HOD post 3

In the last part of Heart of Darkness I picked up on a theme that I thought was interesting and could be applied to everyday life as well as other works of literature. I chose to relate personally to the text.

In the last part of Heart of Darkness I found that there was a theme of “seeing or not seeing the darkness”. Is it better to see the darkness and be scared with the horrors of the world or to ignore the darkness and live in a naïve wonderland? I noticed this in the book in two specific scenarios. The first scenario on page 116 when Marlow is talking to the manager he says to himself, “It seemed to me I had never breathed an atmosphere so vile, and I turned mentally to Kurtz, for relief --- positively for relief.” He them says “Never the less I think Kurtz is a remarkable man.” This quote shows how Marlow relates to seeing the darkness and the horrors of the world. Seeing the horrors scars Marlow, but ironically he turns to the books antagonist for relief. Marlow chose to see the evils of the world and turned to an evil man for mentoring. I believe that when you chose to see the terrible things that encompass our protected existence your life takes upon another path. Once the horrors are seen they cannot go unseen. Once you know what lies beyond the heart of darkness it can never be unknown. This happens to me when I go back to the U.S for vacations. I find it very difficult to relate to a lot of my friends from elementary school because of how different my experiences have been. When I see my friends through away half a hamburger and order an xxx large coke and only drink half, I can’t help but think of the millions of Colombians living under the poverty line. I’ve seen poverty, I’ve been amongst it, and now I will always feel the guilt every time I throw away food. Seeing how people suffer has changed my outlook on life. Poverty however, isn’t even a tenth of what I can imagine Marlow saw in the Congo. If seeing poverty could change my life so much imagine how much it could change Marlow’s to the point where he looked up to Kurtz, a man whose values he clearly looked down upon at the beginning of the novel. So my train of thought as I read this part of the book was basically asking myself if the darkness was really something I wanted to see, or if I just wanted to hold it in the mystery of the lands unmarked on the map.

Further along the reading I encountered yet another passage that related to this thread. On page 141 Marlow talks to Kurtz’s widow and in doing so lies to her about what his last words were. He couldn’t bear showing her the darkness of what her late husband’s last words really were because he saw certain innocence upon her countenance, “But with every word spoken the room was growing darker, and only her forehead, smooth and white, remained illuminated by the unextinguishable light of belief and love.” Marlow couldn’t bear to show her the darkness, he preferred she lived believing her husbands last thoughts and words were regarding her. He didn’t want to mess up the image she has of him and leave her tossing and turning over why her husbands last words were of the horrors of the Congo. Perhaps if she had known she herself would want to see what was so evil about the place and with that she would be condemned to the same life Marlow was now doomed to. In this case I believe Marlow made the right choice by hiding Kurtz’s real last words from his widow. He did her a favor so that she could live her life peacefully without resentment. I found this situation in my own life when my mom told my brother and I that my pet hamster died of naturally causes instead of the real reason, which involved my mom not wanting to pay a 200-dollar hamster surgery. At that time it was a positive white lie. My brother and I were little and knowing that my mom could have saved Hokey Pokey would have depicted her as an evil hamster-killing villain. Like my mom, Marlow chose not to depict Kurtz as a villain, but instead someone who should be admired. Although my example is rather petty I can think of countless other examples where leaving a person in a naïve bubble of love and happiness seems to be a much better alternative than giving the person a life of resentment.

Marlow chose to see the darkness and chose for Kurtz’s widow not too. Overall I believe one should have the choice of either being naïve about the atrocities that go on in the world or seeing them with their eyes open wide. The choice is something that will carve the path for the rest of the person’s life and thus the choice should be theirs.