Heart of Darkness

I loved Conrad’s writing. I didn’t know where this book was going or what the “darkness” was. Then suddenly, I knew! Truth. My heart. The hearts of all mankind. we are utterly tainted by sin. We are without hope. But God.

The language was very hard to follow but it’s an interesting read.

A very powerful and sometimes misunderstood text. Conrad uses a type of literary irony mixed with an unreliable narrator to create an anti-racist and anti-imperialist narrative during the height of European imperialism. This work requires careful and thoughtful review, analysis and study to fully understand. But once understood, it stays with you. After reading this book, you should then watch the extended version of "Apocalypse Now" and analyze the themes and connections between the two as the story shifts across time and space. The concept of contradictions found in both the book and the film are very powerful and still relevant for us today. A final question to consider - are we living in blissful hollow ignorance or are we capable of judging the darkness of our own souls and that of society and state the immortal words - "The horror, The horror."?

The heart of darkness that is profusely referred to in this novella could come to mean so many things. And what it really means, what is really meant, why it means so, who means and for whom, to my mind, reflects the appreciations and apparent criticisms of the book.
Man's own capacity; a capacity to corrupt and get corrupted, man's ultimate inability to comprehend and rend the thick shards of ambiguity life catches us in, sort of feeds that impenetrable heart of darkness. Do we not all own it, have it, exhibit it? And then, if that is so, Heart of Darkness is a parable of human nature.
Despite hearing about the reservations on the racist tones and the not so anti-imperialist stance, I feel that there is more to this work than just that. Nowhere am I determinedly able to maintain that the text gives way to an authorial voice depicting a for or against sign, let alone some agenda to obey. If anything, it is a rich and complex novella with a promise to yield thoughtful discussion.
Degradation of human beings, material and spiritual, is what is at heart of the tale. And the language that captures the prose captivates aspect and attention with poetical sensitivity.
Still, I can hear reserved echoes of criticisms leveled against the 'dark' heart (particularly in its treatment of the natives of Congo, attributed as well to the racist tradition existent in Western literature). But if the dark treatment of Africa is to be considered as representative, what about the 'light' that is coming from the other side. Is it, in Conrad's view, all the more redeeming or 'civilised'? And can we say then which does the voice means when it sighs profoundly the word, 'Horror'? I don't know yet. In that I find the book more open-ended than we presume probably.
Somehow, style is central to narration and is thus worthy of re-readings. The narrative voice is aptly unreliable. Never do we really get to know what Marlow thinks in his own heart; he is a voice telling but somehow devoid of an intimacy towards readers. Perhaps, through what he sees on the outside, he sees the all too dark heart of his own and is unable to reveal it to us as Kurtz does. Marlow envies Kurtz for "He had something to say. He said it."

I am just not prepared enough to understand it yet maybe I'll reread it in future.