I feel that there is obviously a very important reason and larger picture that Marlow wants us to grasp and understand by telling the story of his journey. I do not feel as if Marlow is telling his story solely to inform us of what he has endured, but he wants to show the presence of imperial rule during this time. He emphasizes the notion that the British were not the only ones to blame when it came to exploiting and destroying the colonies that they planned to conquer, so were the Europeans. Marlow's story is also a story of the Europeans display of cruelty and disregard for the native people of that country. Showing how they felt superior and more important than the indigenous people, which adds to the idea that the people are willing to do whatever means necessary to conquer this country and be successful.
While telling his story, Marlow repeatedly includes the phrase "heart of darkness", which is a major symbol in the story. This metaphor better elaborates the purpose behind Marlow’s story, by expressing the idea the “darkness” may not have completely come from the “savages” in the Congo, but from the white men that have invaded their homeland to exploit them.
Based on this information, it can be reasonably to assume that another reason Marlow chose to tell the story is to present the interpretation that those who are determined to reap benefits off of others, will suffer the ultimate consequences. This is evident with the character Kurtz, he set out to seek Ivory and was willing to betray anyone and walk over anybody to get that Ivory and in the end, this resulted in his death. Seeing how the Africans were treated and how dedicated The Company was to becoming successful, allowed Marlow to see how dark and cruel mankind can truly be. It’s kind of like Marlow wants to shine light on the harsh realities that were covered up and hidden by The Company, which explains their idea of trying to “civilize” the savages.
-T'Nia Tention
-T'Nia Tention
I think Conrad's purpose for Marlow telling the story was to show the unreliability of humans and general. Having an African tell the story would've been biased against the Europeans and vise versa. Although Marlow was European, however, he also displayed a sense of morality that allowed him to be aware of the injustices in the Africans. I think this was a key factor in the novel to show both perspectives of imperialism.
ReplyDelete-Rachel Robutti
I also agree that Conrad's purpose for Marlow narrating the story was to allow the readers to understand it through a character's interpretation. If Conrad would have allowed the narrator to tell the entire story, then it would have given us exact portrayals and very little open to interpretation. It was crucial in order to target the reactions that Conrad wanted from the reader, and also in contributing to the themes of the novel.
ReplyDeleteValentina Mejia
I agree with you on this because through Marlow's perspective we see what he sees. We get to experience all the racial moments he engages in like when he said the two black kids looked like acute angles, but then we also see that he isn't as narrow headed as we think, he does realize the situation that the people are in and we see that in the scene where he gives the kid a biscuit.
Delete-Destiny Quinones
I agree, it creates a personal insight into the story that Marlow is telling, it shows the biased he has because he tells the story, Marlow tells us the story through which he sees and portrays everything to be, this shows how much biased is used in telling a story of an event so harsh as the story Marlow is telling and how it justifies the actions of the Europeans. - Rakasha McIntosh
ReplyDeleteThe reason conrad uses Marlow was to gain perspective and also comment on the fact that people in society who choose to ignore the probability of corruption and human rights violations in other parts of the world are just as guilty since they choose to make no strives for change.
ReplyDelete- Alicia Cornejo
no thanks
ReplyDelete