Misplaced Blame

I find the Adam Sandler “Hannukah Song” offensive. It belittles what is a significant Jewish historical event. However, any song that annually is so enormously popular, is undeniably art. Perhaps not exactly comparable, I will nevertheless attempt the leap. Certainly, the obviously stereotypical, racism in Joseph Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness” is offensive, even so, the offensive can still be appreciated for art. And there is much to appreciate in Conrad’s short novel.
The claims to Conrad’s racism, his being a “thoroughgoing racist” as Chinua Achebe famoulsy argued, are not baseless. Marlow, the exploring protagonist of “Heart of Darkness”, describes the Africans he encounters; “these were strong lusty, red-eyed devils” (2) he does not afford them even the pronoun ‘they’. Marlow hears from their mouths “uncouth sounds” (4). The land of Africa is itself viewed as “primeval” “dark” “chaos”, an “Inferno” even, among other uncomplimentary adjectives.
Chinua Achebe, in his objections to “Heart of Darkness”, preempts many of my own thoughts as to how Conrad’s novella is not xenophobic. However, I think Achebe dismisses them too quickly and gives Conrad too much credit for the perpetuation of racist ideology. To begin with, the frames through which this story is told; Marlow repeating a personal experience, which is then being retold by a fellow sailor on a different ship and years later, are significant. The anonymous sailor emerges intermittently throughout Marlow’s storytelling, “For a long time already he [Marlow], sitting apart, had been no more to us than a voice.” (10) There is an enormous separation established then, between Marlow and Conrad, even between Marlow and his audience (both the narrative sailors and present day readership). Kept at a distance we can be objective and hear “no more… than a voice”. On reading the proliferation of derogatory pronouncements against the Africans, Conrad is not considered a credible African observer. The reader does not turn to the novel as a travel book or a sociological study of the African people. The book is appreciated for its literary merit.
Furthermore, Joseph Conrad was a product of the rampant colonialist mentality, pervasive in Europe. White was good, black was associated with evil (the devil was traditionally depicted as black). Europe was the progressive, civilized, “so remote from the night of first ages”, the center of the world (16). This sentiment was steeped into the mindset of the European (the strength of nurture!) and therefore “Heart of Darkness” makes innumerable references to civilization in contrast to African wilderness. For this reason, the only African man that Marlow befriends is one he calls “an improved specimen… useful because he had been instructed” (16). The African was making strides towards Europeanization and being civilized, therefore, was tolerated by Marlow. This was a flawed “Western psychology to set Africa up as a foil to Europe”, as Achebe labels it. It however, was certainly not created by Conrad. Nor, was it the source of the ignorance that plagued Achebe’s contemporaries.
Although I find them objectionable, I do not blame Conrad for the sentiments espoused in his novel. I am also not ready to cast aside his novel. It should continue to be taught in universities, but perhaps (as was done in my high school) taught along with Achebe’s “Things Fall Apart”. Maybe even, in conjunction with a history class on colonialism. It should be understood in its context and not used as a lesson in anthropological studies of the African people.