Why is this book a classic on the literature circuit ?

DWill · Senior Joined: 31 Jan 2008 Posts: 384 Gender:

I liked the phrase used by another member to describe this novella's status. And I wondered what others would say after some days of discussion mainly of issues of controversy and theme. These are fine topics, but do they tell us that much about why this book is still read?

I had some things to say about the novella that might have sounded negative, so I wanted to be sure to say that on the matter that really counts, I think this is a great work. There was not a page--hardly a paragraph--where I didn't wonder at Conrad's mastery of language. He is a virtuoso; he can really "bring it!" His talent doesn't stop at that level, but it is probably what most impresses me. Anyone else have an opinion of Conrad as an artist?

Ophelia · Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:53 pm Post subject:

DWill wrote:

Penelope · Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:58 pm Post subject:

Please Miss, Ophelia said:-

The one thing that didn't much work for me was the story about Mr Kurtz. I did not feel much anticipation before meeting him, and then even less seemed to be revealed than I had ancipated.
Perhaps this is an element in the book I need to go back to.

Ophelia, I agree with you absolutely - Kurtz was supposed to be this tremendously charismatic character....but Conrad did not convey this in his (wonderful) writing. So Why? He knew what he was doing....I am sure....now why did he write Kurtz like this? Was it perhaps to show us the shallowness of 'Glamour'? We can all sit around nodding in agreement - which doesn't achieve anything - and we can become blinded by 'public opinion' - 'spin doctoring' - 'media rhetoric' - could this be why he gave us such a tenuous picture of this character?

I never heard of Joseph Conrad at school......I heard of 'Lord Jim' in later life......We were more likely to have been given 'Masterman Ready' by Captain Marryat - we were still taught - Rule Brittania - Land of Hope and Glory - and 'Aren't We Great' - in the 1950's. But my Son, in the late 1980's and early '90's did HD as a syllabus book.

DWill · Senior Joined: 31 Jan 2008 Posts: 384 Gender:

Yeah, there was a great build-up for the entrance of Kurtz. By the time he comes on stage, I guess he's too wasted away to be able to show us his stuff. But I felt this as an anti-climax, too. Conrad keeps Kurtz pretty shadowy. I wonder if he did this in order to try to give him an air of mystery. He may have thought he could never describe Kurtz in such a way as to substantiate Marlow's awe of him, so he didn't even try. We just have Marlow telling us over and over what a powerful effect this guy had on him. Marlow even says that what was truly impressive about Kurtz was his voice, so of course Marlow wouldn't be able to convey that effect to his audience.

Does anyone grasp why Marlow so admires the last utterance of Kurtz? To me, the relationship is quite an enigma. Marlow tells the Intended that he knew Kurtz as well as any man could know anyone. Can this be true? Marlow feels a responsibility for Kurtz, but he doesn't even know why he feels it. He visits the Intended in the end without knowing why he's doing that, either. Incidentally, Marlow appears to be a bit psychotic at that point, still suffering from his illness, having some hallucinations.

I liked the things about the book that seemed absurd, such as the clerk in the starched collars in the middle of the jungle, the "pilgrims" with their staves, the Russian sailor in the parti-colored costume, the two women in black knitting in the antechamber like Greek Fates (I guess). Maybe part of the absurdity was also the role Marlow found himself playing, as he said, "the nightmare of my choice," when any choice of action would have been a nightmare. This quality could be something that links Conrad to modernism.

I do think I can defend his decision to lie to the Intended. Earlier in the story, he flashes forward to the scene and says that the reality of Kurtz's world just didn't belong in his fiance's world, that it would have been shattering for her to hear what Kurtz really said. And then, of course, Marlow would have to explain what the words meant. Right, I'm sure I would have ducked that one, too!

Robert Tulip · Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 8:21 am Post subject:

Promise and disappointment is a big theme in imperialism. Kurtz seems to share in the mystique of royalty, in that the idea is greater than the reality. Japanese Emperor Hirohito never appeared in public before Macarthur made him do so after the war. Like all imperialism (eg the Iraq war) lofty ideals such as freedom and justice have a major disconnect with their incompetent and compromised implementation. The trouble with Kurtz is that the ‘redeeming idea’ is so flagrantly at odds with the sordid reality that a rather gross deflation is inevitable on the slightest examination. I think the horror is what Kurtz has done to other human beings to get ivory.

Ophelia · Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:08 am Post subject:

Robert wrote:

"Promise and disappointment is a big theme in imperialism. Kurtz seems to share in the mystique of royalty, in that the idea is greater than the reality. Japanese Emperor Hirohito never appeared in public before Macarthur made him do so after the war. Like all imperialism (eg the Iraq war) lofty ideals such as freedom and justice have a major disconnect with their incompetent and compromised implementation. The trouble with Kurtz is that the ‘redeeming idea’ is so flagrantly at odds with the sordid reality that a rather gross deflation is inevitable on the slightest examination. I think the horror is what Kurtz has done to other human beings to get ivory."

Hello Robert,

Just a note to say that I sometimes don't answer your postings about HD for the very good reason that... everything is so well put that I have nothing to add! Smile

So this mustn't be mistaken with ignoring you.

I like the reference you make here to Emperor Hirohito.

Penelope · Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:19 am Post subject:

Well Robert, I think the horror is what Kurtz has done to himself, to get Ivory........

He gained the whole pile of Ivory....but he had lost his own soul....

well, I don't really believe a soul can be lost....but he certainly lost his way.

It is a bit like the Wizard of Oz when we meet Kurtz isn't it?

Robert Tulip · Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:07 pm Post subject:

Penelope · Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 8:36 am Post subject:

I thought we were discussing what Kurtz meant by his exclamation.

I thought his exclamation about the horror....was his realising how he had wasted his life. I don't think Kurtz would have given the cruelties he had wreaked on the Africans a second thought.

I wasn't sympathising with Kurtz - just surmising as to what his last words meant.

Robert Tulip · Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:25 pm Post subject:

Conrad is a master of ambiguity! Both meanings are very much there in Kurtz's last statement - a surface egocentric meaning of 'poor me' and a deeper objective meaning of 'what have I done to these people'.


	HOME	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT