Overwhelming Criticism of Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad

Critics have made a lot of accusations against the amount of racism and anti-feminist comments in Joseph Conrad’s novel, Heart of Darkness. These critics have well-crafted their arguments on why their point of view on the content of the novel is the correct opinion. Across all the accusations, there seems to be one common opinion. Conrad’s ideas seem to be delivered through the protagonist and main character of Heart of Darkness, Marlow. The novel takes us on Marlow's journey up the Congo and Thames in Africa. It can be safely said that the experiences of the characters in Heart of Darkness were unique to time period in which they took place. In Chinua Achebe’s An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, Achebe states that, “It might be contended, of course, that the attitude to the African in Heart of Darkness is not Conrad’s but that of his fictional character, Marlow, and that far from endorsing it Conrad might indeed be holding it up to irony and criticism.” (256).

There is no doubt that racism exists in Heart of Darkness, but I don’t agree with the critics on the idea that it was pretty much wrong of Conrad to include the as much racism as he did in his novel. In the eyes of Achebe the novel is, “...a book which parades in the most vulgar fashion prejudices…” and “...the very humanity of black people is called in question.” (259). I believe that Heart of Darkness is a reflection of the time period in which it was written, not a novel specifically written to talk against Africans or women. Even if the message was delivered through the characters. Therefore, I disagree with the claims made in the commentary by Achebe that Heart of Darkness is inherently racist. I am arguing that there is a significant amount of racism in Heart of Darkness, but the content had no bad intentions. The content was simply influenced by the time period in which it was written.

Any piece of literary work reflects what the writer may have experience in his or her lifetime. Whether it is evident or not, the work is mostly influenced by the common beliefs of the time period. In a few years, someone will be able to look at a literary work from out time period and get a pretty good idea of what was happening. The arguments Achebe made against the amount of racism he believed there was in Heart of Darkness were written around the 1900s. That’s a big time gap from when the novel was published in 1899, which includes more than one chance in the influences surrounding Achebe. In Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and the World of Western Women, Peters states that, “I will argue that Marlow views the world of Western women in the way he does less because he simply reiterates dominate nineteenth-century cultural ideas about women…” (Peters 88). Even though Peters is arguing that there is anti-feminist comments in Heart of Darkness, he is basically saying that Marlow views are based a common belief of the century. We are so heavily influenced by our surroundings, even in the fictional world of created by Conrad. “But his soul was mad. Being alone in the wilderness, it had looked within itself and, by Heavens I tell you, it had gone mad.” (Conrad 65). Kurtz’s life was influenced by the time he spent in the Congo, just like the storyline of Heart of Darkness was influenced by the time period in which Conrad lived in. Taking this idea, Conrad had no specific intentions of creating a novel in which its sole purpose was to be racist like Achebe is arguing. Conrad instead used his work in a creative way to give us a glimpse at the time period he lived in. It all depends on the time we live in. In a few years from now, the opinions on Heart of Darkness will be different as the time period we will be in will make us feel different. Achebe would have most likely felt different about the content of Heart of Darkness if he lived in the time period in which it was written, or if he lived with the influences of today's world.

I agree with the claims made by Achebe in the sense of racism being wrong, but I don't agree with his claim that the novel doesn't have literary merit. “And the question is whether a novel which celebrates this dehumanization, which depersonalizes a portion of the human race, can be called a great work of art. My answer is: No, it cannot.” (Conrad 257). Achebe's claim is strong but, I think he neglects the fact that Heart of Darkness isn’t celebrating dehumanization. Dehumanization is only a part of the novel and you can take it for how you want it. There will be more than enough times in life when something, no matter how praised is is will be bound offend you. Conrad is such a great writer; he makes his story so real that he traps us in his fictional world. Critics like F. R. Leavis have said, “...Conrad chose his subject well.” (Conrad 253). Achebe quotes Leavis, which means he must have felt that his opinion was important to his argument. Even if Heart of Darkness is said to be one of the most racist works of its time, Conrad's work should still be praised for its content. The novel in a sense is teaching a little bit about the time period, even if some people think differently. Even Achebe admits that the novel is a representation of the time period and is very well known. He States, “...a novelist responding to one famous book of European fiction: Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, which better than any other work that I know displays that Western desire and need…” (Conrad 252). In a sense the Western desire or need, a very important common belief of the time, is what encompasses the racism Achebe is so worried about. He himself, yes the one who said the novel doesn’t deserve to have any literary merit is a famous book, mostly for its, “...inexpressible and incomprehensible mystery.” (Conrad 253). I honestly think that Achebe and other critics are so offended by Conrad's work because it describes the time period in which Heart of Darkness was written so well.

Anything that catches anyones eye is bound to make someone respond in a way that will also get attention. Offending someone isn't the usual drive behind a author, but they don’t write to completely please someone or a group of people. Achebe admits that, “...it is no concern of fiction to please people about whom it is written.” (259). So then that brings me to the question, why does he care so much about the content of Heart of Darkness? Achebe is the one who said fiction doesn't care if it pleases anyone. I believe that this is most likely due to the fact that humans tend to not like the truth, especially if the truth is about something they care a lot about. They will defend their viewpoints in any way that they can, just like Achebe did. The language Conrad used, helped him convey his very touchy message with a deeper meaning. Critics say Conrad was a, “...purveyor of comforting myths.” (Achebe 3).

Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness will always be one of the most criticized novels, especially for its time. Conrad puts his skills to work and traps us in the fictional world of Heart of Darkness so well that the novel has impacted so many people, like Chinua Achebe. Any literary work or response to a piece of literature will no doubt be influenced by the current events of the time in which they were written. Achebe makes a valid argument throughout his commentary, but whether you believe it or not, his opinion was heavily influenced by the time period he lived in. No matter what the content of any work is, it should never be stripped of its literary merit. Everything has some value, it just may be harder to find depending on your point of view. I believe that like Heart of Darkness, any work written in the past teaches us something important about the time in which it was written. If something makes a big enough impact, in other words, if it good enough, there is a big chance it will be talked about forever. “Unfortunately his heart of Darkness plagues is still.” (Achebe 259). There was obviously something that stuck out and affected people in Heart of Darkness since we are still talking about it.