The moral conditions for genocide in Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness (1).

The moral conditions for genocide in Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness (1). Scholars may differ in their moral assessment of JosephConrad's fiction, but they all seem to agree that morality is alegitimate lens for interpreting the novels. The problem, of course, isspecifying Conrad's orientation toward morality, for as scholarsconsistently observe, unstable knowledge and unreliable perception arepersistent themes in Conrad's corpus. (2) Not surprisingly, therehas been much confusion on the topic of Conrad's moral vision.Given Conrad's rejection of certain knowledge, Ian Watt Literary critic and literary historian Ian Watt (born March 9, 1917 in Windemere, England, died December 13, 1999 in Menlo Park, Calif.) was a professor of English at Stanford University. claims thatConrad develops a flexible moral paradigm, what he dubs "subjectivemoral impressionism impressionism, in paintingimpressionism,in painting, late-19th-century French school that was generally characterized by the attempt to depict transitory visual impressions, often painted directly from nature, and by the use of pure, broken color to " (1980, 174). This theoretical approach hasfound its most recent formulation in John G. Peters's Conrad andImpressionism, which articulates an impressionist epistemology thatallows Conrad to maintain "moral values" and thereby"avoid the abyss of ethical anarchy and epistemologicalsolipsism Epistemological solipsism is the variety of idealism according to which only the directly accessible mental contents of the solipsistic philosopher can be known. The existence of an external world is regarded as an unresolvable question, or an unnecessary hypothesis rather than " (2001, 135). Like Watt and Peters, Mark Wollaegerintelligently examines Conrad's moral vision in relation to hisobstinate epistemological questionings: "A skeptic himself, Conradnevertheless remained consciously devoted to a moral perspective on lifeand literature" (1990, 14). Less optimistic, however, is H.M.Daleski, who sees in the fiction a "pervasive moral nihilism Moral nihilism (also known as error theory) is the meta-ethical view that there are no moral facts, where facts are (roughly) true propositions. Moral nihilists hold that there are no objective moral facts---that nothing is morally good, bad, wrong, right, etc. "(1977, 24), a view that Dwight H. Purdy shares when he calls the laternovels "morally repellent" (1984, 7). In this same traditionis Patrick Brantlinger, who writes about the "moralbankruptcy" of Conrad's "literary project" (1996,96). In the following pages, I want to demonstrate why the moralinterpretation of Conrad's texts is problematic at best andcompletely misguided at worst. Put simply, to determine whetherConrad's "literary project" is moral or not, the scholarmust be strategically positioned to make such a judgment. In otherwords Adv. 1. in other words - otherwise stated; "in other words, we are broke"put differently , the scholar must have an implicit or explicit set of criteria todetermine what constitutes a true moral vision. Moreover, this scholarmust be in possession of a reliable epistemology that gives him/heraccess to true moral criteria. Significantly, it was when Conrad wasworking through the ideas central to Heart of Darkness Heart of Darknessadventure tale of journey into heart of the Belgian Congo and into depths of man’s heart. [Br. Lit.: Heart of Darkness, Magill III, 447–449]See : Journey that he rejectedthe concept of morality. For instance, in a letter to his dear friendR.B. Cunninghame Graham dated January 31, 1898, approximately one yearbefore Conrad completed the novella novella:see novel. novellaStory with a compact and pointed plot, often realistic and satiric in tone. Originating in Italy during the Middle Ages, it was often based on local events; individual tales often were gathered into collections. , Conrad says: "There is nomorality, no knowledge and no hope; there is only the consciousness ofourselves which drives us about a world that whether seen in a convex ora concave ConcaveProperty that a curve is below a straight line connecting two end points. If the curve falls above the straight line, it is called convex. mirror is always but a vain and fleeting appearance"(1969, 71). This rejection of morality is not a one-time affair, foronly five months after Heart of Darkness had completed serialization se��ri��al��ize?tr.v. se��ri��al��ized, se��ri��al��iz��ing, se��ri��al��iz��esTo write or publish in serial form.se with Blackwood's Magazine, Conrad makes a similar observation in aletter to Edward Garnett Edward Garnett (1868–1937) was an English writer, critic and a significant and personally generous literary editor, who was instrumental in getting D. H. Lawrence's Sons and Lovers published. : "I still have some pretensions to thepossession of a conscience though my morality is gone to the dogs. I amlike a man who has lost his gods" (1986, 2:198). This is a verycurious remark. Conrad is certainly not endorsing an inhumane in��hu��mane?adj.Lacking pity or compassion.inhu��manely adv. philosophyrooted in moral nihilism; as a possessor of a conscience, he believes intaking personal and political responsibility for one's actions. Theproblem is that something intrinsic to morality makes sociallyresponsible and politically just action impossible. So, for Conrad, tohave a conscience means rejecting morality; or conversely, being moralconflicts with having a conscience. Of course, this strict morality/conscience dichotomy begs thequestion: what is Conrad's definition of morality? As I will arguein this essay, however, such a question is incoherent. For Conrad, theproblem is not defining true morality; rather, the problem is thatmorality is an empty signifier sig��ni��fi��er?n.1. One that signifies.2. Linguistics A linguistic unit or pattern, such as a succession of speech sounds, written symbols, or gestures, that conveys meaning; a linguistic sign. , a semiotic semiotic/se��mi��ot��ic/ (se?me-ot��ik)1. pertaining to signs or symptoms.2. pathognomonic. vacuity va��cu��i��ty?n. pl. vac��u��i��ties1. Total absence of matter; emptiness.2. An empty space; a vacuum.3. Total lack of ideas; emptiness of mind.4. that dominantpolitical powers can strategically manipulate in order to justify crimesagainst humanity. Put differently Adv. 1. put differently - otherwise stated; "in other words, we are broke"in other words , Conrad rejects morality, not becauseit is an essential concept that leads necessarily to social injustice Social Injustice is a concept relating to the perceived unfairness or injustice of a society in its divisions of rewards and burdens. The concept is distinct from those of justice in law, which may or may not be considered moral in practice. ,but because it is such an amorphous concept that political powers can soeasily exploit in order to justify some of the most heinous crimesagainst humanity, specifically genocide. Therefore, instead of claimingthat Conrad details a clear but extremely negative concept of moralityin his fiction, I examine how he portrays a charismatic political figurewho appropriates morality in order to justify crimes against humanity.Specifically, I discuss how an intelligent imperialist like Kurtz canstrategically construct a political system that makes a crime likegenocide a moral imperative A moral imperative is a principle originating inside a person's mind that compels that person to act. It is a kind of categorical imperative, as defined by Immanuel Kant. Kant took the imperative to be a dictate of pure reason, in its practical aspect. . I. "Mind the Gap" To illustrate the insurmountable difficulties of the moralinterpretation, I examine Heart of Darkness, specifically Kurtz'sreport to the International Society for the Suppression of SavageCustoms. It is my contention that scholars have consistentlymisinterpreted what little we have of this document precisely becausethey have interpreted it through a moral lens. The document begins withan observation about the superior development of white Europeans, who"'must necessarily appear to them [savages] in the nature ofsupernatural beings--we approach them with the might as of adeity'" (Conrad 1996, 66). Given European"superiority," white colonizers could by "'thesimple exercise of'" their "'will ... exert a powerfor good practically unbounded'" (66). Such "altruisticsentiment" leads Marlow into a state of euphoria, that is, untilthe concluding postscript, which reads: "'Exterminate all thebrutes!'" On reading this line, Marlow is horrified hor��ri��fy?tr.v. hor��ri��fied, hor��ri��fy��ing, hor��ri��fies1. To cause to feel horror. See Synonyms at dismay.2. To cause unpleasant surprise to; shock. . How coulda simple exercise of will exerting a power for good lead to a call forgenocide? For Marlow, the problem with Kurtz's call to exterminatethe brutes is that it seemingly contradicts the content of the preceding"altruistic sentiment." Marlow is not alone in thinking that there is an irreconcilablecontradiction between the report and its postscript. Let me brieflyexamine three separate interpretations of this document in order toexpose the central assumption governing standard approaches to thenovella. In her feminist reading of Heart of Darkness, Johanna M. Smithinterrogates the "interrelated ideologies of gender andempire" (1996, 169) in order to expose the contradictions inherentin patriarchal and imperialist ideologies. On this interpretation,Kurtz's report to the International Society embodies "thecontradiction between the brutality of conquest and the mystifying mys��ti��fy?tr.v. mys��ti��fied, mys��ti��fy��ing, mys��ti��fies1. To confuse or puzzle mentally. See Synonyms at puzzle.2. To make obscure or mysterious. 'power for good' of imperialist ideology" (171). Inessence, Smith, like Marlow, detects a conceptual "gap"between the "noble" colonizing mission and the call forgenocide: "a gap appears between" Kurtz's "earlyadvocacy of the 'new gang' and the end of his report,'scrawled evidently much later': 'Exterminate all thebrutes!'" (171). A virtuous gang of colonizers certainly wouldnot endorse genocide--hence, the contradictory gap. In Conrad and Impressionism, Peters minds the conceptual gap from aslightly different angle. On his interpretation, adherence to absoluteTruths or values is, for Conrad, destructive. In concrete terms,Kurtz's report is based on "an absolute system," butafter living in a culture that subscribes to alternative values, Kurtz"comes to believe that his system of values is not the only way toorder one's existence and hence cannot be based upon an absolutefoundation" (2001, 140). On discovering that European values arenot absolute, Kurtz despairs, which leads him to make his plea forgenocide: "The scrawled postscript, 'Exterminate all thebrutes!' ... is his disillusioned response" (140). Once the"noble" values of the first part of the report are called intoquestion, Kurtz becomes disillusioned, which is to say that the firstpart of the report is totally out of step with the postscript. Notsurprisingly, Peters refers to Kurtz as "immoral" (140). In his book on Heart of Darkness, Peter Edgerly Firchow hasdeveloped the gap interpretation most insistently. For Firchow, thereexist two Kurtzes, the original and the sham. According to according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. this reading,the "pious document is clearly the product of the original Kurtz,the bearer of the imperial torch, whereas the note represents equallyclearly an afterthought by the sham, or the ruthless maverickentrepreneur" (2000, 83). From this perspective, the Kurtz in thefirst part of the report is "a kind of imperialist EuropeanEveryman" (110), while the genocidal Kurtz is driven by "anaberrant moment of madness" (144). Because Kurtz ultimatelysuccumbs to his basest impulses, Firchow refers to him as "less ofa heroic explorer and more of an amoral a��mor��al?adj.1. Not admitting of moral distinctions or judgments; neither moral nor immoral.2. Lacking moral sensibility; not caring about right and wrong. or even immoralentrepreneur" (78). What ultimately unifies three totally diversescholars like Smith, Peters, and Firchow is their view that there is aradical gap between Kurtz's report and the postscript, and that thepostscript represents Kurtz's moral degeneration. By contrast, I intend to argue 1) that the postscript to the reportis internally consistent with the preceding "altruisticsentiment," 2) that Kurtz is moral precisely because he followsthrough with the logic of the document, which culminates in genocide and3) that Conrad rejects morality because it makes crimes againsthumanity, like genocide, possible. There are three stages to myargument. In the first, I examine the biblical logic that makes genocidea moral obligation. In the second, I argue that Conrad was aware of thebiblical conditions that justified genocide. Finally, I use thisanalysis to interpret Kurtz's report. II. "My problem: What harm has come to mankind through morals and through its morality." (Friedrich Nietzsche 1968, 169) There is a seeming contradiction throughout the Bible. On the onehand, God commands His Chosen People not to kill, but on the other hand,He commands them to kill others with tenacious regularity. (3) Unmarriedbut sexually active women (Deuteronomy 22:21-22), Sabbath breakers(Numbers 15:35), disobedient sons (Deuteronomy 21:18-21), andhomosexuals (Leviticus 20:13) are just a few groups that should be putto death. Indeed, in Deuteronomy and first Samuel, God even sanctionsgenocide, telling his people to wipe out whole races of people, whichincludes "men and women, children and infants" (I Samuel Noun 1. I Samuel - the first of two books in the Old Testament that tell of Saul and David1 SamuelOld Testament - the collection of books comprising the sacred scripture of the Hebrews and recording their history as the chosen people; the first half of the 15:3). How is it possible for the Chosen People to accept the TenCommandments Ten Commandmentsor Decalogue[Gr.,=ten words], in the Bible, the summary of divine law given by God to Moses on Mt. Sinai. They have a paramount place in the ethical system in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. , but not, at the same time, recognize that God commandsthem to violate one of those commandments quite regularly? There is away to answer this question, but to do so, we must abandon our currentunderstanding of the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill This is a disambiguation page: a list of articles associated with the same title. !" as weraise a more fundamental question: who, according to a theologicalworldview world��view?n. In both senses also called Weltanschauung.1. The overall perspective from which one sees and interprets the world.2. A collection of beliefs about life and the universe held by an individual or a group. , would be considered human? The answer to this question liesin the Judeo-Christian tradition of the Chosen People. According to one interpretation of the Bible, it is possible todetermine who is a chosen person on the basis of an individual'scapacity to see spiritual things. Paul develops this idea in firstCorinthians when he makes a distinction between the natural and thespiritual person: We speak of these, not in words of human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, thus interpreting things in spiritual terms. The natural man does not accept what is taught by the Spirit of God. For him, that is absurdity. He cannot come to know such teaching because it must be appraised in a spiritual way. The spiritual man, on the other hand, can appraise everything, though he himself can be appraised by no one. (I Corinthians 2:13-15) The believer stands on a different epistemological plane thanunbelievers. Because believers can see both material and spiritualthings, they can appraise appraisev. to professionally evaluate the value of property including real estate, jewelry, antique furniture, securities, or in certain cases the loss of value (or cost of replacement) due to damage. all things. The infidel INFIDEL, persons, evidence. One who does not believe in the existence of a God, who will reward or punish in this world or that which is to come. Willes' R. 550. This term has been very indefinitely applied. , by contrast, can onlysee material realities, so the believer's life is beyond theunbeliever's epistemological reach. Paul examines the distinctionsbetween the natural and the spiritual person again in the penultimatechapter of Corinthians, this time clarifying more carefully theontological distinctions between two types of people: "Earthly menare like the man of earth, heavenly men are like the man of heaven"(I Corinthians Noun 1. I Corinthians - a New Testament book containing the first epistle from Saint Paul to the church at CorinthFirst Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, First Epistle to the Corinthians 15:48). Through faith, the believer is ontologicallytransformed, existing no longer just as a person created out of earth,but now existing as a being created out of spirit. According to thisview, the community can determine whether a person is a spiritual beingor not through his or her epistemological capacity. If a person can seespiritual things (has faith), then the person is (ontologically) aspiritual being, like Christ, "the man of heaven." But if aperson cannot see spiritual things (lacks faith), then we can infer thatthis person is just an earthly being, lacking spirit. The ontological distinction between the natural and the spiritualperson is crucial, because a natural being, which is like an animal, hasno human rights. This is made clear in the first letter of Peter: You, however, are 'a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people he claims for his own to proclaim the glorious work' of the One who called you from darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were no people, but now you are God's people; once there was no mercy for you, but now you have found mercy. (I Peter 2:9-11) If you are chosen by God, you can expect mercy, but if you are not,the consequences can be dire. Not surprisingly, with regard to thetreatment of non-chosen people, neither the Ten Commandments norChrist's Golden Rule necessarily applies, since the non-chosen donot rise to the level of a people ("Once you were no people").Therefore, were the Chosen People to steal from or kill the non-chosen,they would not be violating one of the Ten Commandments, for mercy isaccorded only to people. This subtle qualification explains why theChosen People can ruthlessly kill so many people in the Old Testamentwithout contradicting God's command not to kill. To bring this section to a close, let me make some very clearpoints about the theological conditions for genocide. Not only arebelievers allowed to kill infidels, they are actually commanded to doso. But there are a few conditions. Because infidels can only seematerial realities, they are not allowed to question or challenge theChosen People's system of belief, for as it says in second Peter:"These men pour abuse on things of which they are ignorant."Given the natural person's presumptuous pre��sump��tu��ous?adj.Going beyond what is right or proper; excessively forward.[Middle English, from Old French presumptueux, from Late Latin praes behavior, Peter detailswhat should happen to these non-spiritual beings: "They act likecreatures of instinct, brute animals born to be caught anddestroyed" (II Peter 2:12). This claim does not necessarily implythat believers should seek out and destroy non-believers. It is onlywhen we read Deuteronomy, first Corinthians, and first and second Peterthat the conditions for genocide become clear. When the infidel not onlyquestions and challenges the believer's system, but also has anegative impact on the spiritual community, then the believers mustexterminate the infidels, "lest they teach you to make any suchabominable offerings as they make to their gods, and you thus sinagainst the Lord, your God" (Deuteronomy 20:18). Given this logic,if believers do not exterminate infidels, they are in danger of sinningagainst God. Moreover, because offending infidels are not people in thestrict sense of the word (a "no people"), the chosen peopleneed not worry that they are violating a divine mandate when they killthem. III. "I take it that Jahweh was little taken up with any of his creatures, except the people who inhabited the countries from which the Aryans came." (Cunninghame Graham 1981, 62) Surely this is a rather uncharitable and idiosyncratic id��i��o��syn��cra��sy?n. pl. id��i��o��syn��cra��sies1. A structural or behavioral characteristic peculiar to an individual or group.2. A physiological or temperamental peculiarity.3. interpretation of the Bible. So why should anyone suppose that Conradwould have read the Bible in this way? (4) The answer lies inConrad's relationship with Graham, a vocal socialist and atheistwho was extremely critical of British imperialism and religious belief.(5) Conrad had profound respect for Graham. Indeed, in a letter Conradcalls him "the most alive man of the century" (1969, 135). Somuch did Conrad admire Graham that he asked the conservative publisher,William Blackwood William Blackwood (November 20, 1776 - September 16, 1834) was a Scottish publisher who founded the firm of William Blackwood & Sons.Blackwood was born of humble parents in Edinburgh. , if he could dedicate a volume that included Youth,Heart of Darkness, and Lord Jim Lord Jimsuccessful in lifelong efforts to regain honor lost in moment of cowardice. [Br. Lit.: Lord Jim]See : NoblemindednessLord Jim to his extremely liberal friend. (6)Although the volume was eventually dedicated to Conrad's wife,Conrad did dedicate Typhoon typhoon:see hurricane. to his friend, and in a letter, Conrad saysto Graham: "It is a public declaration of our communion in more,perhaps, than mere letters and I don't mind owning to my pride init" (143). The strength of the bond between Graham and Conrad is more thanjust fraternal sentiment; it is intellectual. In a letter to Graham,Conrad says: "I can assure you that I never wrote a book since [thebeginning of their friendship] without many mental references to you ofwhom alone amongst my readers I always thought that He willunderstand" (1969, 191). To understand more clearly what makesGraham the ideal reader of Conrad's fiction, I want to brieflyexamine Graham's essay "Bloody Niggers," which Conradread in mid-June of 1898, just six months before he started writingHeart of Darkness. (7) Both the essay and Conrad's response shedconsiderable light on Heart of Darkness in that they expose the social,political, and individual psychology that has made colonization anhistorical reality. To open the essay, Graham locates himself within a tradition ofatheist writers who consider the God-concept a psychological projection In psychology, psychological projection (or projection bias) is a defense mechanism in which one attributes to others one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts or/and emotions. ,the seething product of an overheated imagination: "That theall-wise and omnipresent om��ni��pres��ent?adj.Present everywhere simultaneously.[Medieval Latin omnipres God, to whom good people address theirprayers,... is really but a poor, anthropomorphous animal, is day by daybecoming plainer and more manifest" (1981, 58). (8) Thisobservation is certainly not original--William Blake ("The Marriageof Heaven and Hell"), Percy Shelley ("The Necessity ofAtheism atheism(ā`thē-ĭz'əm), denial of the existence of God or gods and of any supernatural existence, to be distinguished from agnosticism, which holds that the existence cannot be proved. "), Ludwig Feuerbach (The Essence of Christianity), KarlMarx (Towards a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right), andFriedrich Nietzsche Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (October 15, 1844 – August 25, 1900) (IPA: [ˈfʁiːdʁɪ? ˈvilhelm ˈniːtʃə]) was a nineteenth-century German philosopher. (Twilight of the Idols and Anti-Christ) are just afew who had already observed that humans psychologically project theGod-concept into being. What makes Graham's work so uniquelyinsightful is his analysis of the way the God-concept functions tojustify and sanction colonization and its most ruthless practices ofexploitation, a project that anticipates the writings of Frantz Fanon Frantz Fanon (July 20, 1925 – December 6, 1961) was an author from Martinique, essayist, psychoanalyst, and revolutionary. He was perhaps the preeminent thinker of the 20th century on the issue of decolonization and the psychopathology of colonization. .(9) Central to the theology of colonization is establishingepistemological superiority, which thereby allows those in control ofthe intellectual means of production Means Of Production is a compilation of Aim's early 12" and EP releases, recorded between 1995 and 1998. Track listing"Loop Dreams" – 5:30 "Diggin' Dizzy" – 5:33 "Let the Funk Ride" – 5:11 "Original Stuntmaster" – 6:33 to ontologize themselves asGod's Chosen People and to ontologize the non-chosen"other" as sub-human. For Europeans, epistemologicalsuperiority enables them to control the interpretation of the Bible, andnot surprisingly, white Europeans have concluded that "the firstman in the fair garden by the Euphrates was white" (Graham 1981,61). Of course, Graham continues, "we have no information"(61) to verify this claim, but since white people "have entered, soto speak, into a tacit compact with the creator" (62), they are inan epistemological position to make such a claim. Non-white peoples maywant to challenge this assertion, but since they are mere infidels wholook but cannot see, who listen but cannot hear, they are, as Paul says,unable to comment on the spiritual reality that exceeds theirepistemological grasp. So when whites use the Bible to ontologizethemselves as superior, non-whites can neither verify nor challenge thisclaim. Significantly, of all the white nations in the world, the Britishare, as Graham ironically observes, specifically chosen,"God's favoured nation" (1981, 65). In fact, the Britishgentleman is the apex of creation, the being that gives God most joy:"Thus, through the mist of time, the Celto-Saxon race emerged fromheathendom hea��then?n. pl. hea��thens or heathen1. a. One who adheres to the religion of a people or nation that does not acknowledge the God of Judaism, Christianity, or Islam.b. and woad and, in the fullness of the creator's pleasure,became the tweed-clad Englishman" (64). Given their status as"God's own Englishmen" (63), the British have a right,nay, an obligation to colonize col��o��nize?v. col��o��nized, col��o��niz��ing, col��o��niz��esv.tr.1. To form or establish a colony or colonies in.2. To migrate to and settle in; occupy as a colony.3. the world: Much of the earth was his [the Englishman's], and in the skies he had his mansion ready, well aired, with every appliance known to modern sanitary science waiting for him with a large bible on the chest of drawers in every room. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, India, and countless islands, useful as coaling stations and depots amongst the heathen, all owned his sway. (Graham 1981, 64-5) The British have been charged with building the city of God onearth. Therefore, they can take whatever land on the planet they deemfit. As for non-white, non-chosen races, specifically "bloodyniggers," they must submit themselves to the British. At thispoint, Graham underscores how Europeans have exploited the word"nigger" to inspire hatred and to vindicate violence: "Inthe consideration of the 'nigger' races which God sent intothe world for whites (and chiefly Englishmen) to rule,'niggers' of Africa occupy first place" (1981, 66).Graham's indignant tone, while certainly justified, is unfortunate,because it fails to connote con��note?tr.v. con��not��ed, con��not��ing, con��notes1. To suggest or imply in addition to literal meaning: "The term 'liberal arts' connotes a certain elevation above utilitarian concerns"the subtle theological distinctions thathave made violence against non-whites psychologically and politicallypossible. However, the content of his claim is right on the mark. Inkeeping with Paul's theology of the Chosen People, "God'sown Englishmen" are human in the strict sense of the word, whilethose of African descent are not really human. Therefore, when theBritish violate Africans, they are not committing crimes:"'Niggers' who have no cannons, and cannot construct areasonable torpedo, have no rights. 'Niggers' whose lot isplaced outside our flag, whose lives are given over to a band ofmoneygrubbing miscreants (chartered or not) have neither rights norwrongs" (66-67). Humans have rights, not animals, and becauseAfricans do not have epistemological access to the one true God, theycannot be considered human in the strict sense of the word--they are a"no people" who can expect "no mercy." Just in caseGraham's reader may have failed to understand how the God-conceptlegitimates genocidal action against Africans, he states his pointdirectly: "Better, by far, to have made the 'niggers'white and let them by degrees all become Englishmen, than put us to thetrouble of exterminating whole tribes of them, to carry out hisplan" (66). Exterminating Africans is legitimate so long as theBritish are carrying "out his [God's] plan." And how canEuropeans know God's plan? The answer is the Bible, for as Grahamsays, "our own exploits amongst the 'niggers' ofto-day" resemble "the record of crimes, of violence" inthe Old Testament (62). There are specifically two ideas in this document that are ofparticular relevance for my interpretation of Conrad. First, since theBritish control the God-concept, they can ontologize themselves asChosen People and Africans as sub-human. By making this distinction, theBritish could perpetrate per��pe��trate?tr.v. per��pe��trat��ed, per��pe��trat��ing, per��pe��tratesTo be responsible for; commit: perpetrate a crime; perpetrate a practical joke. extreme acts of violence on Africans withoutviolating either the Ten Commandments or Christ's Golden Rule--onlyhumans have rights, so killing an African (animal) would not be immoral.Second, and more importantly, by making colonization part of God's"plan," Graham illustrates how it could be moral to killAfricans. This is a much stronger claim than my first point. To say thatit is not immoral to kill Africans does not imply that Britishcolonizers should seek out and kill Africans; it just means that theprohibition against killing has been removed. The second claim makeskilling ("exterminating whole tribes of them") a moralobligation, a necessary act "to carry out his plan." WhileGraham understands that genocidal action against Africans could be amoral obligation that is part of God's plan, his essay fails tomake clear the logic that justifies such action. But where Graham fails,Conrad succeeds. Conrad read "Bloody Niggers," which he considered"very good, very telling" (1969, 89). However, he did havesome objections. The essay lacks subtlety, and as a consequence, Grahamends up preaching to the converted. To make the essay more poignant andmore effective, Conrad encourages Graham to hold his thoughts back,letting them gather "together to form a solid and penetratingphalanx phalanx,ancient Greek formation of infantry. The soldiers were arrayed in rows (8 or 16), with arms at the ready, making a solid block that could sweep bristling through the more dispersed ranks of the enemy. " so that they could become "perhaps victorious"(1986, 2:70). (10) Put differently, to reach an audience that might notbe critical of theology or imperialism, Conrad urges Graham to writemore cogently. "Bloody Niggers" certainly helped Conrad explain thetheological mentality that justified "exterminating whole tribesof" Africans, or, as Kurtz puts it, to "[e]xterminate all thebrutes!" What makes Heart of Darkness more effective, however, isConrad's aesthetic control, his ability to frame the issues withina more comprehensive context and to maximize the emotional impact on hisreader. The downside of Conrad's call for subtlety is that his"idea" could so easily be lost upon his reader. In fact,Conrad mentions this problem in a letter to Graham. After Graham readthe first installment of the novella which appeared in Blackwood'sMagazine in 1899, Conrad told Graham that "the idea [of thenovella] is so wrapped up in secondary notions that You--even You!--maymiss it" (1969, 116). Here we return to Graham as the ideal readerof Conrad's texts. If Graham, who is Conrad's ideal reader("I always thought that He will understand"), couldpotentially miss the "idea" of the novella, how much more aptis the average reader to miss it? Conrad's subtlety has, no doubt,been the occasion for much interpretive ambiguity. But if we can specifywhat it is about Graham that makes him Conrad's ideal reader, thenwe might be more strategically positioned to interpret the"idea" of Heart of Darkness. For the sake of clarity, let mespecify what I consider the crucial links between Graham and Conrad. Conrad, like Graham, had very little respect for Christianity. Infact, Conrad tells Edward Garnett how he, "from the age offourteen, disliked the Christian religion, its doctrines, ceremonies andfestivals" (1986, 2:468). To Conrad's mind, something inChristianity lends "itself with amazing facility to crueldistortion," and consequently, Christianity "has brought aninfinity of anguish to innumerable souls--on this earth" (5:358).Not surprisingly, when an evangelist presented Conrad "with apocket copy of the English Bible," Conrad, who noticed that thebook "was printed on rice paper," "used the leaves forrolling cigarettes" (1924, 96). (11) While Conrad had just aslittle respect for Christianity as Graham, his critique of Christianitywas much more subtle. Therefore, in Heart of Darkness, while Conradexposes the theology of colonization, he resists the temptation to be asovert as Graham, though Graham, who understands how British Imperialismhas its roots in Christian theology Noun 1. Christian theology - the teachings of Christian churchesfree grace, grace of God, grace - (Christian theology) the free and unmerited favor or beneficence of God; "God's grace is manifested in the salvation of sinners"; "there but for the grace of God go , is in a position to understandprecisely how the theological mentality of Heart of Darkness has beenused to justify the European exploitation of Africa. (12) More specifically, Conrad, again like Graham, understands that thetheological mentality makes genocide not just permissible, but, undercertain conditions, a moral obligation. But Conrad's analysis ofthe dangers of the theological mentality is more comprehensive thanGraham's, and as a consequence, his critique is much moreconvincing. The task at this point is to demonstrate how the theologicalmentality functions to legitimate genocide as a moral obligation inHeart of Darkness. IV. "it is the highest importance to know whether we are not duped by morality." (Emmanuel Levinas, 1969, 21) Establishing epistemological superiority is the first step towardjustifying genocide as moral. As Marlow claims, "[t]he inner truthis hidden" (Conrad 1996, 50), so a person must have cultivated asuperior epistemological faculty in order to access the hidden truth.(13) The average person will look but not see, listen but not hear, forthe material world looks at us with an "air of hiddenknowledge" (73). (14) But for those who are in possession of a"higher intelligence" (40), the secret truth can be known. Atthis point, I want to examine specifically how Marlow and Kurtzconstruct an invulnerable in��vul��ner��a��ble?adj.1. Immune to attack; impregnable.2. Impossible to damage, injure, or wound.[French invuln��rable, from Old French, from Latin and impenetrable epistemology similar toPaul's, one that they can use to ontologize themselves as superiorand others as inferior. (15) As Paul claims, to see spiritual things, one must be spiritual.Consequently, the spiritual person can appraise everything, includingthe non-spiritual person's life, whereas the spiritualperson's life can be appraised by no one. Significantly, aspiritual discourse is frequently used throughout Heart of Darkness toillustrate white European superiority and black African inferiority. Forinstance, in his report, Kurtz claims that white Europeans must appearto "savage" Africans as "supernatural beings,"individuals who could wield the might "of a deity" (Conrad1996, 66). Given Kurtz's uncanny power to influence people'sminds, it should come as no surprise that Marlow adopts his rhetoricwhen he describes Fresleven, the mild-mannered Dane who was killed:"The supernatural being had not been touched after he fell"(24). For Marlow, Kurtz is an incarnational bridge to the highestrealities, for it is through Kurtz's "burning noblewords" (66) that Marlow gets "the notion of an exoticImmensity im��men��si��ty?n. pl. im��men��si��ties1. The quality or state of being immense.2. Something immense: "the empty immensity of earth, sky, and water" ruled by an august Benevolence BENEVOLENCE, duty. The doing a kind action to another, from mere good will, without any legal obligation. It is a moral duty only, and it cannot be enforced by law. A good wan is benevolent to the poor, but no law can compel him to be so.BENEVOLENCE, English law. " (66). The reason whyKurtz can supposedly access higher realities is because he isspecifically chosen. Marlow indicates exactly this when he asks Kurtz ifhe understands the "roaring chorus" of natives shouting.Notice how Kurtz and then Marlow replies: "'Do I not?' hesaid slowly, gasping, as if the words had been torn out of him by asupernatural power" (84). Kurtz can see what others cannot, andthis is the case, Marlow suggests, because a "supernaturalpower" has been assisting him, tearing the words out of him likeJeremiah's God in the Old Testament and Paul's God in the NewTestament. In essence, Kurtz is in the same epistemological position asPaul's spiritual man. These references to the supernatural are important, because forhumans, the world cannot be known--it is "impenetrable to humanthought" (Conrad 1996, 72). To know an ultimate truth or aspiritual reality about the world, one must be more than human, asupernatural being of sorts. Significantly, both Marlow and Kurtzpossess this supernatural capacity, which is clear from their ability tosee spiritual things, especially truth. That Kurtz is supposedly capableof disclosing truth is one of the central points running throughout thetext. For instance, the Russian tells Marlow about Kurtz'sepistemological superiority ("'He [Kurtz] made me seethings--things.'" [72]), which leads the Russian to concludethat Kurtz is an extraordinary man who is not bound by ordinary laws:"'You can't judge Mr. Kurtz as you would an ordinaryman'" (72). As for Marlow, Kurtz has helped him to see"the appalling face of a glimpsed truth" (87), which makesMarlow rush through the streets of the Sepulchral se��pul��chral?adj.1. Of or relating to a burial vault or a receptacle for sacred relics.2. Suggestive of the grave; funereal.se��pul City spitting contempton those who do not possess his privileged knowledge: "They[ordinary people] were intruders whose knowledge of life was to me anirritating presence, because I felt so sure they could not possibly knowthe things I knew" (88). Although it is through Kurtz that Marlowgains special knowledge of the world, Marlow flaunts his ability toaccess truth throughout the narrative. He knows about the "innertruth" (50), the "truth stripped of its cloak of time"(52), the "truth" that one "must meet ... with his owntrue stuff" (52), and the "surface-truth" (52). (16)Obviously, Marlow and Kurtz are ontologically superior to ordinaryhumans because of their more-than-human ability to know what is"impenetrable to human thought." By claiming access to truth, Marlow and Kurtz can ontologize othersas they will, and not surprisingly, Africans are ontologized as moreanimal than human, which makes them non-spiritual beings. Let me providejust a few examples to illustrate how the African's animality isunderscored throughout Heart of Darkness. Marlow has to supervise a"savage who was fireman." This "improved specimen,"instead of belonging to a Kantian Kingdom of Ends, is merely a means toa European's end: He ought to have been clapping his hands and stamping his feet on the bank, instead of which he was hard at work, a thrall to strange witchcraft, full of improving knowledge. He was useful because he had been instructed; and what he knew was this--that should the water in that transparent thing disappear, the evil spirit inside the boiler would get angry through the greatness of his thirst, and take a terrible vengeance. (Conrad 1996, 52) What is the implicit definition of "improving knowledge"in this passage? It is not a recognition of oneself as capable ofnegative freedom, which is the ability to overcome animal inclinationsand physical impulses, nor it is an understanding of positive freedom,which is the ability to legislate to oneself the moral law. It is asuperstitious belief that terrifies the "improved specimen"into filling a boiler with water. In essence, the improving knowledge isthat which makes Africans an effective instrument of a white European.The African is a mere means, like an animal. Not coincidentally, Marlowuses an animal discourse to describe the fireman: "to look at himwas as edifying as seeing a dog in a parody of breeches and a featherhat, walking on his hind legs" (Conrad 1996, 52). By ontologizingthe African as an animal, Marlow effectively converts him into a means(humans are ends in and of themselves, while animals, in relation tohumans, can be used as a mere means to human well-being) and therebydivests him of human rights (humans have rights, animals do not). Consequently, when Marlow's helmsman dies later in the text,Marlow does not mourn the loss of a full-fledged human being; he lamentsthe death of a deficient tool: Perhaps you will think it passing strange this regret for a savage who was no more account than a grain of sand in a black Sahara. Well, don't you see, he had done something, he had steered; for months I had him at my back--a help--an instrument. It was a kind of partnership. He steered for me--I had to look after him, I worried about his deficiencies, and thus a subtle bond had been created, of which I only became aware when it was suddenly broken. (Conrad 1996, 67) Marlow thinks of this little-account savage in terms of hisutility; he is a deficient instrument who must be looked after (thesub-"human" is not an independent agent that can governitself) and who enables (serves as an "instrument") chosensuperiors to achieve their ends. Africans can be converted into instruments because of theirinability to be governed by noble principles. Such is the implicit viewMarlow betrays when he discusses how the thirty starving Africans on hissteamboat resist the temptation to revolt against the five whites onboard. On noting the Africans' restraint, Marlow responds,"And these chaps too had no earthly reason for any kind of scruple scruple:see English units of measurement. .Restraint! I would just as soon have expected restraint from a hyenaprowling prowl?v. prowled, prowl��ing, prowlsv.tr.To roam through stealthily, as in search of prey or plunder: prowled the alleys of the city after dark.v.intr. amongst the corpses of a battlefield" (Conrad 1996, 58).For Marlow, hungry animals do not forgo a feast in the name of a higherprinciple; in fact, their most basic needs determine their behavior.Humans, by contrast, cultivate values and principles that transcendanimal needs, so they can resist the temptation to satisfy an animalneed in the name of a higher principle. Because Marlow considersAfricans more animal than human, he is surprised by the restraint of theAfricans in his steamboat. Such self-control is obviously inconsistentwith his view of the African. More importantly, by likening Africans tohyenas, Marlow does more than just ontologize the natives as animals; heimplicitly specifies why they are more animal than human--animals aregoverned exclusively by animal appetites, whereas humans can be governedby a moral precept. And Marlow's observation that the natives onhis steamboat show restraint does nothing to mitigate his racist view;these Africans are an anomaly, an exception to what he considers theAfrican/hyena rule. The last example, while the least overt andoffensive, is the most significant in terms of the genocidal mentalityin Heart of Darkness. Kurtz's Russian disciple tells Marlow aboutthe unspeakable rites that the natives offered up to Kurtz. In his briefnarrative, the Russian specifies that the natives "wouldcrawl" (74). From a white European perspective, this act ofcrawling justifies labeling Africans as sub-human savages. For instance,when talking to Noun 1. talking to - a lengthy rebuke; "a good lecture was my father's idea of discipline"; "the teacher gave him a talking to"lecture, speechrebuke, reprehension, reprimand, reproof, reproval - an act or expression of criticism and censure; "he had to the Russian, Marlow cannot tolerate the harlequin'sobsequious relationship to Kurtz. To condemn the Russian, Marlow likenshis fawning behavior to an act of crawling, which he links with the"savages": "If it had come to crawling before Mr. Kurtz,he crawled as much as the veriest savage of them all" (109). Themore deferential deferential/def��er��en��tial/ (-en��shal) pertaining to the ductus deferens. def��er��en��tialadj.Of or relating to the vas deferens.deferentialpertaining to the ductus deferens. the crawling behavior, the more savage one is. Significantly, this animalization of the African has a veryspecific function in relation to Kurtz's and Marlow'sspiritual discourse. Specifically, humans can know spiritual truth andthey can live their lives according to these truths. As rational beingswith free will, they are independent agents who cannot be reduced to ameans. On the basis of their God-given faculties and abilities, theypossess certain inalienable rights The term inalienable rights (or unalienable rights) refers to a theoretical set of human rights that are fundamental, are not awarded by human power, and cannot be surrendered. They are by definition, rights retained by the people. , which include being treated as anend. By contrast, animals cannot reason, and as a consequence, theycannot act responsibly. For this reason, they must be "lookedafter." Moreover, given their underdeveloped faculties andabilities, they do not possess human rights, which means that they canbe used as a means, "an instrument." According toGraham's model in "Bloody Niggers," ontologizing Africansas animals has been enough for the British to justify exterminatingthem. But on a psychological level, there is something lacking inGraham's system. If I could demonstrate that an African is theontological equal of a dog, this does not give me the right to killeither the African or the dog. Another condition must be met in order tojustify genocidal action. According to the Bible, that condition is theadulteration Mixing something impure with something genuine, or an inferior article with a superior one of the same kind.Adulteration usually refers to mixing other matter of an inferior and sometimes harmful quality with food or drink intended to be sold. of the Chosen People's spiritual life. In The Wretchedof the Earth, Frantz Fanon describes this process incisively. The native"is the corrosive element, destroying all that comes near him; heis the deforming element, disfiguring all that has to do with beauty andmorality" (1968, 41). Contact with the native can only havedebilitating de��bil��i��tat��ingadj.Causing a loss of strength or energy.DebilitatingWeakening, or reducing the strength of.Mentioned in: Stress Reduction consequences for the Chosen People: "All values, infact, are irrevocably poisoned and diseased as soon as they are allowedin contact with the colonized race. The customs of the colonized people,their traditions, their myths--above all, their myths--are the very signof that poverty of spirit and of their constitutional depravity"(42). If it can be shown that Africans adulterate a��dul��ter��ate?tr.v. a��dul��ter��at��ed, a��dul��ter��at��ing, a��dul��ter��atesTo make impure by adding extraneous, improper, or inferior ingredients.adj.1. Spurious; adulterated.2. Adulterous. the spiritual life ofthe Chosen People, then genocide becomes not just permissible; itbecomes a moral obligation. This is where Conrad goes beyond Graham. Graham suggests that Africans, because they are considered lessthan human, have no rights ("'Niggers' ... have norights"), which makes genocide permissible. Aside from suggestingthat "exterminating whole tribes of them" is part ofGod's plan ("to carry out his plan"), Graham offers noexplanation that necessarily links the Chosen People'sepistemological and ontological superiority with a moral obligation forgenocide. He only demonstrates that it is not immoral for chosenEuropeans to exterminate whole tribes of Africans. Conrad, however, is much more thorough. Let us see how the finalcondition for making genocide moral is met in Heart of Darkness. WhenKurtz first enters the "God-forsaken wilderness" (1996, 28) ofAfrica, he goes, like a typical Christian missionary, as a minister oflight, Truth, and civilization; he must elevate the "savages."But instead of his transforming the natives, they transform him. Atfirst, Marlow, who frequently lives in a state of denial, refuses toacknowledge Kurtz's "fallen" condition. For instance,when Kurtz's Russian disciple intimates that Kurtz has participatedin unspeakable rites, Marlow says: '"I don't want to knowanything of the ceremonies used when approaching Mr. Kurtz'"(74). But after seeing impaled heads on stakes in front of Kurtz'shouse, Marlow can no longer deny the facts. The most damning evidenceconfirming Kurtz's spiritual degeneration, however, comes whenMarlow finds Kurtz "crawling on all-fours" (81). Kurtz hasbecome one of "them." In essence, "crawling onall-fours" suggests that Kurtz has become "a veriestsavage," a brute that cannot see or experience the higher realitiesof the spiritual life. Given the logic of Heart of Darkness, becoming an animal has veryspecific connotations. Supernatural humans can know a hidden truth thatis "impenetrable to human thought." Moreover, they canovercome their animalistic urges and live according to noble principles.When Kurtz becomes an animal, he implicitly loses two more-than-animalcapacities: he would no longer be able to know a hidden, more-than-humantruth and he would no longer be able to conform his life to a spiritualprinciple. In essence, he would be like a hyena who is governed solelyby animal appetites, so the idea of being a moral agent would be out ofthe question. Given this animalistic nature, Kurtz would no longerbelong to a Kantian Kingdom of Ends; he would become "aninstrument," a mere means to the true human community's end.So by becoming an animal, Kurtz could no longer justify his position ofsuperiority. Since it is the natives (those who "would crawl") whohave degraded Kurtz ("he is crawling on all-fours"), Kurtzmust "[e]xterminate all the brutes," "lest theyteach" other Chosen Europeans "to make any such abominableofferings as they [the Africans] make to their gods, and you thus sinagainst the Lord, your God." Kurtz's decision to use the word"brutes" is important. In "An Outpost of Progress "An Outpost of Progress" is a short story written in July 1896 by Joseph Conrad, drawing on his own experience at Congo. It is published in Cosmopolis in 1897 and is later collected in 'Tales of Unrest' in 1898. ,"which Conrad published before Heart of Darkness, one of the maincharacters, Carlier, talks "about the necessity of exterminatingall the niggers" (1987, 102). Had Kurtz said "Exterminate allthe niggers!," the report on the Suppression of Savage Customswould not have been nearly as internally consistent as it is when hesays: "Exterminate all the brutes!" Because animals("brutes") do not have rights, Kurtz can endorse genocide withemotional, psychological, and spiritual impunity--most people havereservations about killing humans, but most have no problem with thekilling of animals. This is doubly the case since the natives havealready begun to corrupt the spiritual life of a Chosen Person and totransform him into a brute. From a traditional Judeo-Christianperspective, therefore, committing genocide is Kurtz's only moralchoice. To state this more strongly, were Kurtz not to endorse genocide,he would be in danger of allowing others to become animalized, whichwould lead to spiritual degeneration on a massive scale. So to achieve amoral victory, Kurtz must make a moral call for genocide. To put this inMarlow's words, "It was an affirmation, a moral victory paidfor by innumerable defeats, by abominable terrors, by abominablesatisfactions. But it was a victory! That is why I have remained loyalto Kurtz to the last" (1996, 88). Kurtz's vision is a moralvictory. Of course, scholars could argue, as does Firchow, that Marlowendorses only Kurtz's noble vision, the desire to "exert apower for good practically unbounded." But if my intuitions areright, that the underbelly of the "altruistic sentiment"document implies genocide, then it does not matter whether Marlowendorses the report minus the postscript. In fact, Marlow endorsing thereport minus the postscript is all the more dangerous, because it is thealtruistic sentiment that effectively conceals the genocidal impulseimplicit in Adj. 1. implicit in - in the nature of something though not readily apparent; "shortcomings inherent in our approach"; "an underlying meaning"underlying, inherent the document's philosophy. To conclude, let me briefly discuss the aesthetic challenge inHeart of Darkness. Like Graham, Conrad realizes that it is not incarnate in��car��nate?adj.1. a. Invested with bodily nature and form: an incarnate spirit.b. Embodied in human form; personified: a villain who is evil incarnate. devils who have formulated the political doctrine of colonization or thetheological justification of genocide. On the contrary, the individualswho have originated and perpetrated oppressive systems have belonged toa veritable gang of virtue. As Conrad says in a letter to Graham:"Posterity shall be busy thieving, lying, selling its little soulfor sixpence (from the noblest motives) and shall remember no one exceptperhaps one or two quite too atrocious mountebanks" (1969, 47-48).For Conrad, heinous crimes against humanity are not inconsistent withnoble and moral discourses. In fact, some of the worst atrocities arecommitted in the name of the "noblest motives" like morality. But how can a writer expose a culture's sacred idol, likemorality, as the most effective weapon for perpetrating crimes againsthumanity? After all, morality is inviolable; it is beyond reproach,beyond critique. (17) But that is precisely why it is so dangerous. Inshort, the culture's noblest motives create an epistemologicalblind spot; we can criticize certain moralities, but never morality assuch, and as a consequence, we can critically interrogate degradingmoralities, but never morality as such. For a writer like Conrad, whoconsiders morality so dangerous, morality's seeming inviolability INVIOLABILITY. That which is not to be violated. The persons of ambassadors are inviolable. See Ambassador. creates a formidable aesthetic dilemma. On the one hand, were he tocritique a sacred idol like morality too overtly, he would fail toreplicate the subtle psychology that makes morality so effective inpersuading a liberal man of virtue to commit or conceal atrocities. Onthe other hand, were he to critique morality too subtly, he would runthe risk of sounding at a frequency too low to be heard. It is thisdimension of Marlow's narratorial complexity that has so oftenbaffled even the most astute scholars. For instance, in Gone Primitive,Marianna Torgovnick fails to understand the significance ofMarlow's epistemological limitations: Heart of Darkness is narrated by Marlow and shares many of his limitations. The narrative is willing to approach, but finally backs away from, really radical themes--about modern Europe, about the human mind in an indifferent universe, about sacrificial and violent rituals as a charm against death, about the degree to which men are driven to affirm their essentiality and identity. (Torgovnick 1990, 152) For Torgovnick, Conrad and Marlow (as if the two are one and thesame) would successfully address Europe's problematic politics onlythrough a more overt and direct critique. But for Conrad, Europeans havebeen able to justify their atrocities to self and others through abeneficent be��nef��i��cent?adj.1. Characterized by or performing acts of kindness or charity.2. Producing benefit; beneficial.[Probably from beneficenceon the model of such pairs as discourse, like morality, that effectively conceals its darkunderside. Put differently, were Conrad to make Marlow more critical andaware, were he to make Heart of Darkness more direct and overt, he wouldhave failed to depict the very mindset mind��setor mind-setn.1. A fixed mental attitude or disposition that predetermines a person's responses to and interpretations of situations.2. An inclination or a habit. that makes a Marlow incapable ofrecognizing the genocidal dangers implicit in the altruistic sentimentpart of Kurtz's report on the Suppression of Savage Customs. Putanother way, were a Marlow to understand and expose the logicalconnection between the altruistic sentiment and the call for genocide,he would have been less inclined to admire the seemingly original orsham Kurtz or to conceal Kurtz's crimes against humanity. But it isprecisely this lack of critical awareness that has made so many decent,lawabiding, moral subjects of the empire capable of committing (Kurtz)and/or concealing (Marlow) atrocities against others with impunity. Lackof awareness and inability to make logical connections, therefore, are,contra Torgovnick, the "radical themes" of Heart of Darkness;they are the very things that make Kurtz and Marlow fail to realize howthey have been duped by morality into participating in a large-scaleproject of degrading and violating another culture and race. Significantly, understanding Marlow's complex position asnarrator NARRATOR. A pleader who draws narrs serviens narrator, a sergeant at law. Fleta, 1. 2, c. 37. Obsolete. is crucial for making sense of Kurtz. Marlow does notwholeheartedly whole��heart��ed?adj.Marked by unconditional commitment, unstinting devotion, or unreserved enthusiasm: wholehearted approval.whole support Kurtz. He is horrified by what he perceives asKurtz's moments of madness. In essence, Marlow detects a conceptualgap in Kurtz's report. On my interpretation, however, there is nosuch gap. The report is so horrifying because it is logically andinternally consistent. Kurtz merely articulates in the postscript whatthe report logically implies. From this perspective, Kurtz's crimeis not genocide; his crime is stating overtly the usually hiddengenocidal logic of Western morality, a logic that the west has feltcomfortable implementing ("Exterminate all the brutes!"), butnever admitting (Marlow offers a representative "the report of the'Suppression of Savage Customs,' with the postscriptum tornoff" [Conrad 1996, 89]) to others or itself. Marlow may not approveof Kurtz's call to exterminate the brutes, but he does not have to.By endorsing the first part of Kurtz's report, Marlow implicitlyendorses the postscript, whether he knows it or not. What differentiatesKurtz and Marlow is that Kurtz, having been forced to follow hisaltruistic-sentiment moral ideology to its logical end, ultimatelyacknowledges what his philosophy implies. Marlow, on the other hand,lives in a state of denial. But this state of denial is precisely why heis so dangerous. Were people to understand how Kurtz's moral systemlogically leads to genocide, they would be less apt to accept it. Byconcealing the logical end of Kurtz's moral philosophy, Marloweffectively prevents himself and others from seeing the justificatoryfoundation of Europe's crimes against humanity in Africa. Of course, many contemporary scholars could reject this criticalinterpretation of morality in Heart of Darkness by claiming that theyuse true morality to interpret Conrad's texts, not the shammoralities that have conveniently justified human rights abuses. But,for Conrad, such a view indicates a naive understanding of the waymorality is constructed. To my mind, Conrad was not being a sloppy,irresponsible, or nihilistic ni��hil��ism?n.1. Philosophya. An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence.b. A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated.2. intellectual when he rejected morality; tothe contrary, he was being unabashedly honest and politically realistic.For those scholars who would import a moral discourse into Conrad'stexts, their moral gesture puts them at odds with Conrad, not just interms of morality, but also in terms of epistemology. But just becauseConrad rejects morality, it does not follow that he lacks a vision ofsocial justice. Paradoxically, to establish a more politically justsociety, Conrad seeks to banish morality. As a man with a conscience anda subtle ear for the logic of oppression, Conrad would have us call intoquestion the moral mechanism that makes the atrocity against humanity anightmare from which we are still trying to awake. Notes (1) I would like to thank John G. Peters, John Lestat, and thereaders of College Literature for making valuable suggestions forrevising this essay. I would also like to thank the Alexander vonHumboldt Foundation The Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (in German Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung) is a foundation of the German government for the promotion of international cooperation in the field of scientific research. See alsoThe Humboldt Prize for the generous financial assistance that made thisproject possible. (2) There have been many excellent studies of Conrad'sepistemology, but for the sake of this essay, I mention only those thathave influenced my reading of Conrad most: Watt (1980), Wollaeger(1990), Peters (2001), and Roberts (2000). (3) In The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism monotheism(mŏn`əthēĭzəm)[Gr.,=belief in one God], in religion, a belief in one personal god. In practice, monotheistic religion tends to stress the existence of one personal god that unifies the universe. (1997),Regina M. Schwartz does a first-rate study of the theological psychologythat so consistently leads to ruthless acts of violence. My work is inthe same tradition as Schwartz's, but I offer a different model toexplain this psychology. (4) For an excellent study of Conrad's extensive knowledge anduse of the Bible, see Purdy (1984). (5) In the "Introduction" to Joseph Conrad's Lettersto R.B. Cunninghame Graham, C.T. Watts sheds much light on Conrad'sclose friendship with Graham. (6) Watts mentions the dedication debate in his commentary onConrad's letters (1969, 136-37). (7) Watts claims that "Graham seems to have notedConrad's criticisms, because he made uncharacteristically largeexcisions and alterations to this article before it was republished: thedigressions and topical references were curtailed" (1969, 90). (8) There were many varieties of atheism emerging in thelate-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries. Some useful studies aboutthe emergence of atheism include: Berman (1988), Miller (1963), Thrower(2000), Wilson (1999), and Nielsen (2001). (9) For a discussion of Frantz Fanon's scathing critique oftheology, see my essay (Lackey 2002). (10) This quotation comes from The Collected Letters of JosephConrad. The passage I quoted is in French in the original. The Wattsversion does not have an English translation. (11) This incident is documented in Ford (1924), but I first cameupon it in Purdy (1984, 8-9). (12) It is worth noting that Conrad does not savage justChristianity. In Almayer's Folly Almayer’s Follylust for gold leads to decline. [Br. Lit.: Almayer’s Folly]See : Greed , the Arabs refer to Almayer as"that Unbeliever" (1936, 29), and they use the same kind ofpsychological tactics as Christians to justify acts of cruelty andviolence towards unbelievers. We see this same dynamic in Lord Jim. Isuspect that Conrad, like Nietzsche and Freud, was less interested inthe shortcomings of any particular religion than the common failings ofall religious belief. As Nietzsche claims in On the Genealogy of Morals,"all religions are at the deepest level systems of cruelties"(1989, 61), or as Freud claims, "every religion is in this same waya religion of love for all those whom it embraces; while cruelty andintolerance towards those who do not belong to it are natural to everyreligion" (1959, 39). (13) For an excellent discussion of the epistemology of Heart ofDarkness within the context of the emergent social Darwinism social DarwinismTheory that persons, groups, and “races” are subject to the same laws of natural selection as Charles Darwin had proposed for plants and animals in nature. of thelate-nineteenth century, see Lindquist (1996). (14) Susan E. Lorsch has written an excellent study documenting thereasons why nature and the world could no longer be signified after thedeath of God. For Lorsch, since there is no God, according to manylate-nineteenth and early-twentieth century writers, there can be noideal language to signify the world. For this reason, both Victoriansand modernists wrote extensively about their inability to find alanguage that adequately signified nature or the world. (15) In a sense, this essay is an attempt to expand on and torework Edward Said's interpretation of Heart of Darkness (1993).Here specifically is the quote that has motivated me to write thisessay: "For if we cannot truly understand someone else'sexperience and if we must therefore depend upon the assertive authorityof the sort of power that Kurtz wields as a white man in the jungle orthat Marlow, another white man, wields as a narrator, there is no uselooking for other, non-imperialist alternatives; the system has simplyeliminated them and made them unthinkable. The circularity, the perfectclosure of the whole thing is not only aesthetically but also mentallyunassailable" (24). My task has been to demonstrate how thisinvulnerable system is based on a theological mentality. (16) It is worth noting that Conrad did not share Marlow's orKurtz's epistemological optimism regarding truth, which is clearfrom the following remark to Graham: "And suppose Truth is justround the corner like the elusive and useless loafer it is? I can'ttell. No one can tell. It is impossible to know. It is impossible toknow anything tho' it is possible to believe a thing or two"(1969, 45). Scholars like Chinua Achebe, Firchow, and Brantlinger failto distinguish Marlow's view from Conrad's, which results invery clumsy interpretations of the novella. (17) Nietzsche makes a similar observation about morality inTwilight of the Idols (1989, 80). Works Cited Berman, David. 1988. History of Atheism in Britain: From Hobbes toRussell. London and New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of : Routledge. Brantlinger, Patrick. 1996. "Heart of Darkness:Anti-Imperialism, Racism, or Impressionism?" In Heart of Darkness,ed. Ross C. Murfin. Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin's. Conrad, Joseph Conrad, Joseph,1857–1924, English novelist, b. Berdichev, Russia (now Berdychiv, Ukraine), originally named Jósef Teodor Konrad Walecz Korzeniowski. . 1936. Almayer's Folly. New York and London:Penguin Books. ______. 1969. Joseph Conrad's Letters to R. B. CunninghameGraham. Ed. C.T. Watts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press (known colloquially as CUP) is a publisher given a Royal Charter by Henry VIII in 1534, and one of the two privileged presses (the other being Oxford University Press). . ______. 1986. The Collected Letters of Joseph Conrad. Ed. FrederickR. Karl. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ______. 1987. "An Outpost of Progress." In Tales ofUnrest. New York: Penguin Books. ______. 1996. Heart of Darkness. Ed. Ross C. Murfin. Boston and NewYork: Bedford/St.Martin's. Daleski, H.M. 1977. Joseph Conrad: The Way of Dispossession The wrongful, nonconsensual ouster or removal of a person from his or her property by trick, compulsion, or misuse of the law, whereby the violator obtains actual occupation of the land. Dispossession encompasses intrusion, disseisin, or deforcement. . NewYork: Holmes and Meier. Fanon, Frantz. 1968. The Wretched of the Earth. Trans. ConstanceFarrington. New York: Grove Press, Inc. Firchow, Peter Edgerly. 2000. Envisioning Africa: Racism andImperialism in Conrad's Heart of Darkness. Lexington: TheUniversity of Kentucky Coordinates: The University of Kentucky, also referred to as UK, is a public, co-educational university located in Lexington, Kentucky. Press. Ford, Ford Madox. 1924. Joseph Conrad: A Personal Remembrance.Boston: Little, Brown, and Company. Freud, Sigmund Freud, Sigmund(froid), 1856–1939, Austrian psychiatrist, founder of psychoanalysis. Born in Moravia, he lived most of his life in Vienna, receiving his medical degree from the Univ. of Vienna in 1881. . 1959. Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego.Trans. James Strachey. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company. Graham, R. B. Cunningham. 1981. "Bloody Niggers,"Selected Writings of Cunninghame Graham. London and Toronto: AssociatedUniversity Presses. Holy Bible: The New American Bible History of the English BibleOverviewOld English translationsLindisfarne GospelsMiddle English translationsWyclif's BibleEarly Modern English translationsTyndale's BibleCoverdale's BibleMatthew's BibleTaverner's BibleGreat Bible . 1971. Nashville, Camden, andNew York: Thomas Nelson Publishers. Lackey, Michael. 2002. "Frantz Fanon on the Theology ofColonization," Journal of Colonialism & Colonial History.3.2:1-29. Levinas, Emmanuel. 1969. Totality and Infinity: An Essay onExteriority ex��te��ri��or��i��ty?n.Outwardness; externality. . Trans. Alphonso Lingis. Pittsburgh: Duquesne UniversityPress Duquesne University Press, founded in 1927, is a publisher that is part of Duquesne University, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.The Press is the scholarly publishing arm of Duquesne University, and publishes and collections in the humanities and social sciences. . Lindquist, Sven. 1996. Exterminate all the Brutes. New York: NewPress. Lorsch, Susan E. 1983. Where Nature Ends: Literary Responses to theDesignification of the Landscape. London and Toronto: AssociatedUniversity Presses. Miller, J. Hillis. 1963. The Disappearance of God: FiveNineteenth-Century Writers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press The Harvard University Press is a publishing house, a division of Harvard University, that is highly respected in academic publishing. It was established on January 13, 1913. In 2005, it published 220 new titles. . Nielsen, Kai. 2001. Naturalism and Religion. Amherst, New York Amherst is a town in Erie County, New York, U.S., directly northeast of the City of Buffalo. As of the 2000 census, the town had a total population of 116,510. This represents an increase from the 1990 census figure of 111,711. :Prometheus Books. Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1968. The Will to Power. Trans. WalterKaufmann. New York: Vintage Books. ______. 1989a. On the Genealogy of Morals. Trans. Walter Kaufmannand R.J. Hollingdale. New York: Random House. ______. 1989b. Twilight of the Idols Trans. R.J. Hollingdale. NewYork: Random House. Peters, John G. 2001. Conrad and Impressionism. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. Purdy, Dwight H. 1984. Joseph Conrad's Bible. Norman:University of Oklahoma Press The University of Oklahoma Press is the publishing arm of the University of Oklahoma. It has been in operation for over seventy-five years, and was the first university press established in the American Southwest. . Roberts, Andrew Michael. 2000. Conrad and Masculinity. New York:St. Martin's Press. Said, Edward W Said, Edward W(adie)(born Nov. 1, 1935, Jerusalem—died Sept. 25, 2003, New York, N.Y., U.S.) Palestinian-born U.S. literary critic. Said was educated in Western schools in Jerusalem and Cairo before moving to the United States to attend Princeton and Harvard . 1993. "Two Visions in Heart of Darkness."In Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage Books. Schwartz, Regina M. 1997. The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy ofMonotheism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press The University of Chicago Press is the largest university press in the United States. It is operated by the University of Chicago and publishes a wide variety of academic titles, including The Chicago Manual of Style, dozens of academic journals, including . Smith, Johanna M. 1996. "'Too Beautiful Altogether':Ideologies of Gender and Empire in Heart of Darkness." In Heart ofDarkness, ed. Ross C. Murfin. Boston and New York: Bedford/St.Martin's. Thrower, James. 2000. Western Atheism: A Short History. Amherst:Prometheus Books. Torgovnick, Marianna. 1990. Gone Primitive: Savage Intellects,Modern Lives. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Watt, Ian. 1980. Conrad in the Nineteenth Century. Berkeley:University of California Press "UC Press" redirects here, but this is also an abbreviation for University of Chicago PressUniversity of California Press, also known as UC Press, is a publishing house associated with the University of California that engages in academic publishing. . Watts, C.T. 1969. "Introduction." In Joseph Conrad'sLetters to R.B. Cunninghame Graham, ed. C.T. Watts. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. Wilson, A.N. 1999. God's Funeral. New York and London: W.W.Norton & Company. Wollaeger, Mark. 1990. Joseph Conrad and the Fictions ofSkepticism. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Michael Lackey is assistant professor of English at SUNY-Brockportand a visiting assistant professor at Wellesley College. He haspublished articles on Virginia Woolf, Friedrich Nietzsche, Nella Larsen,Mark Twain, Paul Celan, Frantz Fanon, T.S. Eliot, and Gerald ManleyHopkins.