Colonialism in Heart of Darkness and Chinua Achebe

Colonialism in Heart of Darkness and Chinua Achebe

Joseph Conrad's novella, Heart of Darkness is considered to be a great work of art not only because it painfully portrays how brutally and unjustly the natives are treated in the African wilderness, but also because its treatment of colonialism is considered a cornerstone in the history of western fiction.

Colonialism refers to the enterprise by which a nation extends its authority over other territories; it is characterized by an unequal relationship between the colonists and the natives of a country. Colonists usually think that they are doing the country good by bringing civilization and enlightenment; however the result is atrocity and death. This is clearly portrayed in Heart of Darkness. One of the characters who exercises colonialism is Kurtz whose main purpose is extracting ivory from the land in whatever way he can. He is treated as a supernatural authority by the Africans who always seem to obey and listen to him carefully. Marlow indicates the Africans' obedience to Kurtz when he tells us, "He was not afraid of the natives; they would not stir till Mr. Kurtz gave the word. His ascendancy was extraordinary. The camps of these people surrounded the place, and the chiefs came every day to see him. They would crawl." (p. 131) Kurtz believes that everything in the wilderness belongs to him, as Marlow hears him say, "My Intended, my ivory, my station, my river, my…" (p. 116) Moreover, he thinks that there is nothing wrong with what he's doing; on the contrary, Kurtz believes that he's doing the right thing. His civilization mission and his philosophy regarding the natives are expressed in his report of which Marlow tells: "But it was a beautiful piece of writing. The opening paragraph, however, in the light of later information, strikes me now as ominous. He began with the argument that we whites, from the point of development we had arrived at, 'must necessarily appear to them [savages] in the nature of supernatural beings--we approach them with the might as of a deity,' and so on, and so on. By the simple exercise of our will we can exert a power for good practically unbounded,' etc., etc." (p. 118) Although Marlow is not a native, he finds himself obliged to be treated like one. In other words, he finds himself reacting in the very same way as the natives themselves to Kurtz's authority. "I did not betray Mr. Kurtz - it was ordered I should never betray him - it was written I should be loyal to the nightmare of my choice." (p. 141) It is interesting that Marlow refers to Kurtz as 'the nightmare'; it seems as if he is hypnotized by him and has no choice but to do as he is told. Moreover, the phrase, 'it was ordered' adds to the ambiguity of what Marlow is trying to say. He could have said, 'I was ordered' but he does not.

It is worth mentioning here that Heart of Darkness is a novel that is partially biographical. Conrad was obliged to seek employment with a Belgian company in Africa due to difficult labor conditions in 1889. Although he stayed for a short while in Africa, it was an experience that shattered his health and changed his world-view, while the moral degradation he witnessed in the Congo's economic exploitation disgusted him. A decade after this, he wrote Heart of Darkness, which is about his experience in Africa. What is really ironic is that in the book Joseph Conrad in Context, it is mentioned more than once that Conrad never got over his experience in Africa, as if other people in his place would not feel the same thing! So basically, Marlow seems to echo Conrad's own opinions in his novel.

Colonists are driven to exploit ivory at an insatiable rate without even bothering to think about the devastating effects on the natives. This is very clearly shown in the following quote: Marlow refers to the ivory merchants as a "devoted band" calling themselves "the Eldorado Exploring Expedition." He says "they were sworn to secrecy." They spoke the language of "sordid buccaneers: it was reckless without hardihood, greedy without audacity, and cruel without courage; there was not an atom of foresight or of serious intention in the whole batch of them, and they did not seem aware these things are wanted for the work of the world. To tear treasure out of the bowels of the land was their desire, with no more moral purpose at the back of it than there is in burglars breaking into a safe." (p. 87) In brief, what these colonizers were doing was purposeless, which in turn means that the consequences which were brought about as a result of their actions were also useless.

Furthermore, the colonists had a quasi divine authority to do as they pleased in the colonies; this is portrayed by the conversation between the uncle and the nephew, which was overheard by Marlow, "'Certainly,' grunted the other; 'get him hanged! Why not? Anything--anything can be done in this country. That's what I say; nobody here, you understand, here, can endanger your position. And why? You stand the climate--you outlast them all.'" (p. 91) Here, they are talking about hanging Kurtz's assistant and probably Kurtz himself, so that they can get Kurtz's possessions, including his ivory.

Colonialism is also explored in other parts of the novella, where the reader can see just how mercilessly and brutally the natives are treated by the colonizers. When Marlow is on a steamer with a Swedish captain, he describes how the natives, whom he sees on his way to the station, are being exploited and treated as mere beasts. All the natives are represented as being naked and horribly thin; they are never referred to as humans. They are forced to work under hard conditions, are given no clothes, and are left to starve: "A continuous noise of the rapids above hovered over this scene of inhabited devastation. A lot of people, mostly black and naked, moved about like ants. A jetty projected into the river. A blinding sunlight drowned all this at times in a sudden recrudescence of glare." (p. 63) When Marlow finally arrives at the station, he sees yet another traumatizing scene,

"A slight clinking behind me made me turn my head. Six black men advanced in a file, toiling up the path. They walked erect and slow, balancing small baskets full of earth on their heads, and the clink kept time with their footsteps. Black rags were wound round their loins, and the short ends behind waggled to and fro like tails. I could see every rib, the joints of their limbs were like knots in a rope; each had an iron collar on his neck, and all were connected together with a chain whose bights swung between them, rhythmically clinking… but these men could by no stretch of imagination be called enemies. They were called criminals, and the outraged law, like the bursting shells, had come to them, an insoluble mystery from the sea. All their meagre breasts panted together, the violently dilated nostrils quivered, the eyes stared stonily uphill. They passed me within six inches, without a glance, with that complete, deathlike indifference of unhappy savages. Behind this raw matter one of the reclaimed, the product of the new forces at work, strolled despondently, carrying a rifle by its middle. He had a uniform jacket with one button off." (p. 64)

When reading this passage, one cannot help but wonder, how could these poor natives possibly be criminals? They do every single thing they are told to do, without the least bit of complaining and yet, they are called criminals. The words 'tails,' 'collar,' 'breasts panted,' and 'dilated nostrils' immediately bring to the mind the image of dogs. And of course, we should not forget the colonizer, who is right behind them with a rifle, making sure that these men walk 'in a file,' 'without glancing' at Marlow, and only 'staring stonily uphill.' So not only are they compared to animals, but they are also expected to work like machines!

This is the main reason why Achebe does not accept Heart of Darkness, it is because he does not like the way African people are portrayed in it. Chinua Achebe, a Nigerian poet and novelist, was attracted to Conrad's Heart of Darkness as a child. However, in the 1970s, he changed his mind about it and until today, he continues to dismiss the novel. In his essay on Conrad's novel, Achebe attempts to explain why. He says that what Conrad is terribly worried about is the idea of kinship between him and the blacks, which is why he dehumanizes them. Contrasting with this is Edward Said's opinion that Conrad is exaggerating the imperialistic and the dehumanizing discrepancies so that we, as readers, are outraged at its injustice and therefore work out "solutions" for ourselves. In other words, Heart of Darkness is, according to Said, a self-referential novel. But still, Achebe has a strong point in saying that Conrad has dehumanized the Africans because Conrad seems to be obsessed with the words 'black' and 'darkness' since he associates them with the Africans and uses these words numerous times throughout his novel.

Convincingly Achebe believes that the most revealing passages in the novel are about people. He says that the following quote contains the meaning of Heart of Darkness, "… but what thrilled you was just the thought of your remote kinship with this wild and passionate uproar. Ugly. Yes, it was ugly enough …" If only the thought was thrilling, then what would knowing do to us?! It is this 'remote kinship' that seems to terrorize Conrad and is implied throughout the novel several times.

However, his passages about the natives or savages, as Conrad refers to them, seem a mere description of what they are and what they are going to do. His personal sentiments are never revealed. But the vocabulary he chooses and the way he describes the Africans force the reader to sympathize with them. However, there are parts in the novel where we can infer that Conrad, although not showing sympathy towards the savages, cannot bear looking at them. For example, when he sees the six men tied to each other with chains around their necks, he says, "My idea was to let that chain-gang get out of sight before I climbed the hill." And in another incident, he says, "The hurt nigger moaned feebly somewhere nearby, and then fetched a deep sigh that made me mend my pace away from there." Clearly, he was not strong enough to neither hear nor see these savages being treated mercilessly.

When Marlow arrives at the Central Station, he witnesses more of these atrocities towards the 'niggers.' The manager of the station is apparently an uncivilized person who is there only because he hasn't been ill, as Marlow tells us, "He had no genius for organizing, for initiative, or for order even. That was evident in such things as the deplorable state of the station. He had no learning, and no intelligence. His position had come to him--why? Perhaps because he was never ill . . . He had served three terms of three years out there…He was neither civil nor uncivil. He was quiet. He allowed his 'boy'--an overfed young negro from the coast--to treat the white men, under his very eyes, with provoking insolence." (p. 74)

One of Conrad's greatest fears that is implied in the novel is the possibility of the whites having 'distant kinship' with the blacks, and this is mentioned by Achebe. This explains why Marlow wasn't able to forget his African helmsman's look on his face just before he died, "And the intimate profundity of that look he gave me when he received his hurt remains to this day in my memory - like a claim of distant kinship affirmed in a supreme moment." Conrad's careful word choice of 'distant kinship' rather than 'brother,' for example, is cautiously observed by Achebe. He understands that Conrad is trying, as much as possible, to create layers between himself and the natives. Also, the words 'remains to this day in my memory,' are understood by Achebe as a negative connotation, as if this 'memory' continues to torture him to this very day. Achebe concludes from this that Conrad is a racist.

Moreover, Achebe states that Conrad has dehumanized Africans. But I do not agree with him on this point. My evidence to this can be seen in this quote, when Marlow who can be considered Conrad's mouthpiece at this instance says, "The conquest of the earth, which mostly means the taking it away from those who have a different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into it too much." We can infer from this quote that Conrad was actually against the idea of Africans being treated the way they were. Also, according to Edward Said, Conrad, being a creature of his time, 'could not grant the natives their freedom, despite his severe critique of the imperialism that enslaved them.' In other words, Conrad was against this imperialism and he criticized it as well, but the era that he lived in made it impossible for him to do anything about it. In my opinion, it might be that Conrad never meant to dehumanize the Africans; it might be that the experience he was going through during his stay in Africa was so overwhelming to him that he could not or was not able to reveal his sympathy. Maybe he did not want to reveal anything at all in order to emphasize it being a part of its "darkness." After all, it is Conrad himself who chose to write his novel in an ambiguous and subtle way which leaves the reader with puzzled thoughts about what exactly Conrad is trying to say. Almost everything in Heart of Darkness seems; everything is not is.

In conclusion, as we can see, examples of colonial acts are displayed throughout Heart of Darkness. Colonists take over the wilderness and practice exploitation only to acquire ivory. But at the same, the colonists' actions are purposeless, such as when they order the natives to aimlessly blast the railway when there is actually nothing to blast. This brings about the failure of their exploitation and civilizing mission.