When trying to interpret a dense book by myself, I find that I often miss the most important points and connections. Listening to people mull over the text in class is tedious, but pays off in the end when new interpretations are shared.
Something that I completely missed while reading the book was the connection between Kurtz's Intended and his last words. The idea that 'the horror!' was a reference to the fiancee shows a very interesting level of the book; I'm glad that it was a topic of discussion today.
Reading Heart of Darkness is difficult, analyzing it is near traumatic. Having a group of other minds to approach it with (along with two teachers packing previous experience with the novel) is immensely helpful.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Connection: Heart of Darkness and Sigmund Freud
An aspect of Heart of Darkness that really sticks out is Kurtz's descent to savagery. An extended stay in the forests in mad pursuit of ivory seemed to do interesting things to the agent's mentality; the doctor met by Marlow would be intrigued. Severed heads acting as decoration? Rock on. Caring more about elephant tusks than your own health? Cheers.
Freud comes in naturally with the (arguably) mad agent: the repression of internal, base drives that are often considered ammoral or frowned upon. Kurtz's transformation demonstrates the tearing down of the wall that holds back these drives, called the 'id' by Freud. This raises new aspects of the novel: What is it about the Congo that causes these changes? What role does 'civilized' society play in the caging of the 'id'?
Marlow views Kurtz in a very mixed, ambiguous manner. Disgust, exaltation, respect, fear... They all seem to be expressed in his narrating. Is this how 'normal' people view those who have released inner animal urges? Perhaps an experience like that raises such a complex blend of emotions that he simply doesn't know how to react. Would you?
Freud comes in naturally with the (arguably) mad agent: the repression of internal, base drives that are often considered ammoral or frowned upon. Kurtz's transformation demonstrates the tearing down of the wall that holds back these drives, called the 'id' by Freud. This raises new aspects of the novel: What is it about the Congo that causes these changes? What role does 'civilized' society play in the caging of the 'id'?
Marlow views Kurtz in a very mixed, ambiguous manner. Disgust, exaltation, respect, fear... They all seem to be expressed in his narrating. Is this how 'normal' people view those who have released inner animal urges? Perhaps an experience like that raises such a complex blend of emotions that he simply doesn't know how to react. Would you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)