Nigerian Writer Chinua Achebe Argued That Heart Of Darkness

Nigerian Writer Chinua Achebe Argued Thatheart Of Darknessis An Offen

Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe argued that Heart of Darkness is an "offensive and deplorable book" that "set(s) Africa up as a foil to Europe, as a place of negations at once remote and vaguely familiar, in comparison with which Europe's own state of spiritual grace will be manifest." Achebe says that Conrad does not provide enough of an outside frame of reference to enable the book to be read as ironic or critical of imperialism. Based on the evidence in the text, argue for or against Achebe's assertion.

Paper For Above instruction

The debate surrounding Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and its portrayal of Africa and imperialism has sparked significant scholarly discussion, with Chinua Achebe famously criticizing the novel for its racist overtones and ideological stance. In evaluating Achebe’s assertion that Conrad fails to provide an adequate outside frame of reference to read the story as ironic or critical of imperialism, it is essential to analyze the text itself and consider the broader context of colonial literature.

Achebe’s critique hinges on the notion that Conrad’s narrative perpetuates a biased and dehumanizing view of Africa and its people. According to Achebe, the novel deploys Africa as a "place of negations," a trope where Africa exists primarily as a contrast to Europe, devoid of complexity or agency, thus reinforcing stereotypes. In the novel, Africa often functions as a backdrop against which European civilization's morals and values are contrasted, but it lacks its intrinsic voice or perspective, making it difficult to interpret the narrative as an ironic critique. Instead, Conrad seems complicit in the racist vision, portraying Africans as primitive or subhuman and Africa as a wilderness that embodies moral darkness, which resonates with imperialist ideology.

However, the question remains whether Conrad's narrative can be read as exposing the hypocrisy or brutality of imperialism despite these problematic portrayals. Some scholars argue that Conrad’s descriptions of the darkness and chaos of the Congo suggest an underlying critique of imperialism’s destructive effects. For example, Marlow’s journey into the Congo exposes the moral corruption and cruelty inflicted upon native populations; these descriptions could be interpreted as ironic or critical. Furthermore, Conrad’s ambiguous narrative voice, with Marlow sometimes questioning the morality of imperialism, introduces a layer of complexity that invites critique rather than acceptance.

Nevertheless, the argument that Conrad does not provide enough of an outside frame of reference remains compelling. Unlike later anti-imperialist literature that explicitly underscores colonial brutality and advocates for native agency, Heart of Darkness offers a mostly European perspective, with limited insight into African voices or viewpoints. This narrative choice can be read as a reflection of the imperialist worldview of the time, which often failed to recognize or validate indigenous perspectives. As a result, the novel’s framing makes it challenging to interpret as a clear critique, because it inadvertently consolidates the colonial narrative rather than undermining it.

Moreover, some critics argue that Conrad’s portrayal participates in the same ideological framework it seeks to critique, by emphasizing the darkness and chaos associated with the continent, thus reinforcing stereotypes rather than dismantling them. This perspective aligns with Achebe’s view that the novel sets Africa as a foil to Europe without providing an adequate outside perspective that might challenge or complicate this dichotomy.

In conclusion, based on the evidence in the text, it can be argued that Heart of Darkness lacks a sufficiently explicit outside frame of reference to enable a reading as an ironic or critical commentary on imperialism. The novel’s focus remains predominantly within the European-centered narrative, with limited African agency or voice, reinforcing stereotypes rather than critiquing them. While there are moments of ambiguity that suggest potential critique, the overall framing aligns more closely with Achebe’s assertion that the novel perpetuates a dehumanizing view of Africa and imperialism, thus rendering it offensive and deplorable in its ideological implications.

References

• Achebe, Chinua. (1975). An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad's Heart of Darkness. Transition, 29, 27-42.
• Conrad, Joseph. (1899). Heart of Darkness. Blackwood's Magazine.
• Chinua Achebe. (1983). Hopes and Impediments: Selected Essays. Heinemann.
• Gikandi, Simon. (2007). Negotiating the Postcolonial: The Case of Chinua Achebe. Routledge.
• McClintock, Anne. (1995). Imperial Leather: Race, Gender, and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest. Routledge.
• Radhakrishnan, R. (1996). The Postcolonial Aura: Third World Criticism in the Age of Global Capital. Indiana University Press.
• Robinson, Cedric J. (1983). Black Marxism: The Making of the Black Radical Tradition. University of North Carolina Press.
• Stam, Robert. (1997). Literature and Postcolonialism. Blackwell Publishing.
• Young, Robert J. C. (2001). Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction. Blackwell Publishing.
• Williams, Raymond. (1977). Marxism and Literature. Oxford University Press.