Blog #2

Reviewing the Heart of Darkness

Both Chinua Achebe’s “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness” and J. Hillis Miller’s “Should We Read ‘Heart of Darkness’?” identify Joseph Conrad’s writing characteristics in Heart of Darkness. Each article contrasts immensely from the other as each author had his own views on Conrad and his writing style. Miller considers Conrad a great writer of his time period while Achebe regards Conrad as a racist who should not be read by students across the world.
Achebe writes a criticism to the Conrad’s novella that is driven and well thought out. Achebe states that Conrad’s book displays “the desire … in Western psychology to set up Africa up as a foil to Europe” (Achebe 337). The author believes that Conrad wrote to promote Europe as this great society compared to the poor and desolate African jungle. Achebe feels that Conrad knows nothing about Africa and should have never written a story about something that he could not relate to. This leads to Achebe main point in his article where he states, “Joseph Conrad” was a thoroughgoing racist” (Achebe 343). From this point of in the criticism, Achebe stops attacking the story Conrad wrote and starts attacking Conrad. This technique of ad homien makes Achebe look as though he is insulted by Conrad’s work of literary merit. Sadly, Achebe shows great weakness by attacking Conrad personally. It is unprofessional to consider someone a racist when Achebe never lived during the same time as Conrad. Achebe forgets that Heart of Darkness is a work of fiction. Achebe believes in “a close [similarity]” between Marlow and Conrad even though Marlow is a creation that Achebe did not create (Achebe 342). Achebe should not have the audacity to consider Conrad a racist because of a fictional tale Conrad wrote.
On the other hand, Miller presents great accolades to Conrad for his piece of literature. Miller criticizes Achebe stating that “it is impossible to decide authoritatively whether or not we should read ‘Heart of Darkness’” (Miller 463). Miller believes that it is up to the reader to decide if they want to read Conrad’s novella, not some English professor that lived fifty years after Conrad died. Through the article, Miller states everything Achebe says and then provides examples as to why Achebe’s wrong. Miller main point comes at the end of his article where he states, “Heart of Darkness should be read” and “ought to be read” (Miller 474). The author feels that Conrad’s story is too mesmerizing to be ignored. Miller’s great strength is that correctly understands the mystery behind Conrad. When speaking about the book Miller states that “the clear answer is that it is not” (Miller 472). Miller wants to answer the questions that Conrad placed in his novella and Miller provides the readers some questions to ask as he refers to the confusion behind the African jungle. Miller provides a great article that neither insults nor degrades Joseph Conrad.
Both authors have opposing viewpoints for which they are completely entitled too. Miller takes the professional path as he commends Conrad for writing his fictional tale. Achebe attacks Conrad’s morals because of the fictional story. Achebe attacks Conrad without knowing him personally, similarly too the how the Europeans attacked the natives that Conrad’s Heart of Darkness was written about.

Works Cited
Achebe, Chinua. “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness.” Armstrong 336-349.
Armstrong, Paul B., ed. Heart of Darkness. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006.
Miller, J. Hillis. “Should We Read ‘Heart of Darkness’?.” Armstrong 463-474.