Right vs. Correct
Men with opposite opinion can be both
correct. He might say it is raining while another replies it is sunny. How?
They live in different places!
Certainly, Conrad’s work projects the image
of Africa as “the other world,” the antithesis of Europe. Furthermore, the
language Conrad uses to describe the natives, such as “savage”, appeared to
contain racism. To Achebe, Conrad’s use of diction offends him. However, is Achebe
correct when he believe Conrad is racist? Or is Conrad a common European who
lived in the 19th century?
Both men are right. But their correctness
depend on the different angles the reader chooses to view the matter.
Achebe approaches this work of literature
with a background of African history, in which he has an idea what setting was
like back then. In comparison and contrast to what Achebe had learned, Conrad
fails to fulfill his expectation of the Congo. Instead, Achebe takes the
language from the work literally. On the other hand, it is not Conrad’s focus to
educate the readers about the setting or to fulfill anyone’s expectation of the
work. Rather, Conrad’s purpose is to explore different aspects of humanity,
imperialism, colonialism, racism and others. The difference between Conrad’s
and Achebe’s approach to the work contribute to their division, yet both men
are correct in their own ways.
On the other hand, one must note the
difference between the year that Conrad’s and Achebe’s work were published. In
the time Conrad lived in, it was common for many Europeans to feel superior
to other race. Therefore, it would be common for others to dehumanize Africans.
In contrast to Conrad, Achebe lived in an era that is more advance than Conrad’s,
especially in the view of Africans or other race. Conrad expresses his imagination of an adventure in Congo in
parallel to the common beliefs during his time while Achebe expressed the beliefs that reflect the progressive thoughts in race. If we live in Conrad’s
or Achebe’s era and were exposed to the same influence as them, we would most
likely to have a similar reaction with both men. Once again, both men are correct,
but their degree of correctness depends on the time they lived in.
Moreover, one might argue Conrad dehumanizes Africans
by focusing on their exterior features through diction. Perhaps, it is Conrad’s
intention to depict Africans in such way to reveal truths relating to humanity.
After all, it is impossible for us to confirm the answer from Conrad.
With such different, yet correct
ideologies, can this work “be called a great work of art?” The answer lies
within our evaluation on our value of Heart of Darkness, and whether the good
outweigh the “bad”. Besides, there are works of literature that are sexist
and/or racist.
Achebe’s opinion on Conrad’s work continues to emphasize the different angles people might have on the same subject. Racism
might not be racism to some people.To me, Heart of Darkness is another work of
literature that would allow me to advance my writing and reading skills and to
discover people’s realization regarding to humanity or another area. What do
you think?