"It takes a man and all his inborn strength to fight hunger properly. [...] and these chaps, too, had no earthly reason for any kind of scruple" (HOD 116).
In this quotation Marlow is marveling at the fact that the starving natives haven't turned to eat him or his crew. He realizes they are starving by their quickness to respond how they will "dispose" of the enemies attempting to attack the ship, and the fact that the crew members have long since thrown overboard their only other source of food.
This quote is interesting because Marlow is simultaneously admitting to positive attributes of the natives, while maintaining the racist overview that they have no morals. He talks about how they must have huge amounts of strength to fight off their hunger and not eat the crew members, and is even more astonished because, as he says, they have no reason to possess morals against eating the other members of the party.
This is a good example of how Marlow's internal musings could have been taken as evidence that he is a progressive thinker, and therefore less racist. However, in our time, we still see the racist setting of his mind around his musings, and define him as conservative. It is in Marlow's existential digressive thoughts that all evidence of his supposed "ahead of his time" conclusions arise. However, soon after making one of these conclusions, Marlow soon says something that defines him as a legitimate product of his time.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Friday, October 28, 2011
Heart of darknness post 3
"And outside, the silent wilderness surrounding this cleared speck on the earth [waited] patiently for the passing away of its fantastic invasion" (HOD 91)
This quote is referring specifically to one of the stations, but serves to create a larger image for the whole idea of imperialism. The "invaders" are forming this small, tiny spot cleared of any native land or culture, but the impenetrable forests still surround it. Even though there are imperialistic camps and missions in the country, they are a minority to the country itself.
"going back up the river was like traveling back to the earliest beginnings of the world [...] when big trees were king" (HOD 105).
This quote refers to the surrounding forest written about in the last section. The book portrays this wilderness as "thick, sluggish, and deserted" "there was no joy in the brilliance of the sunshine" (HOD 105). This description advances the idea that imperialism is "necessary" to make the country better. By portraying even the wilderness in a negative light, the author defends imperialism.
This quote is referring specifically to one of the stations, but serves to create a larger image for the whole idea of imperialism. The "invaders" are forming this small, tiny spot cleared of any native land or culture, but the impenetrable forests still surround it. Even though there are imperialistic camps and missions in the country, they are a minority to the country itself.
"going back up the river was like traveling back to the earliest beginnings of the world [...] when big trees were king" (HOD 105).
This quote refers to the surrounding forest written about in the last section. The book portrays this wilderness as "thick, sluggish, and deserted" "there was no joy in the brilliance of the sunshine" (HOD 105). This description advances the idea that imperialism is "necessary" to make the country better. By portraying even the wilderness in a negative light, the author defends imperialism.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Heart of Darkness Post #2
"We live, as we dream, alone" (Conrad 97)
In this book, Marlow is continually depicted as one white man among many natives. Because of his deep seeded racism, this creates the feeling that Marlow views himself as alone. He also travels alone, ready to leave at a moment's notice.
On another note, the changing of the narrators makes the story rather confusing. The fact that the narrative switches back and forth from Marlow's mind to the mind of the omnipotent narrator makes the action of the story very difficult to separate from the narrative. However, the switching viewpoints allow us to see inside the mind of Marlow, and understand him as a flawed character without his biases through the omnipotent narrator.
In this book, Marlow is continually depicted as one white man among many natives. Because of his deep seeded racism, this creates the feeling that Marlow views himself as alone. He also travels alone, ready to leave at a moment's notice.
On another note, the changing of the narrators makes the story rather confusing. The fact that the narrative switches back and forth from Marlow's mind to the mind of the omnipotent narrator makes the action of the story very difficult to separate from the narrative. However, the switching viewpoints allow us to see inside the mind of Marlow, and understand him as a flawed character without his biases through the omnipotent narrator.
Monday, October 24, 2011
Heart of Darkness Post #1
"But Marlow was not typical [...] and to him the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the tale which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze, in the likeness of one of these misty halos that sometimes are made visible by the spectral illumination of moonshine" (Conrad 68).
I take this to mean that the process, or journey that Marlow takes in getting to the point or lesson of his story is more important to him than the lesson itself. This relates to the theory of teaching that involves coming to a conclusion with your student, rather than throwing information at him. Marlow takes his listeners on a journey that created a proverbial glow around the point of the story itself.
The book also implies that sailors are implicitly simple. Their stories have basic points, and the sailors stick to themselves, their crafts, and the sea. Marlow, however, is depicted as a teacher. He is the last one to still "follow the sea", and although this would seem to allude to Marlow being a genuine sailor (i.e. not a teacher), I believe that it has some sort of wisdom related significance. The book portrays Malow as a genius rambler. His fellow sailors are used to his ramblings, and tune out most of his stories and lessons, including the one he spins in the first chapter about the Romans coming to England and feeling terrified in the new area. He traces this story along to his experience when he traveled up the Congo river as a younger sailor.
As a reader, I'm guessing that Marlow's stories are what weaves this book together, and that the knowledge in it is to be grasped by the storytelling mechanism itself; not the end of the book.
I take this to mean that the process, or journey that Marlow takes in getting to the point or lesson of his story is more important to him than the lesson itself. This relates to the theory of teaching that involves coming to a conclusion with your student, rather than throwing information at him. Marlow takes his listeners on a journey that created a proverbial glow around the point of the story itself.
The book also implies that sailors are implicitly simple. Their stories have basic points, and the sailors stick to themselves, their crafts, and the sea. Marlow, however, is depicted as a teacher. He is the last one to still "follow the sea", and although this would seem to allude to Marlow being a genuine sailor (i.e. not a teacher), I believe that it has some sort of wisdom related significance. The book portrays Malow as a genius rambler. His fellow sailors are used to his ramblings, and tune out most of his stories and lessons, including the one he spins in the first chapter about the Romans coming to England and feeling terrified in the new area. He traces this story along to his experience when he traveled up the Congo river as a younger sailor.
As a reader, I'm guessing that Marlow's stories are what weaves this book together, and that the knowledge in it is to be grasped by the storytelling mechanism itself; not the end of the book.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
1984 blog post #7
"'They can't get inside you,' she had said. But they could get inside you. 'What happens to you here is for ever,' O'Brien had said. That was a true word. There were things, your own acts, from which you could never recover. Something was killed in your breast: burnt out, cauterized out" (Orwell ch6).
The fact that Winston now acknowledges that Julia was wrong shows his change in attitude towards her. Before he was taken into the Ministry of love, he never would have discredited anything she said. He had a faith in her that took the ministry's worst punishment to break. That he is resigned to the fact that Julia is wrong and that the ministry can infiltrate the mind shows that he has indeed betrayed her.
Until he was threatened by the rats, Winston's one goal was to keep his heart's allegiance to Julia. He reconciled himself to giving up his mind and body, but he hoped that, secretly, his heart could remain his own. He knew in the back of his mind that O'Brien would eventually find out, and this is confirmed when O'Brien says that Winston's final task is to love Big Brother. This is the ultimate berayal and submission to the party, as Winston is surrendering the final piece of his humanity that is his own. After he surrenders this, he gains a new humanity, approved by the party.
O'Brien says that what happens to you in the ministry of love stays with you forever. It makes sense that Winston would never have the slightest hint of a negative thought towards the party ever again. However, one line in the passage suggest that something may remain in him. In response to hearing about the invasion of Africa, Winston thinks, "An extraordinary medley of feeling -- but it was not a medley, exactly; rather it was successive layers of feeling, in which one could not say which layer was undermost -- struggled inside him" (Orwell, ch6). Although Winston doesn't remember WHAT is struggling inside him, he can still feel that it is there. This shows that, perhaps, Winston did not lose absolutely every trace of his past self.
The fact that Winston now acknowledges that Julia was wrong shows his change in attitude towards her. Before he was taken into the Ministry of love, he never would have discredited anything she said. He had a faith in her that took the ministry's worst punishment to break. That he is resigned to the fact that Julia is wrong and that the ministry can infiltrate the mind shows that he has indeed betrayed her.
Until he was threatened by the rats, Winston's one goal was to keep his heart's allegiance to Julia. He reconciled himself to giving up his mind and body, but he hoped that, secretly, his heart could remain his own. He knew in the back of his mind that O'Brien would eventually find out, and this is confirmed when O'Brien says that Winston's final task is to love Big Brother. This is the ultimate berayal and submission to the party, as Winston is surrendering the final piece of his humanity that is his own. After he surrenders this, he gains a new humanity, approved by the party.
O'Brien says that what happens to you in the ministry of love stays with you forever. It makes sense that Winston would never have the slightest hint of a negative thought towards the party ever again. However, one line in the passage suggest that something may remain in him. In response to hearing about the invasion of Africa, Winston thinks, "An extraordinary medley of feeling -- but it was not a medley, exactly; rather it was successive layers of feeling, in which one could not say which layer was undermost -- struggled inside him" (Orwell, ch6). Although Winston doesn't remember WHAT is struggling inside him, he can still feel that it is there. This shows that, perhaps, Winston did not lose absolutely every trace of his past self.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
1984 blog post #6
"the old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love and justice. Ours is founded upon hatred" (Orwell 267).
This one statement could easily sum up every party platform we've read about thus far. The party is most certainly not founded on love or justice, indeed they make it their business to destroy it. The party is founded upon hatred for everything that is not the party. The party hates everything that potentially takes away its power.
The two minutes hate is another example of how the party is based around hate. This event is supposed to draw the people together, because they all hate the opposing countries. Thus the very nationalism that holds Oceania together is hatred.
This hate is ideally supposed to translate into every party member's subconscious. They are taught to hate their very human natures, the natures that lead them to question where the party's power stems from. They are taught to hate their own free thoughts, their own free will, and their own humanity.
The only thing they are taught to love is Big Brother. In the book this is exemplified when O'Brien tells Winston that his final step is to love Big Brother. At the end of this section, Winston says that he still hates Big Brother, and this is the tiny scrap of humanity that he has left, aside from never betraying Julia.
This one statement could easily sum up every party platform we've read about thus far. The party is most certainly not founded on love or justice, indeed they make it their business to destroy it. The party is founded upon hatred for everything that is not the party. The party hates everything that potentially takes away its power.
The two minutes hate is another example of how the party is based around hate. This event is supposed to draw the people together, because they all hate the opposing countries. Thus the very nationalism that holds Oceania together is hatred.
This hate is ideally supposed to translate into every party member's subconscious. They are taught to hate their very human natures, the natures that lead them to question where the party's power stems from. They are taught to hate their own free thoughts, their own free will, and their own humanity.
The only thing they are taught to love is Big Brother. In the book this is exemplified when O'Brien tells Winston that his final step is to love Big Brother. At the end of this section, Winston says that he still hates Big Brother, and this is the tiny scrap of humanity that he has left, aside from never betraying Julia.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
1984 blog #5
"It was my little daughter. She listened at the keyhole. Heard what I was saying, and nipped off to the patrols the very next day" (Orwell 233).
Parsons is still proud of his children, even though one of them has most likely condemned him to death. The fact that children would willingly give over their parents to death is gruesome, but even more so is the fact that the parents are genuinely proud of them for doing so. In this twisted and dark society, the family bond is absolutely shattered. Parents SHOULD be afraid of their children if they raised them according to party standards. This does lead one to question, however, whether or not a parent would turn their child in. It's so hopelessly sad that the children are so brainwashed that they would gleefully destroy their families. The concept of love does not really exist in this world, and this includes the love of child to parent.
Parsons allowed his children to become this way because he was also brainwashed by the party. He is the "ideal" party member in all he does. However, how can he be the ideal member if he ends up being committed to death? This provides yet another paradox of the story; That someone can do absolutely everything right, and still be hammered into a wall by the party.
Parsons is still proud of his children, even though one of them has most likely condemned him to death. The fact that children would willingly give over their parents to death is gruesome, but even more so is the fact that the parents are genuinely proud of them for doing so. In this twisted and dark society, the family bond is absolutely shattered. Parents SHOULD be afraid of their children if they raised them according to party standards. This does lead one to question, however, whether or not a parent would turn their child in. It's so hopelessly sad that the children are so brainwashed that they would gleefully destroy their families. The concept of love does not really exist in this world, and this includes the love of child to parent.
Parsons allowed his children to become this way because he was also brainwashed by the party. He is the "ideal" party member in all he does. However, how can he be the ideal member if he ends up being committed to death? This provides yet another paradox of the story; That someone can do absolutely everything right, and still be hammered into a wall by the party.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)