Kelli's Discussion Thread:
Throughout this half of the Heart of Darkness we encounter the opening characters and are introduced to the main character of Marlow. But through meeting this character we see that Marlow’s telling of his story is told by another narrator, but we never know the name, along with the three listeners. The narrator speaks throughout the film in the first person as well. what do you think the writers intentions were with this writing style throughout this novel?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The purpose of Conrad's narrators are to allow the reader to understand Marlow's journey from many different points of view. If Marlow was the only narrator, we could only see his vision of the Congo, not an outsider's point of view. By differentiating the narrator's, the reader has a better perception of Marlow's adventures. By writing a novel in multiple narrations, the story is much more compelling to read.
ReplyDeleteMarlow is a complex character, and needs many people describe all of his thoughts. Marlow uses first person narraration to speak his own mind. The purpose of the narrarators was to get a different perspective on the complex character of Marlow. The writer's intentions were to depict the emotions that Marlow felt throughout his journey. The writer used these three narrators, made us think of we should judge the character of Marlow. Every reader of this novel sees Marlow differently, which makes a more thought provoking story.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ciara in that the purpose of basically having two narrators is to give multiple perspectives of the same story. There are one or two instances where our narrator stops telling Marlow's narrative and gives us his own opinion about the story he is hearing. At one point he sounds just as confused as we readers may be. The purpose of having two narrators is also to show that not everything you hear is true. We have no way of knowing how accurate Marlow's story is because it happened already and he is using his memory to tell these listeners. Also we do not know how accurately the listener is recording this story to tell us as readers. This is also shown throughout the story because Marlow is told many things about Kurtz, but those are all opinions and stories and they may not be 100% accurate.
ReplyDeleteI personally felt that this was done to show that Marlow's story was not 100% factual. It is easy for a reader to comprehend what they are reading as a form of historical context when in reality, the story is majority fiction. There are many stereotypes and exaggerated scenes throughout the book and this is not something that an audience should percieve as factual information. Also, I feel that by changing narrators, it is in a way symbolic of the idea of history. History is basically one man's encounters being passed on to an audience of people that were not there to witness these events first hand. However, depending on the perspective, the story may vary in many ways, usually benefitting one party more than another.
ReplyDeleteThe anonymous narrator of the novel seems to serve a very important purpose. This voice is the voice of reason that grounds the book in reaction to Marlow's narration that is chaotic and at times insane. It is also self reflexive in the sense that this narrator is just as much a witness to Marlow's telling of the events of his story as we are as the readers.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the style of this novel with the two narrators is to give the reader two different perspectives of Marlow's journey. As we know in real life, there is always more to a story, or more than one version of a story. Through this we hear two narrators and their views, so we can see a differen site of the story. We could have one narrator of the story, and we may not even know that this is the actualy story.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Mary said. The fact that the reader gets not only Marlow's point of view but another's as well helps us to better understand his character better. If we only received narration from Marlow's point of view, the story would be one-sided and we may doubt what is going on because it is only his perspective.
ReplyDeleteThe story within a story, a tool that Conrad chose for “Heart of Darkness”; one in which an unnamed narrator tells Charles Marlow's continuing journey. I thinking one would needs to look in and exam the “darkness” theme here, for the degree of interpretation, as were, death and suicide are symbolized throughout the book and the film. It appears Conrad’s is subtly guiding the reader. In a matter that the reader is lead to look at the inner self of Marlow (protagonist) and the Kurtz (antagonist) as were, Kurtz is portrayed as the revolving Christ character. Both the novel and the film “Apocalypse Now” are leaning towards a heavy political stance. Both mediums take a great deal by stressing the brutality on the human existence, it appears these works are ultra realism.
ReplyDeleteA good reasoning for Conrad differentiating the narrators is to provide the audience with multiple perspectives of Marlow's journey. The audience's point of view is enhanced because we are not limited to one direct idea. Having more than one perspective allows us to determine the validity and truth to Marlow's story. The use of more than one story gives the reader more involvement within conrad's piece. As opposed to accepting one direct narration and given story outside ideas from other characters can influence our perspective on the piece. Having more than one point of view makes the main character Marlow seem less dominant and creates more diversity for the novel.
ReplyDeleteI think a theme involved in the plot of Heart of Darkness is the struggle to understand the human mind. I think Marlow is intrigued by Kurtz because he is given information about what he did but not why he did it. I think internal struggles are more evident in the movie, especially when we meet Kurtz and see how twisted his mind was. We are blocked from the workings of the mind because we are trapped inside our own minds, and different perspectives helps to illuminate such limitations. Also, the shift in perspective is almost like we are making a move to get closer to the "heart" of the situation and the story, much like the way Marlow tries to find Kurtz in the "heart" of the jungle. Either way, multiple perspectives provide us with more information and a more clear understanding of surrounding circumstances. We get a picture of Marlow in the beginning that is outside of his own mind, and having both impressions gives us a deeper insight into his character.
ReplyDeleteI think it is difficult to say why the writer chose to introduce a mystery narrator into Heart of Darkness. There could be several reasons for this. I think that he did the because he knew the book might be controversial. Perhaps, he introduced a narrator to separate Marlow's character from his own personal views, and he didn't want readers to feel he was prejudice or discriminatory in any way. The narrator is often used to dispute what Marlow is saying or tell him to be careful about what it is he is thinking. Maybe he did this in order to provide an alternate for the views of the main character, or to even show that the thoughts he were having were belittling and flat out wrong.
ReplyDelete