Achebe essay

Sorry Achebe, Heart of Darkness is a Great Work of Art
In Chinua Achebe’s analysis “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness”, he makes many assertions towards the author of the Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad. Achebe is out to damage Conrad as he uses Conrad’s own writing to prove his point. Achebe creates strong analysis when he states that Africa was “the other world” in Conrad’s story (Achebe 338). Unfortunately, Achebe is flawed when he starts making conclusions about Conrad as many quotations are taken out of proportion or when he suddenly reverses his own opinion in attempt to prove his point even more. Achebe lost his focus of critiquing the story and started to focus on critiquing the author. The technique of ad hominem may provide for a persuasive argument, but it may not be the most ethical approach. Even though Achebe is correct about the prejudice against Africans in Conrad’s novella, he accuses Conrad of being bigoted, he anachronistically applies contemporary standards to a late 19th century work of fiction, and he neglects the novels literary qualities.
Achebe is completely correct in saying that the story of Heart of Darkness created a difference between two areas of the world through racism. In the story Africa was set “up as a foil to Europe” where Europe attempted to manifest its spiritual grace (Achebe 337). Through the eyes of a European, Africa was a prehistoric continent with nothing in common with the European civilization. Europeans considered themselves superior to all others and thought if these other people acted like Europeans they too could be civilized. Achebe is appalled by this conceited behavior of Europeans during the time period shown throughout Conrad’s story. Achebe also points out that almost every African in the story is “ugly” (Achebe 339). Conrad definitely uses much more description with the Africans in the story compared to the Europeans. This is also because Europeans are considered “normal” while the Africans have strange features to the eyes of a European that distinguish them. Thus, Achebe proves his point again about how the story is contrasting the two ethnic groups making the European seem superior in all aspects of physical appearance. Finally, Achebe points out that during Conrad’s story the Africans “in place of speech” spoke “a violent babble of uncouth sounds” and were usually “too busy with their frenzy” (Achebe 341). Conrad certainly wanted to express the difference in the two groups of people by allowing one to speak normally and only allow the other to use gibberish. The way Marlow points out the difference in language makes him seem like he is prejudiced against the African way of communication. Still, Marlow was no expert on Africa language and can only retell what he thought he heard from the natives. Achebe correctly points out that Conrad’s characters apply racism in their descriptions of the natives, but Achebe cannot understand that there is a difference between a character and an author.
Achebe considers Conrad and Marlow to be the same person even though that is not the case. Throughout his criticism, Achebe states that Conrad is referring to Africans in a negative way even though the story is through the eyes of Marlow (Achebe 338-343). Just because Marlow is making racist comments, Achebe goes straight to the conclusion that Conrad must believe in the same ideas. Conrad’s novella is layered purposely to avoid what Achebe believes. In the book an unknown narrator speaks of the history that Marlow experienced through his time in Africa. By using this technique, Conrad exemplifies the barrier between his characters’ ideals and his own ideals. Achebe does not understand this concept when he states, “Joseph Conrad was a thoroughgoing racist” and from this point on Achebe starts attacking Conrad personally (Achebe 343). Achebe uses the simple assertion that since Marlow is a racist and Conrad and Marlow are the same person, then Conrad must be a racist too. Sadly, simple assertions usually do not work out so well. Achebe provides little proof other than a “close [similarity] between their two careers” as to why he feels Conrad and Marlow are the same person (Achebe 342). Through Achebe’s own statements he is literally condemning the entire European continent as racist. Conrad, who was writing to a European community, wanted to show a defined difference in the two types of people. However, Achebe still feels the need to condemn Conrad’s book for not involving an African perspective. Conrad did not write Heart of Darkness with an African perspective because Conrad is a European.
Achebe attacks Conrad even when Conrad speaks of beauty within the natives. Even though the mysterious African woman is defined as “superb” and “magnificent” as she looks upon of the Europeans “without a stir and like the wilderness”, Achebe still considers her “a savage counterpart to the refined, European woman” that appears later in the story (Achebe 341). Conrad is elucidating to his audience the elegance that is hidden away in the heart of Africa. The mysterious woman is meant to be a part of the jungle as she is compared to the wilderness that surrounds her. Achebe wants everything Conrad says in his novella to be prejudiced even though that is not the case. Also, when the Africans do speak within the book Achebe says that “they constitute some of his [Conrad] best assaults” because it weighted the “necessity for consistency in the portrayal of the dumb brutes against the sensational advantages of securing their conviction” due to the words spoken out of their mouths (Achebe 341). Yet, Achebe does not specify what the natives should sound like. Does Achebe want the natives to sound like Europeans? Europeans and Africans sound nothing alike, so Achebe is more or less just complaining about the fact that Conrad differentiates between the two races. Conrad’s novella would have been worse off if the vernacular of the two races were the same. Achebe is scornful of Conrad and his piece of literary merit because Achebe thinks this book pertains to life in the late 20th century even though the book was written almost a hundred years earlier.
Achebe provides contrasting conclusions to his claim of Conrad’s racism that cannot apply to a story written a hundred years earlier. Achebe is irritated that no other scholars thought of the “ultimate question of equality between white people and black people” during a time where imperialism existed (Achebe 342-343). Imperialism is the policy of extending the rule or influence of a country over other countries, so basically there was no thought of equality. Europeans thought they were better than Africans and that alone does not make a person a racist. During this time period equality was not stressed because it was a time of exploration where the country with the most control was considered the greatest. Also, Achebe even points out that this story was written in the late 1800’s when his “own father was still a babe in arms” (Achebe 346). Conrad, who sailed down to the Congo before writing his book, has a more vivid description of imperialism in this time period than Achebe. Conrad has firsthand knowledge of the situation during the imperialistic times while Achebe only has secondhand knowledge told through stories and read from books. Achebe attempts to disprove these challenges but fails in doing so.
Achebe who never lived in this time period states that even though he never lived in the 1800’s he will not “accept any traveler’s tales solely on the grounds that I have not made the journey myself” (Achebe 346). Up until this point in Achebe’s article, he has listened to the traveler’s tales spoken by Marlow and has taken great offense to them. Yet, when his own opinion is challenged, Achebe completely reverses his stance stating that a traveler’s tales may not be true. Hence, the reason Joseph Conrad wrote Heart of Darkness as a work of fiction. Conrad layered his story with multiple narrators to also express the uncertainty in all matters. Achebe acts like many of Conrad’s characters who constantly contradict themselves in order to move up in the world. Achebe will never understand why Conrad wrote his story the way it was written because they lived in different time periods. That, along with Achebe’s wavering opinions, harms his overall argument.
Achebe expresses no open-mindedness towards the excellent story written by Conrad. Achebe criticizes Conrad’s oxymoronic phrases as a “mere stylistic flaw” and says that they only “[induce] hypnotic stupor in his readers” (Achebe 338). What Achebe considers a flaw, many other people consider a perfect writing technique. Conrad wants the reader to be constantly asking questions when he adds uncertainty throughout his novella. Achebe is too busy obsessing over the racism displayed by the characters to even notice the importance of the uncertainty. Also, Achebe considers Conrad’s multiple narrators as a ploy to “draw a cordon sanitaire” between himself and his character and also says that it was a “[total] waste because he neglects to hint…at an alternative frame of reference” (Achebe 342). Yet, again Conrad is illustrating that sense of uncertainty the story involves. Conrad wants readers to ask questions such as if the story Marlow retold was actually true. Conrad’s main purpose was for the reader to ask questions that only the reader could answer for his or her self. However, Achebe shows no tolerance to this type of story-telling, writing it off as inept. Finally, Achebe articulates that Conrad’s novella cannot be called a great work of art because of “his obvious racism” as it “depersonalizes a portion of the human race” (Achebe 344). Achebe is essentially stating that all books that explore the idea of racism towards a group of people with some historical prevalence should be censored. Should all books that speak of the racism during the American civil rights movement be censored too? Achebe cannot seem to tolerate the book that references the racism in Africa because Achebe feels like the man who wrote the story was a racist. If Achebe reads Conrad’s story with an open mind he may uncover the absolutely remarkable literary qualities the novel possesses.
Chinua Achebe is by no means a fan of Joseph Conrad or his work. Achebe continually attacks Conrad’s literary techniques and Conrad himself, even though Achebe contradicts himself in the process. Conrad wanted only to display a significant difference between two races that are significantly different. Conrad’s novella displayed multiple accounts of racism, yet Achebe attacks Conrad’s morals and beliefs. Conversely, Achebe should check his own morals as he acts similar to the manager in Conrad’s story as he contradicts himself in order to provide an argument to prove Conrad was a racist. Achebe acts like a savage when he attacks Conrad. Achebe feels entitled to his opinion because he knows a “traveler” such as Conrad cannot be telling the truth. Conrad’s novella was a masterpiece and sadly Conrad will never be able to defend himself, leaving the rest of the world in doubt to what the actual truth is.



 
Work 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.