European Imperalistic Discourses in Heart of Darkness

It is difficult to read Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness simply as a late-Victorian novel. While it does embody many elements typical to the genre during this time--namely intrigue, anti-heroes, and a gritty, realistic sensibility captured in an exotic location--the novel serves as a sociopolitical commentary on major issues of the day. Contemporary readers use the novel to highlight and discuss racism, sexism, moral confusion, and the hypocrisy of Imperialism, all shrouded in a particular sense of ambiguity and confusion that seems to solidify their arguments. However, a specifically New Historical reading of the novel resolves much of that ambiguity and opens the door for readers to understand significant and clearly enduring social concerns from a Victorian point-of-view. Perhaps more importantly, Heart of Darkness becomes Conrad's mouthpiece to enlighten readers and express his opinions regarding the effectiveness and humanity of Imperialism.

Using Marlow as his agent, Conrad brings into question the concept of justifying Imperialism on the grounds of efficiency and a noble idea. Almost immediately he writes,

The conquest of the earth, which mostly means the taking it away from those who have a different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into it too much. What redeems it is the idea only. An idea at the back of it; not a sentimental pretence but an idea; and an unselfish belief in that idea--something you can set up, and bow down to before and offer a sacrifice to... (7).

He explains that this idea is what the Roman Empire lacked-- that they were not colonizers so much as mere conquerors who "grabbed what they could get for the sake of what was to be got." The idea implies a certain sense of allegiance to and investment in the colony-- the idea is a redeeming quality of Imperialism.

Unquestionably, Imperialism has been increasingly viewed, in the one hundred years since the publication of Heart of Darkness, as unethical and an abuse of power, though at the time, most Europeans claimed support for reasons such as the added national income. what Kipling called "the White Man's Burden;" and frankly, powers and esteem above other European countries. The turn of the nineteenth century, though, was certainly a time of change with regards to these opinions-- particularly in Africa, as Europe laid claim all over the continent. In the introduction to Heart of Darkness for his publisher, Conrad wrote, "The criminality of inefficiency and pure selfishness when tackling the civilizing work in Africa is a justifiable idea. The subject is our time distinctly" (Blackburn 37). This intent establishes the novel as specifically Victorian and early Modern, not the Contemporary mouthpiece many have force it to become.

Many contributions to late Victorian society promote the idea of efficiency in Imperialism. According to Michael Ignatieff in his piece The Seductiveness of Moral Disgust, the moral assumption that something must be done was "borrowed from the imperial past but also from unexamined hubris about the West's current technological and logistical might" (554). That is, the West was so technologically advanced, properly educated and civilized, that they held a moral responsibility to improve the civility of people the world over. The social Darwinist theory "survival of the fittest" justifies Imperialism, arguing that civility would encourage an improvement in struggles between peoples "pitted against each other in the complex rivalry of life" (Hawkins 288). This is a quality in Kurtz that Marlow seems to be attracted to in the novel, at least at first. Kurtz seems to be the kind of man who "had come out equipped with moral ideas of some sort..." (Conrad 31), and begins as an idealist who asserts "we can exert a power for good practically unbounded" (51).

Kurtz and Marlow effectively present values that would have been identified by pro-Imperialists of the time. Conrad cleverly turns their morality on their heels in order to condemn the Imperialism of the Congo, a very unique colony in Africa. Whereas other colonies throughout the world were supported by the full resources of their European states, the Congo had been acquired by King Leopold II of Belgium as his own, personal country rather than a benefit of Belgian Parliament. Leopold used forced labor of the Congolese people to collect ivory and rubber, for example, but was not particularly interested in developing an economic market or even aiding the country to become self-sufficient. The images of waste and "objectiveless blasting" in Heart of Darkness point to suggestive illustrations that "reveal an inefficiency that was peculiar to King Leopold's Congo" (Hawkins 290). An example of this inefficiency is the inadequacy of the currency system-- or the lack of a consistent one at all. Marlow describes how the crew on his steamer was paid "every week three pieces of brass wire...and the theory was they were to buy their provisions with that currency in river-side villages. You can see how that worked" (Conrad 41). This subtle but important observation is significant because Leopold never established a unified currency system, allowing the Congo to fed for itself in payment and conversion of ridiculous symbols of currency.

Conrad also manages to expose Leopold's insufficient ability to merely uphold the civilizing "idea" itself in the mistreatment of the Congo natives. When Marlow arrives in Matadi, he observes a chain gang of men, called "criminals," carrying loads of soil. He is disgusted by the sight, and when he crosses by a pointless hole dug into the slope he remarks, "It might have been connected with the philanthropic desire of giving the ciminals something to do" (Conrad 17). Leopold had, in the Berlin Act, vowed to improve the well-being of the Congolese, and when he was found in violation of that pledge due to forced labor in such extremes, he insisted such standards encouraged a sense of industry that would improve their civility. In spite of this argument, between 1895 and 1908, the Congo population fell by three million inhabitants. Conrad obviously did not view the industry of forced labor as an implement of philanthropy.

Marlow expresses a generally sympathetic attitude toward the Africans he meets. He may not view them as noble, but recognizes their humanity and acknowledges that their "pure, uncomplicated savagery was a positive relief, being something that had a right to exist--obviously--in the sunshine" (Conrad 59(. He respects the cannibals who work on his steamer, who do not generally give him a reason to mistrust them, especially when they retain composure during the attack on the steamer.

Though British Imperialists canot be credited with completely selfless intentions in their colonization and civilization of the world, as Hawkins says, "Conrad could appeal to his British readers to condemn Leopold without impugning themselves, since such abuses as forced labor and the absence of currency were not characteristic of British colonies" (292). But Conrad's sanction of British colonization is not unconditional. As a native of Poland, Conrad himself was a subject of Imperialism; at this time Poland was partitioned by Germany, Russia, and Austria. Later in life he became active in support of Polish independence, but always demonstrated a strong sense of nationalism and resentment for occupying powers. As a member of a conquered nation himself, it is not surprising he commiserates the Congolese people in Heart of Darkness, going so far as to give his villain a German name-- Kurtz.

Conrad uses Kurtz, in fact, as a close indictment of British Imperialism. Conrad reveals that Kurtz's mother was half-English and he was educated partly in English. Though he practices Leopold's method of exploitive Imperialism, Kurtz's small allegiance to England indicates at least partial responsibility on Britain's part to the inappropriate system of colonizing the Congo. "All Europe contributed to the making of Kurtz" (Conrad 50), just as all Europe, with no exception to England, authorized the creation of Leopold's Congo.

After the first installment of Heart of Darkness was published in Blackwood's Magazine, Joseph Conrad wrote to his friend R. B. Cunninghame Graham, "I think that if you look a little into the episodes you will find in them the right intention though I fear nothing that is practically effective." He seemed to hold little faith in political reform. Ten years later, however, the head of the Congo Reform Association, E. D. Morel, wrote to A. Conan Doyle that Heart of Darkness was the "most powerful thing ever written on the subject" (Hawkins 293). Scholars, particularly students, are prone to projecting the supposed opinions and views of the author on characters they are studying, and in many eases this is presumptuous. In this case, however, it is not only clear in examining the novel that Conrad's opinion is expressly conveyed through his narrator, historical documents site Conrad's specific intention in writing it. It is only through historical consideration that we are able to effectively interpret Conrad's judgement of Imperialism in the Congo and truly understand the negative implications of Imperalism in general during the late nineteenth century.



Conrad, Joseph. Heart of Darkness. 4th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2006. 1-77.

Fieldhouse, D. K. "Imperialism: An Historigraphical Revision." The Economic History Review 14 (1969): 187-209. JSTOR. 2 Feb. 2008.

Hawkins, Hunt. "Conrad's Critique of Imperialism in Heart of Darkness." PMLA 94 (1974): 286-299. JSTOR. 2 Feb. 2008.

Ignatieff, Michael. "The Seductiveness of Moral Disgust." Social Research 71 (2004): 549-568. 2 Feb. 2008.

Stokes, Eric. "Late Nineteenth-Century Colonial Expansion and the Attack of the Theory of Economic Imperialism: a Case of Mistake Identity?" The Historical Journal 12 (1969): 285-301. JSTOR. 2 Feb. 2008.