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 19^th 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?