioning the darkness of one’s heart was
to stir up this kind of a controversy. If not, I probably need to schedule an
earlier date with which to conference with my psychologist about my sanity. In all semi-seriousness,
I believe it can be universally concluded that the title Heart of Darkness
refers to the notion of everyone being just a little bit evil.
Dylan, you make a strong connection between the average individual and the events that take place in the novella. I certainly agree, there is a "darkness" that innately lies within us these ideas expressed in Conrad's work through various happenings. Do you believe the people all, considering no man is perfect. We see in the ivory company even considered the morality of their actions, or were their actions simply nature, while potentially becoming prosperous?
ReplyDeleteI agree, the Heart of Darkness does heavily suggest that every human, no matter how "good" or "kind," is subject to an "evil" or "dark" conscious. Again, morality is simply standardized by consensus of the population. It is subject to change by the skew of perceptions and the influence of propaganda. Everything, every spec, concept, material, etc. of our human realm is subject to perceptual interpretation. Einstein had it right: it's all "relative." We cannot and can never wholly escape bias and of course, this will lead into beliefs and faith and religion and I could easily rant on those subjects. Are there fundamental morals? What do we consider "right" to actually be "right" beyond the constraints of time?
ReplyDeleteI like both explanations you give here. The idea that everyone has their own "heart of darkness" is a fantastic claim and is proven constantly throughout the novella. Although, what "heart of darkness" did the enslaved natives have? I suppose they were never actually introduced as individual characters to read into it so deeply. Your other point is also perfectly validated: that ivory is the book's own "heart of darkness," or is, at the very least, the cause of most of the "hearts of darkness." The ivory created greed, which created the traders' "evil" tendencies.
ReplyDelete