THIS WORK WAS WRITTEN October 3rd 2007
A foil is a literary mechanism which uses a secondary to contrast with a major character, serving a variety of purposes. Various types of foils include character foils, situation foils, and setting foils. In his masterpiece, Things Fall Apart, Chinua Achebe employs character foils. The character foils in this novel expemplify the varying personalities created by the Igbo (Nigerian tribal) culture and the past. Character foils are usually between two closely tied characters with nearly opposite personalities with a distinct, culturally important connection or common ground. Thematically, this contrast helps to develop Things Fall Apart as a tragedy through pointing out the flaws and weakness in the characters that are foiled. Two primary character foils, that between Obierka and Okonkwo, and that between Ikemefuma and Nwoye, serve to contrast and illuminate the differences between each other, as well as reveal each other’s weaknesses in a way not seen by just examining the person’s actions alone.
Ikemefuma becomes a foil of Nwoye and the same vise versa. They share a common cultural ground of trying to fit in and qualify as men, under their father’s expectations. In this effect, Achebe brings out the cultural flaws and impractical elements of Okonkwo’s perception of men. The foil between Ikemefuma, as adroit, mature, learned, and pre-paternal, and that Nwoye, as childish, dependent, unknowledgeable, and yet yearning for guidance, is one that brings out the father’s interpretation of Nwoye’s flaws which are overall categorized by Okonkwo as lazy. Ikemefuma’s exemplary masculine qualities and admiration of Okonkwo inspire Nwoye’s desire to be masculine and detach from his childish and feminine weaknesses. However, in the death of Ikemefuma, all of Nwoye’s weaknesses are revealed as the most significant part of the character foil is unveiled in that Nwoye’s masculinity and confidence was solely dependent on Ikemefuma, and never a true part of his own personality. Achebe, at this point, makes it highly evident that the purpose of the foil between Ikemefuma and Nwoye was to expose the tragedy of Okonkwo and his dependency on the masculine cult which causes the tragedy of Nwoye, a boy unrealistically expected to be a man, not become, but be.
More importantly, Obierka is a foil of Okonkwo, and the contrast between them helps to show Okonkwo’s weaknesses and lack of words and ignorant use of brutal force, while it shows at the same time Obierka’s ability or compelling need to question the Igbo Culture. Okonkwo is a man of action not words; Obierka is a man of words and little action. Okonkwo fears of showing any sense of emotion as a sign of femininity, while Obierka’s character exemplifies the disadvantages in this by showing Okonkwo’s inability to socially connect and ultimately turn the closest against him. Obierka’s ability to remain calm and cool when things conflict with his personal preference or request something of him that disagrees with his personal ideas. Okonkwo cannot remain calm, and is often rash and foolish in this sense, eager to show off or demonstrate masculinity, which in Obierka’s reflections upon Okonkwo’s actions; we realize this is the tragic flaw that leads to Okonkwo’s climatic banishment from the tribe.
In a general sense, Things Fall apart can be viewed as the tragedy of Okonkwo’s actions. However, the character foils demonstrate that not only are Okonkwo’s actions tragic, but also the Igbo culture, radicalized by Okonkwo’s interpretation which reflects only his fears. The foils between Obierka and Okonkwo, as well as Ikemefuma and Nwoye, help to expose the tragic flaws of Okonkwo and his self-interpreted culture that cause things to fall apart.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
The Motif of Eyes throughout The Great Gatsby
THIS WORK WAS WRITTEN ON NOVEMBER 6th 2007
F. Scott Fitzgerald is renown for his mastery of both symbolism and motifs. In The Great Gatsby, this becomes most evident considering the boundless symbols and motifs he employs: eyes, parties, colors, the American dream, etc. The eyes of doctor T.J. Eckleburg are of particular importance and extensively symbolic throughout the novel. Fitzgerald uses the eyes of doctor T.J. Eckelburg to create relative parallels of symbolic importance with the eyes of other characters as well. Cumulatively, he employs the motifs of eyes to, with masterful discretion, criticize American society in the 1920’s.
Doctor T.J. Eckleburg’s eyes are described as “[. . .] blue and gigantic-their retinas are one yard high. The look out of no face but, instead, from a pair of enormous yellow spectacles which pass over a non-existent nose...his eyes, dimmed a little by many painless days under sun and rain, brood on over the solemn dumping ground [. . .]” (23). Upon first description, Fitzgerald depicts the eyes as faded, disappointed, sad, and overseeing. We later learn that they look into and over the valley of ashes, the place where those who fail to achieve the American Dream with little to start with end up at. Already, Fitzgerald creates a felling as if the eyes represent god. The usage of the word “brood” in the quote above implies that the owner of the eyes is rather unhappy with what he is watching. The Eyes create an idea of a godly being watching over society. They seem disgusted with society of the 1920’s, the moral decay, and the social decadence that so characterizes the era. Furthermore, the eyes expressively show disappointment in the American Dream which causes people to fail and ruin their lives out of their own self-ambition, which is essentially, another component of the era of decadence.
One of the most significant passages regarding the eyes of T.J. Eckleburg in this novel occurs after Mr. Wilson realizes that Mertyl was cheating on him: "I spoke to her," he muttered, after a long silence. "I told her she might fool me but she couldn't fool God. I took her to the window- " With an effort he got up and walked to the rear window and leaned his face pressed against it, "-and I said 'God knows what you've been doing, everything you've been doing. You may fool me but you can't fool God!' " (167). At this point, Michaelis, who was standing behind him, was looking at the eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg, which had just revealed themselves to the night, “pale and enormous”. In this situation, it can be seen as though the eyes were watching over, with dissapprovement, the entire moral deterioration and scandalous behavior of meryl which was so characteristic of the 1920’s. This passage firmly, and in a non-abstract manner, establishes the eyes of Dr. T.J. Eckleburg as god’s eyes. The idea of “she couldn’t fool god”, emphasizes that she couldn’t fool god that she was achieving the American dream, which she never was, and in part, was just another component of the moral decadence of the 1920’s.
Nick’s eyes are continuously mentioned in the narration, in which he discusses things “through eyes”, for example: "After Gatsby’s death the East was haunted for me like that, distorted beyond my eye’s power of correction." (167). This last quote shows how Fitzgerald often uses “through Nick’s eyes”, to point out a flaw with society which he himself sees. In this instance, Nick shows that his image of the east has seen the impossibility of the American dream which destroys so many superficially people of the 1920’s. Furthermore, Nick tries, or wants, to run away from the destructive force of the American dream in stating he wants to leave, but alas, that is where the reader find’s Nick lacks the epiphany that the consuming, ruinous drive to achieve the American dream is everywhere around him, no matter where he goes, and feeds of the shallowness and decadence of the society of the 1920s.
Conclusively, Fitzgerald uses the motif of eyes to develop his theme of the ruinous impossibility of achieving the American dream which preys infinitely upon the shallowness and decadence of 1920’s society. He does so through the repetition of Dr. T.J. Eckleburg’s eyes throughout the novel, which represent god, looking down, disappointedly, upon American society, as well as through the insights of nick which directly convey Fitzgerald’s personal criticism of the 1920’s. Eyes are an outstanding example of Fitzgerald’s mastery of motifs and symbols, and one of many which he uses to develop the theme of the factitious nature of the American dream which is inevitably ruinous.
F. Scott Fitzgerald is renown for his mastery of both symbolism and motifs. In The Great Gatsby, this becomes most evident considering the boundless symbols and motifs he employs: eyes, parties, colors, the American dream, etc. The eyes of doctor T.J. Eckleburg are of particular importance and extensively symbolic throughout the novel. Fitzgerald uses the eyes of doctor T.J. Eckelburg to create relative parallels of symbolic importance with the eyes of other characters as well. Cumulatively, he employs the motifs of eyes to, with masterful discretion, criticize American society in the 1920’s.
Doctor T.J. Eckleburg’s eyes are described as “[. . .] blue and gigantic-their retinas are one yard high. The look out of no face but, instead, from a pair of enormous yellow spectacles which pass over a non-existent nose...his eyes, dimmed a little by many painless days under sun and rain, brood on over the solemn dumping ground [. . .]” (23). Upon first description, Fitzgerald depicts the eyes as faded, disappointed, sad, and overseeing. We later learn that they look into and over the valley of ashes, the place where those who fail to achieve the American Dream with little to start with end up at. Already, Fitzgerald creates a felling as if the eyes represent god. The usage of the word “brood” in the quote above implies that the owner of the eyes is rather unhappy with what he is watching. The Eyes create an idea of a godly being watching over society. They seem disgusted with society of the 1920’s, the moral decay, and the social decadence that so characterizes the era. Furthermore, the eyes expressively show disappointment in the American Dream which causes people to fail and ruin their lives out of their own self-ambition, which is essentially, another component of the era of decadence.
One of the most significant passages regarding the eyes of T.J. Eckleburg in this novel occurs after Mr. Wilson realizes that Mertyl was cheating on him: "I spoke to her," he muttered, after a long silence. "I told her she might fool me but she couldn't fool God. I took her to the window- " With an effort he got up and walked to the rear window and leaned his face pressed against it, "-and I said 'God knows what you've been doing, everything you've been doing. You may fool me but you can't fool God!' " (167). At this point, Michaelis, who was standing behind him, was looking at the eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg, which had just revealed themselves to the night, “pale and enormous”. In this situation, it can be seen as though the eyes were watching over, with dissapprovement, the entire moral deterioration and scandalous behavior of meryl which was so characteristic of the 1920’s. This passage firmly, and in a non-abstract manner, establishes the eyes of Dr. T.J. Eckleburg as god’s eyes. The idea of “she couldn’t fool god”, emphasizes that she couldn’t fool god that she was achieving the American dream, which she never was, and in part, was just another component of the moral decadence of the 1920’s.
Nick’s eyes are continuously mentioned in the narration, in which he discusses things “through eyes”, for example: "After Gatsby’s death the East was haunted for me like that, distorted beyond my eye’s power of correction." (167). This last quote shows how Fitzgerald often uses “through Nick’s eyes”, to point out a flaw with society which he himself sees. In this instance, Nick shows that his image of the east has seen the impossibility of the American dream which destroys so many superficially people of the 1920’s. Furthermore, Nick tries, or wants, to run away from the destructive force of the American dream in stating he wants to leave, but alas, that is where the reader find’s Nick lacks the epiphany that the consuming, ruinous drive to achieve the American dream is everywhere around him, no matter where he goes, and feeds of the shallowness and decadence of the society of the 1920s.
Conclusively, Fitzgerald uses the motif of eyes to develop his theme of the ruinous impossibility of achieving the American dream which preys infinitely upon the shallowness and decadence of 1920’s society. He does so through the repetition of Dr. T.J. Eckleburg’s eyes throughout the novel, which represent god, looking down, disappointedly, upon American society, as well as through the insights of nick which directly convey Fitzgerald’s personal criticism of the 1920’s. Eyes are an outstanding example of Fitzgerald’s mastery of motifs and symbols, and one of many which he uses to develop the theme of the factitious nature of the American dream which is inevitably ruinous.
An Examination of the Unreliable Romantic Narrator in a Realist Novel
THIS WORK WAS WRITTEN ON NOVEMBER 19th 2007
In many novels, the notion of a reliable versus unreliable narrator is present. It is easy to understand why when examining personal accounts of situations. The exaggeration of events to glorify oneself often leaves the reader questioning the reality of the work of literature. In the great Gatsby, Nick Carraway narrates the novel which accounts the tragic life of Mr. Jay Gatsby, who fall susceptible to the self-destructive desire to achieve the American dream as he chases after his past. In the novels huckleberry Finn and The Heart of Darkness, the narrators Marlow and Huck both have flaws in their personal accounts. Often, the unreliability of these narrators is a bias created by the ideals of the time period. Additionally, in reflecting upon my own personal experiences and my story telling of them to others, I realize they are simply characterized as exaggerated. In the great Gatsby, Nick Carraway states “no amount of fire or freshness can challenge what a man will store up in his ghostly heart”, an epiphany which F. Scott Fitzgerald employs to hint that many of Nick’s memories are stored not within the mind, but within the heart, where passion and human emotion warp and twist memories into our own personal dreams which we prefer far more and so will others. I strongly agree that people are more so attracted to this notion of a unreliable narrator which
In the Great Gatsby, Nick presents himself as uninvolved in this frenzied pursuit of the American dream which characterizes the 1920’s. Nick Carraway instead show himself as a bystander observing the scene from an uninfluenced point of view. However, certain incidents that occur throughout the novel lead the reader to question the authenticity of Nick’s narration or perception of events, for example, drinking. Nick is, most certainly, drunk at various points when he narrates the novel, and therefore, his accounts cannot be taken seriously. Also, we must take notion of jealousy and human nature which perhaps affected the reality. As an innate flaw within mankind, we naturally grow jealous of those who have more and often disregard our own behaviors by hyper-focusing on that of others. Such is so with Nick Carraway. He focuses on Gatsby’s avid hunt for the American dream, and lacks to notice the jealousy which drives such an interest. Lastly, it is absurd to think that nick himself has not been consumed by the American dream. However, none of these negating factors are incorporated into Nick’s narration of the story because as a whole, it appeals to hear about the collapse of a man’s ideal world than to hear about the despair and inability of two men to maintain a consistent grasp of their dreams.
In Huckleberry Finn this notion of a romanticized tale or exaggerated truth is highly present. The novel depicts Huck’s moral struggle and maturity. Because of Huck’s immaturity, events are often depicted on a grander scale than they were in real life. Historical context also influence the lack of reality which both make the narration unreliable but the story more appealing in that it shows the common views of all as to whether or not blacks were accepted as members of society and as to whether or not slavery was wrong.
Furthermore, in Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, the unrealistic, heroic, yet depressing and evil-extracting venture of a man, for a nobel cause, penetrating into the heart of darkness, is unreliably depicted by Marlow. He idealizes a hero, just as Nick Carraway, and then later, finds his hero, in this instance Mr. Kurtz, to have disintegrated being susceptible to psychological deterioration, or evil, self destructive ambition. However, he fails to recognize his own ambitions, and instead creates a story where he is the heroic survivor; the bystander. This story too is affected by racism, which lies in the roots of his past. This affects the narrators ability to accurately portray the role of the Africans throughout the story. However, this fantasized version of Marlow’s real tale is readily accepted by a reader of that time period who would accept Marlow’s views of the natives.
This is all I could accomplish in one hour (since according to the College Board, I am allotted 1.5x the initial amount of time allotted. I hope I interpreted the prompt correctly.
In many novels, the notion of a reliable versus unreliable narrator is present. It is easy to understand why when examining personal accounts of situations. The exaggeration of events to glorify oneself often leaves the reader questioning the reality of the work of literature. In the great Gatsby, Nick Carraway narrates the novel which accounts the tragic life of Mr. Jay Gatsby, who fall susceptible to the self-destructive desire to achieve the American dream as he chases after his past. In the novels huckleberry Finn and The Heart of Darkness, the narrators Marlow and Huck both have flaws in their personal accounts. Often, the unreliability of these narrators is a bias created by the ideals of the time period. Additionally, in reflecting upon my own personal experiences and my story telling of them to others, I realize they are simply characterized as exaggerated. In the great Gatsby, Nick Carraway states “no amount of fire or freshness can challenge what a man will store up in his ghostly heart”, an epiphany which F. Scott Fitzgerald employs to hint that many of Nick’s memories are stored not within the mind, but within the heart, where passion and human emotion warp and twist memories into our own personal dreams which we prefer far more and so will others. I strongly agree that people are more so attracted to this notion of a unreliable narrator which
In the Great Gatsby, Nick presents himself as uninvolved in this frenzied pursuit of the American dream which characterizes the 1920’s. Nick Carraway instead show himself as a bystander observing the scene from an uninfluenced point of view. However, certain incidents that occur throughout the novel lead the reader to question the authenticity of Nick’s narration or perception of events, for example, drinking. Nick is, most certainly, drunk at various points when he narrates the novel, and therefore, his accounts cannot be taken seriously. Also, we must take notion of jealousy and human nature which perhaps affected the reality. As an innate flaw within mankind, we naturally grow jealous of those who have more and often disregard our own behaviors by hyper-focusing on that of others. Such is so with Nick Carraway. He focuses on Gatsby’s avid hunt for the American dream, and lacks to notice the jealousy which drives such an interest. Lastly, it is absurd to think that nick himself has not been consumed by the American dream. However, none of these negating factors are incorporated into Nick’s narration of the story because as a whole, it appeals to hear about the collapse of a man’s ideal world than to hear about the despair and inability of two men to maintain a consistent grasp of their dreams.
In Huckleberry Finn this notion of a romanticized tale or exaggerated truth is highly present. The novel depicts Huck’s moral struggle and maturity. Because of Huck’s immaturity, events are often depicted on a grander scale than they were in real life. Historical context also influence the lack of reality which both make the narration unreliable but the story more appealing in that it shows the common views of all as to whether or not blacks were accepted as members of society and as to whether or not slavery was wrong.
Furthermore, in Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, the unrealistic, heroic, yet depressing and evil-extracting venture of a man, for a nobel cause, penetrating into the heart of darkness, is unreliably depicted by Marlow. He idealizes a hero, just as Nick Carraway, and then later, finds his hero, in this instance Mr. Kurtz, to have disintegrated being susceptible to psychological deterioration, or evil, self destructive ambition. However, he fails to recognize his own ambitions, and instead creates a story where he is the heroic survivor; the bystander. This story too is affected by racism, which lies in the roots of his past. This affects the narrators ability to accurately portray the role of the Africans throughout the story. However, this fantasized version of Marlow’s real tale is readily accepted by a reader of that time period who would accept Marlow’s views of the natives.
This is all I could accomplish in one hour (since according to the College Board, I am allotted 1.5x the initial amount of time allotted. I hope I interpreted the prompt correctly.
An Explanation of Conrad’s Assessment of Mankind’s Inherent Evil in Heart of Darkness
THIS WORK WAS WRITTEN ON September 12th 2007
In the novel Heart of Darkness, a theme repetitively discussed and brushed upon in the exposure of all of mankind’s inherent evil. To accomplish this Conrad allows the evil to expose itself within Europeans in Africa through their psychological deterioration of the civilized restraints and social norms which expose it. Down to its core, Conrad assesses that it is a need for survival, greed for dominance, and urge for satisfaction, which drives mankind to commit evil acts. He exemplifies this through the European colonizers of Africa which are driven back to their primitive origins psychologically, the greed for ivory amongst people like Kurtz and Marlow, the need for freedom amongst the blacks and violation of personal primitive values, and the hunger of the cannibals in order to survive.
First, Conrad assess how typical European men’s presence amidst such a primitive darkness psychologically breaks them down to a point of ravish thirst for dominance and success at the cost of natives. The outer station manager is a last link to the civilized society and yet Conrad chooses to add a character of need for occupation amongst the seemingly pointless job of station manager. In this need for dominance and occupation, he mindlessly enchains hundreds of slaves left to die less than a hundred feet from his “civilized office”.
Additionally, Conrad assesses the hunger to survive as another means that drives evil out of mankind. For example, Marlow’s shipmates become and remain cannibals though there are alternate solutions simply because they know it can be the most guaranteed source of food. A significant example of the evil that emerges out of these men is when their leader is killed by Indians, and the captain, Marlow, desperate to show respects to his distant friends, throws the man overboard. The cannibals, even having known the man longer than Marlow, complain that he, their own leader, the one who led them to survive, should have been given to them for eating. Conrad specifically places such a demand into their response to show how separated from humanity and brotherhood these men have become, so evil, that they have no respect for the loss of human life, and on account of hunger and a need for survival which has been enhanced and exposed through living in Africa.
Lastly, the evil within mankind is brought out by psychological deterioration and greed from Kurtz, and in some ways, Marlow. Their greed, their desire for ivory, their desire for purpose and wealth, drives them to steal the ivory and riches of the natives, murder elephants, and murder the Indians or disrupt their culture, invade their territory, and provoke the Indians to fight. Kurtz psychologically deteriorates to his innate evil by dwelling in what is depicted as the very heart of evil and darkness, and rules out all common senses where only primitive instinct for wealth acts as reasoning for staying in such a place. And in that sense, Conrad clearly states that mankind’s inherent evil desires to lead mankind to self destruction, in that the irrational decision of Kurtz to stay in the darkness out of interests for wealth without the consideration of the high risks it imposed.
All in all, Conrad assess several factors contribute to exposing and driving mankind’s inherent evil. He shows the need for purpose as a motivator to commit evil acts such as enchaining humanity through the outer station manager. Conrad shows the need for food and survival, assured survival, as a motivation for murdering innocent members of humanity, even those “close” to the savage ship crew. Lastly, and most significantly, he shows the drive for wealth and imposition as a motivator to commit the daring, evil, and unthinkable in characters such as Kurtz.
In the novel Heart of Darkness, a theme repetitively discussed and brushed upon in the exposure of all of mankind’s inherent evil. To accomplish this Conrad allows the evil to expose itself within Europeans in Africa through their psychological deterioration of the civilized restraints and social norms which expose it. Down to its core, Conrad assesses that it is a need for survival, greed for dominance, and urge for satisfaction, which drives mankind to commit evil acts. He exemplifies this through the European colonizers of Africa which are driven back to their primitive origins psychologically, the greed for ivory amongst people like Kurtz and Marlow, the need for freedom amongst the blacks and violation of personal primitive values, and the hunger of the cannibals in order to survive.
First, Conrad assess how typical European men’s presence amidst such a primitive darkness psychologically breaks them down to a point of ravish thirst for dominance and success at the cost of natives. The outer station manager is a last link to the civilized society and yet Conrad chooses to add a character of need for occupation amongst the seemingly pointless job of station manager. In this need for dominance and occupation, he mindlessly enchains hundreds of slaves left to die less than a hundred feet from his “civilized office”.
Additionally, Conrad assesses the hunger to survive as another means that drives evil out of mankind. For example, Marlow’s shipmates become and remain cannibals though there are alternate solutions simply because they know it can be the most guaranteed source of food. A significant example of the evil that emerges out of these men is when their leader is killed by Indians, and the captain, Marlow, desperate to show respects to his distant friends, throws the man overboard. The cannibals, even having known the man longer than Marlow, complain that he, their own leader, the one who led them to survive, should have been given to them for eating. Conrad specifically places such a demand into their response to show how separated from humanity and brotherhood these men have become, so evil, that they have no respect for the loss of human life, and on account of hunger and a need for survival which has been enhanced and exposed through living in Africa.
Lastly, the evil within mankind is brought out by psychological deterioration and greed from Kurtz, and in some ways, Marlow. Their greed, their desire for ivory, their desire for purpose and wealth, drives them to steal the ivory and riches of the natives, murder elephants, and murder the Indians or disrupt their culture, invade their territory, and provoke the Indians to fight. Kurtz psychologically deteriorates to his innate evil by dwelling in what is depicted as the very heart of evil and darkness, and rules out all common senses where only primitive instinct for wealth acts as reasoning for staying in such a place. And in that sense, Conrad clearly states that mankind’s inherent evil desires to lead mankind to self destruction, in that the irrational decision of Kurtz to stay in the darkness out of interests for wealth without the consideration of the high risks it imposed.
All in all, Conrad assess several factors contribute to exposing and driving mankind’s inherent evil. He shows the need for purpose as a motivator to commit evil acts such as enchaining humanity through the outer station manager. Conrad shows the need for food and survival, assured survival, as a motivation for murdering innocent members of humanity, even those “close” to the savage ship crew. Lastly, and most significantly, he shows the drive for wealth and imposition as a motivator to commit the daring, evil, and unthinkable in characters such as Kurtz.
Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness: An Analysis of the Outer Station as a Significant and Symbolic Setting
NOTE THIS WAS POSTED ON THE DAY THE BLOG WAS CREATED, HOWEVER, THIS WORK WAS WRITTEN September 7th 2007
In many pieces of literature, the setting is a key part of the story, allowing character development, symbolism, theme and plot development, and can serve foiling purposes. The heart of darkness is enriched with such settings; Africa as a foil to England, the Congo river as the eternal darkness and the Thames as something still to have light shed upon. In terms of character development, it is evident that the heart of Congo, the heart of Africa, the heart of darkness, became the ideal location to allow the psychological deterioration of the mind, morals, ethics, and racist views − a setting which truly can consume. However, in particular for my purpose, I have chosen to analyze another highly significant setting in Marlow’s journey into the Congo, and psychologically, his journey into darkness. The Outer Station functions as a reminder of humanity as Marlow knew it, and as a transition and omen of the deteriorative and consumptive powers of the darkness.
Marlow is reminded of humanity to some extent by the presence of the outer station. He immediately identifies himself with the humanity of the largely white occupiers. However, already he sees the imposing affects of this savage darkness in the need for the use of blacks as somewhat “assistants” and some of the more regular tasks, no necessarily suited for a mindless slave. Marlow realizes the little optimism, the happiness and pride the occupants share is in Mr. Kurtz, whose reputation spreads far a cross and up the “black river”, spreading from the gaping blackest spots of the map. The setting, being a place of boat wreckage, obviously is foreshadowing of the wreckage of the boats purpose, to carry them to perhaps the one source of light in that blackened whole.
Marlow is severely shaken by the blend of English society in the setting with that of African “darkness” which cannot, in Conrad’s eyes, be referred to as society. The Outer Station he describes is as though it is under poor and meaningless maintenance, especially considering the meaningless employment of what Marlow, seeing them after years of consumption, presumes to be unfit for the job. The blend of white men, living in almost African style houses, or huts, and the few European-style establishments far out of line, serves as a serious symbolic omen to Marlow and a definitive message of the last of the lights along the Congo being dimmed, the lights of European culture, not entirely destroyed, but dimmed. This is Conrad’s symbolic representation, the setting, of the deterioration which will later be penetrated psychologically, the unavoidable consumption by darkness. Even the men of the outer station, even the Europeans, could potentially be considered a part of the setting in the way which Conrad represents them. The men become less efficient, less purposeful, and even more estranged to people like Marlow who have direct connection with the European world; instead, the men of the outer station, psychologically deteriorating under the stress of the darkness of Africa, expose their inner evil, becoming more pointless, becoming more unwilling, self centered, beyond the need of maintenance of their own setting, or final comfort, from that savage, the horror.
It is evident that the outer station serves several thematic and character developing purposes. As a foreboding omen to Marlow, Conrad depicts the Outer Station not only without maintenance, but beyond the need of maintenance. The men of the station blend nearly into the setting with their psychological deteriorating connection with the European world. Lastly, as a whole, the setting represents the gradual , the deteriorative consuming powers the darkness, and the savagery within, dimming out the final lights on the European civilized Africa, and points a fatal sign in the direction of a gaping, horrific whole of blackness.
In many pieces of literature, the setting is a key part of the story, allowing character development, symbolism, theme and plot development, and can serve foiling purposes. The heart of darkness is enriched with such settings; Africa as a foil to England, the Congo river as the eternal darkness and the Thames as something still to have light shed upon. In terms of character development, it is evident that the heart of Congo, the heart of Africa, the heart of darkness, became the ideal location to allow the psychological deterioration of the mind, morals, ethics, and racist views − a setting which truly can consume. However, in particular for my purpose, I have chosen to analyze another highly significant setting in Marlow’s journey into the Congo, and psychologically, his journey into darkness. The Outer Station functions as a reminder of humanity as Marlow knew it, and as a transition and omen of the deteriorative and consumptive powers of the darkness.
Marlow is reminded of humanity to some extent by the presence of the outer station. He immediately identifies himself with the humanity of the largely white occupiers. However, already he sees the imposing affects of this savage darkness in the need for the use of blacks as somewhat “assistants” and some of the more regular tasks, no necessarily suited for a mindless slave. Marlow realizes the little optimism, the happiness and pride the occupants share is in Mr. Kurtz, whose reputation spreads far a cross and up the “black river”, spreading from the gaping blackest spots of the map. The setting, being a place of boat wreckage, obviously is foreshadowing of the wreckage of the boats purpose, to carry them to perhaps the one source of light in that blackened whole.
Marlow is severely shaken by the blend of English society in the setting with that of African “darkness” which cannot, in Conrad’s eyes, be referred to as society. The Outer Station he describes is as though it is under poor and meaningless maintenance, especially considering the meaningless employment of what Marlow, seeing them after years of consumption, presumes to be unfit for the job. The blend of white men, living in almost African style houses, or huts, and the few European-style establishments far out of line, serves as a serious symbolic omen to Marlow and a definitive message of the last of the lights along the Congo being dimmed, the lights of European culture, not entirely destroyed, but dimmed. This is Conrad’s symbolic representation, the setting, of the deterioration which will later be penetrated psychologically, the unavoidable consumption by darkness. Even the men of the outer station, even the Europeans, could potentially be considered a part of the setting in the way which Conrad represents them. The men become less efficient, less purposeful, and even more estranged to people like Marlow who have direct connection with the European world; instead, the men of the outer station, psychologically deteriorating under the stress of the darkness of Africa, expose their inner evil, becoming more pointless, becoming more unwilling, self centered, beyond the need of maintenance of their own setting, or final comfort, from that savage, the horror.
It is evident that the outer station serves several thematic and character developing purposes. As a foreboding omen to Marlow, Conrad depicts the Outer Station not only without maintenance, but beyond the need of maintenance. The men of the station blend nearly into the setting with their psychological deteriorating connection with the European world. Lastly, as a whole, the setting represents the gradual , the deteriorative consuming powers the darkness, and the savagery within, dimming out the final lights on the European civilized Africa, and points a fatal sign in the direction of a gaping, horrific whole of blackness.
Modern Tragedy
One of my favorite aspects of literature is modern tragedy, which I believe, in any analytical posts I do, I will often touch upon, so why not define it?
A Modern Tragedy
Modern tragedy emerges above classical, Shakespearian, and Greek tragedy through one simple word: flexibility. Where as classical and Greek tragedies limit themselves to the rise and downfall of a Heroic figure, such as a king, the modern tragedy depicts the tragic struggle of a common man. This common man suffers and decades with his society, often loosing values, morals or traditions. This common man, though some may take liberty to reference as a tragic hero, embodies all but heroism. He is no savior of society, but finds himself stuck in the past, fixated on a preconceived image of society which he attempts to save from the overall decline, or arguably simple change of society. In this sense, our "common man" or tragic common hero, immutably clings to a society for which his life and power is invested -- his constant need for ingratiation, by all but submissive actions, is at the rudimentary foundation for his tragic flaw to build upon.
A tragic common man's quest for worth or justification in society in the paramount cause of his downward spiral. Accompany his quest, a tragic flaw -- in Chinua Achebe's Things Fall Apart it was Oknonkwo's trait as a man of action and not words; in the The Great Gatsby it was Gatsby's fixation on the past accompanied by his unrealistic romanticist values pitted against the decadence and moral mutations of the roaring twenties; in Steinbeck's The Pearl Kino's tragic flaw was his fixation on a better future, on wealth and the White man's dream. Generally speaking, the tragic flaw is not in all aspects tragic. The common man's tragic flaw is critically credible for his rise to power in a "old society", but as a new one emerges, and society changes, the traits that led to this common man's achievement of power or social justification are inseperable from those that lead to his downfall as attempts to cling to to this high status which only exists in the old society.
This brings us to the notion of societal tragedy. The common man's struggle fits into a larger image, and the grander progression of mankind. It is this tragic common hero's inability to see change as positive which leads the reader to believe his society is undergoing a tragedy as well. If viewed with an image of generic judgment we, the readers, must decide, is this common man a hero attempting to preserve culture, and his tragedy his failure, or is it all common men's decisions as a whole to progress and change, by factors out of their control, the tragedy? Novelists such as Chinua Achebe, Earnest Hemingway, John Steinbeck, and Tennesee Williams, among others, expertly formulate this question and examine both.
A Modern Tragedy
Modern tragedy emerges above classical, Shakespearian, and Greek tragedy through one simple word: flexibility. Where as classical and Greek tragedies limit themselves to the rise and downfall of a Heroic figure, such as a king, the modern tragedy depicts the tragic struggle of a common man. This common man suffers and decades with his society, often loosing values, morals or traditions. This common man, though some may take liberty to reference as a tragic hero, embodies all but heroism. He is no savior of society, but finds himself stuck in the past, fixated on a preconceived image of society which he attempts to save from the overall decline, or arguably simple change of society. In this sense, our "common man" or tragic common hero, immutably clings to a society for which his life and power is invested -- his constant need for ingratiation, by all but submissive actions, is at the rudimentary foundation for his tragic flaw to build upon.
A tragic common man's quest for worth or justification in society in the paramount cause of his downward spiral. Accompany his quest, a tragic flaw -- in Chinua Achebe's Things Fall Apart it was Oknonkwo's trait as a man of action and not words; in the The Great Gatsby it was Gatsby's fixation on the past accompanied by his unrealistic romanticist values pitted against the decadence and moral mutations of the roaring twenties; in Steinbeck's The Pearl Kino's tragic flaw was his fixation on a better future, on wealth and the White man's dream. Generally speaking, the tragic flaw is not in all aspects tragic. The common man's tragic flaw is critically credible for his rise to power in a "old society", but as a new one emerges, and society changes, the traits that led to this common man's achievement of power or social justification are inseperable from those that lead to his downfall as attempts to cling to to this high status which only exists in the old society.
This brings us to the notion of societal tragedy. The common man's struggle fits into a larger image, and the grander progression of mankind. It is this tragic common hero's inability to see change as positive which leads the reader to believe his society is undergoing a tragedy as well. If viewed with an image of generic judgment we, the readers, must decide, is this common man a hero attempting to preserve culture, and his tragedy his failure, or is it all common men's decisions as a whole to progress and change, by factors out of their control, the tragedy? Novelists such as Chinua Achebe, Earnest Hemingway, John Steinbeck, and Tennesee Williams, among others, expertly formulate this question and examine both.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
