The Moral Conditions for Genocide in Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" Author(s): Michael Lackey Reviewed work(s): Source:

College Literature, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Winter, 2005), pp. 20-41 Published by: College Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25115244 . Accessed: 15/10/2012 10:51
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

College Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to College Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

TheMoralConditions Genocide for inJosephConrad's

Heart of Darkness*
Michael Lackey

Michael

Lackey

is assistant

professor of English at SUNY

Brockport tant and a visiting at assis

Scholars ment

assess may differ in their moral of Joseph Conrad's but fiction, is a they all seem to agree that morality lens for interpreting the novels. legitimate problem,
orientation consistently

professor

Wellesley

The
Conrad's scholars

of

course,
toward observe,

is
morality, unstable

specifying
for knowl as

College. He has published arti cles on VirginiaWoolf Friedrich

Nietzsche, Twain, Fanon, Nella Paul Larsen, Celan, Mark Frantz

edge and unreliable themes in Conrad's ly, there has been of Conrad's topic Conrad's Watt moral moral

are persistent perception corpus.2 Not surprising on the much confusion moral of certain he (1980, found vision. Given Ian knowledge, a flexible develops dubs 174).This its most "subjective theo recent

T.S.

Eliot,

and Gerald

rejection claims that Conrad paradigm, what

Manley Hopkins.

impressionism" retical approach has

formulation

in John Impressionism, which sionist epistemology "moral the abyss of ethical

G. Peters's articulates that allows and

Conrad and an impres Conrad to "avoid

maintain

values"

anarchy

thereby and epistemolog

MichaelLackey 21 Like Watt and Peters, Mark Wollaeger ical solipsism" (2001,135). intelligent examines Conrad's moral vision in relation to his obstinate epistemologi ly con "A skeptic himself, Conrad nevertheless remained cal questionings: on life and literature" (1990,14). Less devoted to amoral perspective sciously sees in the fiction a "pervasive is H.M. Daleski, who however, optimistic, a view that Dwight H. Purdy shares when he calls moral nihilism" (1977,24), the later novels "morally repellent" (1984, 7). In this same tradition is Patrick Brantlinger, who writes about the "moral bankruptcy" of Conrad's "literary project" (1996, 96). In the following the moral pages, Iwant to demonstrate why interpre at best and completely misguided texts is problematic at tation of Conrad's worst. Put simply, to determine whether Conrad's "literary project" ismoral or not, the scholar must be strategically positioned to make such a judgment. In other words, the scholar must have an implicit or explicit set of criteria to a true moral vision. Moreover, determine what constitutes this scholar must access to true be in possession of a reliable epistemology that gives him/her it was when Conrad was working criteria. Significantly, moral through the For ideas central to Heart ofDarkness that he rejected the concept of morality a letter to his dear friend R.B. Cunninghame dated Graham instance, in one year before Conrad the January 31, 1898, approximately completed "There is no morality, no knowledge and no hope; there novella, Conrad says: is only the consciousness of ourselves which drives us about a world that
whether seen in a convex or a concave mirror is always but a vain and fleet

(1969,71).This ing appearance" for only five months after Heart

Blackwood's Magazine, Conrad

rejection ofDarkness
makes a

of morality
similar

is not a one-time
in a

had completed
observation

affair, serialization with

letter to

Edward

some pretensions to the possession of a con science though my morality is gone to the dogs. I am like a man who has lost his gods" (1986,2:198).This is a very curious remark. Conrad is certainly an inhumane philosophy not endorsing rooted in moral nihilism; as a pos sessor of a conscience, in taking personal and political responsi he believes Garnett: "I still have

is that something intrinsic to morality bility for one's actions. The problem action makes and politically So, for socially responsible just impossible. or conversely, being to have a conscience means Conrad, rejecting morality; moral conflicts with having a conscience. Of what course, this strict morality/conscience is Conrad's definition of morality? As dichotomy begs the question: Iwill argue in this essay, howev For Conrad, the problem is not defining

is incoherent. er, such a question true morality; is that morality is an empty signifier, a rather, the problem can strategically manipulate semiotic vacuity that dominant political powers in order to justify crimes against humanity. Put differently, Conrad rejects

22 College 32.1 Literature [Winter 2005]

morality, not because but because exploit it is an essential concept it is such an amorphous in order to justify to social that leads necessarily that political powers concept some of the most heinous crimes

injustice, can so easily against Conrad

instead of claiming that humanity, specifically genocide. Therefore, a clear but extremely negative concept of morality in his fic details tion, I examine how he portrays a charismatic political figure who appropri ates morality in order to justify crimes against humanity. Specifically, I discuss an intelligent imperialist cal system that makes a crime like Kurtz can strategically construct a moral like genocide imperative. l.'Mindthe Gap" a politi

how

interpretation, specifically Kurtz's report to the International It is my contention for the Suppression of Savage Customs. that Society scholars have consistently misinterpreted what little we have of this docu ment it through a moral lens. The they have interpreted precisely because I examine Heart of Darkness, document white nature begins with Europeans, who of the superior development of "'must necessarily appear to them [savages] in the as of a the might them with beings?we approach an observation about

To

illustrate

the insurmountable

difficulties

of the moral

supernatural colonizers deity'" (Conrad 1996, 66). Given European "superiority," white could by '"the simple exercise of" their "'will . . . exert a power for good into leads Marlow (66). Such "altruistic sentiment" practically unbounded'" a state of euphoria, which reads: that is, until the concluding postscript, "'Exterminate could

How

is horrified. all the brutes!'" On reading this line, Marlow a simple exercise of will exerting a power for good lead to a call For Marlow, the problem with Kurtz's call to exterminate the for genocide? the content of the preceding "altruis contradicts brutes is that it seemingly
tic sentiment."

Marlow diction

is not

alone

between

separate to the novella. In her feminist standard approaches governing assumption the "interrelated of Heart ofDarkness, Johanna M. Smith interrogates reading in order to expose the contra ideologies of gender and empire" (1996,169) dictions inherent tation, Kurtz's tion between in patriarchal and imperialist ideologies. On this interpre "the contradic report to the International Society embodies

the report of interpretations

contra in thinking that there is an irreconcilable and its postscript. Let me briefly examine three in order to expose this document the central

of imperialist

of conquest and the mystifying 'power for good' In essence, Smith, like Marlow, detects a con (171). ideology" between the "noble" colonizing mission and the call for geno ceptual "gap" cide: "a gap appears between" Kurtz's "early advocacy of the 'new gang' and the brutality the end of his report, 'scrawled evidently much later': 'Exterminate all the

MichaelLackey 23 brutes!'" gang of colonizers (171). A virtuous the contradictory gap. genocide?hence, In Conrad and Impressionism, Peters minds certainly would not endorse

slightly different angle. On his interpretation, In concrete values is, for Conrad, destructive. terms, Kurtz's report is based on "an absolute system," but after living in a culture that subscribes to alter

the conceptual gap from a to absolute Truths or adherence

native values, Kurtz "comes to believe that his system of values is not the only and hence cannot be based upon an absolute way to order one's existence are not values that European foundation" (2001, 140). On discovering leads him to make his plea for genocide:"The absolute, Kurtz despairs, which ... is his disillusioned all the brutes!' 'Exterminate scrawled postscript, Once the "noble" values of the first part of the report are response" (140). is to say that the first into question, Kurtz becomes disillusioned, which the postscript. Not part of the report is totally out of step with surprisingly, Peters refers to Kurtz as "immoral" (140). In his book on Heart of Darkness, Peter Edgerly Firchow has developed called the gap interpretation most insistently. For Firchow, there exist two Kurtzes, to this reading, the "pious document is the original and the sham. According the product of the original Kurtz, the bearer of the imperial torch, clearly whereas the note represents equally clearly an afterthought by the sham, or the (2000, 83). From this perspective, entrepreneur" in the first part of the report is "a kind of imperialist European Kurtz is driven by "an aberrant the genocidal (110), while Everyman" moment Because Kurtz ultimately of madness" succumbs to his basest (144). the ruthless maverick Kurtz impulses, Firchow refers to him as "less of a heroic explorer and more amoral or even immoral entrepreneur" unifies (78).What ultimately is their view that totally diverse scholars like Smith, Peters, and Firchow is a radical gap between Kurtz's report and the postscript, and that the
script represents Kurtz's moral degeneration.

of an three there post

to the report is inter By contrast, I intend to argue 1) that the postscript the preceding consistent with "altruistic is sentiment," 2) that Kurtz nally moral precisely because he follows through with the logic of the document, in genocide and 3) that Conrad which culminates because it rejects morality makes against humanity, like genocide, possible. There are three stages In the first, I examine the biblical logic that makes geno argument. In the second, I argue that Conrad was aware of the cide amoral obligation. crimes to my conditions
report.

biblical
pret

that justified

genocide.

Finally,

I use this analysis

to inter

Kurtz's

24

32.1 2005] CollegeLiterature [Winter

II. What harm has come to mankind morals and

"My

problem:

through

through itsmorality."

(Friedrich Nietzsche

1968, 169)

There is a seeming contradiction the Bible. On the one throughout hand, God commands His Chosen People not to kill, but on the other hand, He commands but them to kill others with tenacious regularity.3 Unmarried breakers active women Sabbath 22:21-22), (Deuteronomy sexually sons (Deuteronomy and homosex 15:35), disobedient 21:18-21), (Numbers uals (Leviticus 20:13) are just a few groups that should be put to death. even sanctions genocide, and first Samuel, God Indeed, in Deuteronomy races of people, which to wipe out whole his people includes "men telling children

Chosen

is it possible for the and infants" (I Samuel 15:3). How to accept the Ten Commandments, but not, at the same time, People them to violate one of those commandments that God commands recognize There is away to answer this question, but to do so,we must quite regularly? and women,
abandon our current understanding of the commandment, "Thou shalt not

kill!" as we

raise amore would

fundamental be considered tradition

ical worldview,

to a theolog question: who, according lies human? The answer to this question

People. of the Bible, it is possible to determine interpretation is a chosen person on the basis of an individual's capacity to see spiri who when he makes a dis this idea in first Corinthians tual things. Paul develops tinction
We the not He

in the Judeo-Christian to one According

of the Chosen

between
speak Spirit, accept cannot of

the natural
these, not

and the spiritual person:

of human in words wisdom but taught by terms. The in spiritual natural man does For him, of God. that is absurdity. Spirit it must can be appraise appraised everything, in a

in words things by the such man,

thus what come The

interpreting is taught to know spiritual

spiritual

way.

because teaching on the other hand,

though he himself can be appraised by no one. (ICorinthians The believer stands on a different Because believers

2:13-15)

plane than unbelievers. epistemological can see both material and spiritual things, they can appraise all things. The realities, so the infidel, by contrast, can only see material reach. Paul examines believer's life is beyond the unbeliever's epistemological the distinctions between

the natural and the spiritual person again in the this time clarifying more of Corinthians, carefully the chapter penultimate two types of people: "Earthly men are like distinctions between ontological the man of earth, heavenly men are like the man of heaven" (I Corinthians the believer is ontologically transformed, faith, 15:48). Through existing no cre longer just as a person created out of earth, but now existing as a being ated out of spirit. According to this view, the community can determine

MichaelLackey 25 whether a person is a spiritual being or not through his or her epistemolog ical capacity. If a person can see spiritual things (has faith), then the person is a spiritual being, like Christ, "the man of heaven." But if a (ontologically) cannot see spiritual things (lacks faith), then we can infer that this per person son is just an earthly being, lacking spirit. distinction the natural and the spiritual person between The ontological a natural being, which is like an animal, has no human is crucial, because rights. This
You, he you now claims from you

ismade
are

clear in the first letter of Peter:

'a chosen to into race, a royal priesthood, work' a holy nation, who a people called but you

however,

for his darkness

own

proclaim his marvelous once

the glorious

of

the One

are God's

people;

no you were light. Once people, no mercy there was for you, but now

have found mercy. If you are chosen

(I Peter 2:9-11)

by God, you can expect mercy, but if you are not, the con can be dire. Not sequences surprisingly, with regard to the treatment of non nor Christ's Golden Rule the Ten Commandments chosen people, neither do not rise to the level of a people applies, since the non-chosen were were no people").Therefore, to steal the Chosen ("Once you People one of the Ten not be violating would from or kill the non-chosen, they for mercy is accorded only to people. This subtle qualifica Commandments, in the Chosen tion explains why People can ruthlessly kill so many people necessarily God's command not to kill. contradicting to a close, let me make some very clear points about the theological conditions for genocide. Not allowed to only are believers are actually commanded to do so. But there are a few con kill infidels, they ditions. Because infidels can only see material realities, they are not allowed the Old Testament To bring without this section to question or challenge the Chosen system of belief, for as it says People's in second Peter: "These men pour abuse on things of which they are igno rant." Given the natural person's presumptuous Peter details what behavior, to these non-spiritual should happen beings: "They act like creatures of instinct, brute animals born to be caught and destroyed" (II Peter 2:12).This that believers should seek out and destroy claim does not necessarily imply It is only when we read Deuteronomy, non-believers. first Corinthians, and become clear.When first and second Peter that the conditions for genocide the infidel not only questions and challenges the believer's system, but also on the spiritual community, has a negative then the believers must impact exterminate the infidels, "lest they teach you to make any such abominable offerings as they make to their gods, and you thus sin against the Lord, your God" (Deuteronomy 20:18). Given this logic, if believers do not exterminate because offend infidels, they are in danger of sinning against God. Moreover, infidels are not people in the strict sense of the word "no people"), the (a ing

26

32.1 2005] CollegeLiterature [Winter chosen people need not worry kill them. they that they are violating a divine mandate when

III.
"I the take it that Jahweh who was little the taken up with from any of his creatures, except came."

people

inhabited

countries

which

the Aryans

(Cunninghame

Graham

1981, 62)

and idiosyncratic of the Surely this is a rather uncharitable interpretation Bible. So why should anyone suppose that Conrad would have read the Bible in this way?4 The answer lies in Conrad's relationship with Graham, a vocal socialist and atheist who was extremely critical of British respect for Graham. religious belief5 Conrad had profound ter Conrad calls him "the most alive man of the century" (1969, 135). So did Conrad much admire Graham that he asked the conservative publisher, William if he could dedicate a volume that included Youth, Heart Blackwood, to his extremely liberal friend.6 Although the vol of Darkness, and Lord f im ume was eventually dedicated to Conrad's wife, Conrad did dedicate Typhoon to his friend, and in a letter, Conrad says to Graham: "It is a public declara tion of our communion in more, perhaps, than mere letters and I don't mind to my pride in it" (143). owning ismore than just strength of the bond between Graham and Conrad In a letter to Graham, Conrad fraternal sentiment; it is intellectual. says:'T can assure you that I never wrote a book since [the beginning of their friendship] The
without many mental references to you of whom alone amongst my readers

and imperialism a let Indeed, in

I always thought that He will understand" (1969, 191).To the ideal reader of Conrad's clearly what makes Graham briefly examine of

understand

more to

Graham's read in essay "Bloody Niggers," before he started writing Heart 1898, just six months mid-June of Darkness.7 Both the essay and Conrad's response shed considerable light on Heart ofDarkness in that they expose the social, political, and individual psy an historical that has made colonization reality. chology writers a tradition of atheist locates himself within the essay, Graham a psychological consider the God-concept the projection, of an overheated "That the all-wise and imagination: seething product ... is God, to whom omnipresent good people address their prayers, really but a poor, anthropomorphous animal, is day by day becoming plainer and To open who manifest" Blake (1981,

fiction, which Conrad

I want

William

is certainly not original? 58).8 This observation of Heaven and Hell"), Percy Shelley ("The ("The Marriage of Atheism"), (The Essence of Christianity), Karl Ludwig Feuerbach Necessity Marx and Friedrich (Towards a Critique of Right), of HegeVs Philosophy Nietzsche (Twilight of the Idols and Anti-Christ) are just a few who had already

more

MichaelLackey 27 into being. project the God-concept psychologically so uniquely is his analysis of the way work insightful to justify and sanction colonization and itsmost functions a project that anticipates the writings of of exploitation,

observed What

that humans

makes

Graham's

the God-concept ruthless practices

Frantz Fanon.9

to the theology of colonization is establishing epistemological which allows those in control of the intellectual means superiority, thereby as God's Chosen to ontologize themselves of production and to People Central
ontologize the non-chosen "other" as sub-human. For Europeans, epistemo

of the Bible, enables them to control the interpretation logical superiority have concluded and not surprisingly, white Europeans that "the first man in the fair garden by the Euphrates was white" (Graham 1981, 61). Of course, "we have no information" Graham continues, (61) to verify this claim, but since white people "have entered, so to speak, into a tacit compact with the creator" mere Non-white as Paul
selves as

(62), they are in an epistemological peoples may want to challenge infidels who look but cannot see, who says, unable to comment
can

on whites

to make such a claim. position this assertion, but since they are listen but cannot hear, they are, the spiritual reality that exceeds their use the Bible
nor

epistemological
superior,

grasp. So when
non-whites

to ontologize
challenge this

them
claim.

neither

verify

in the world, nations of all the white the British are, as Significantly, Graham chosen, "God's favoured nation" specifically ironically observes, is the apex of creation, the being (1981, 65). In fact, the British gentleman that gives God most joy: "Thus, through the mist of time, the Celto-Saxon race emerged from heathendom and woad and, in the fullness of the creator's became the tweed-clad their status as (64). Given pleasure, Englishman" to "God's own Englishmen" the British have a right, nay, an obligation (63), colonize the world: Much
mansion science room. as

of the earth was his [the Englishman's],

ready, well waiting Australia, aired, with with Zealand, and depots a every large for him New bible appliance on India, the

and in the skies he had his

known the and heathen, chest to modern of drawers islands, owned his sanitary in every useful sway.

Canada, amongst

countless all

coaling

stations

(Graham 1981,64-5) been charged with building the city of God on earth. can take whatever land on the planet they deem fit. Therefore, they As for non-white, non-chosen races, specifically "bloody niggers," they must to the British. At this point, Graham submit themselves underscores The British have the word "nigger" to inspire hatred and to have exploited Europeans "In the consideration vindicate violence: of the 'nigger' races which God sent how into the world for whites (and chiefly Englishmen) to rule, 'niggers' of Africa

28

32.1 2005] CollegeLiterature [Winter occupy first place" (1981, 66). Graham's indignant tone, while certainly it fails to connote because the subtle theological tified, is unfortunate, tinctions that have made violence against non-whites psychologically possible. However, politically In keeping with Paul's theology of are human in the strict Englishmen" African
Africans,

jus dis and

the content

of his claim the Chosen sense of

is right on the mark. "God's own People,

descent
they are

are not
not

really human.

Therefore,
'"Niggers'

the word, while those of when the British violate

who have no cannons,

cornmitting

crimes:

torpedo, rights. 'Niggers' whose lives are given over to a band of money lot is placed outside our flag, whose (chartered or not) have neither rights nor wrongs" (66 grubbing miscreants Humans have rights, not animals, and because Africans do not have epis 67). access to the one true God, they cannot be considered human temological can expect "no are a "no people" who in the strict sense of the word?they mercy." reader may have failed to understand how the action against Africans, he states his point legitimates genocidal God-concept the 'niggers' white and let them by directly: "Better, by far, to have made us to the trouble of exterminating than put degrees all become Englishmen, Africans is tribes of them, to carry out his plan" (66). Exterminating so long as the British are carrying "out his [God's] plan." And how legitimate can Europeans know God's plan? The answer is the Bible, for as Graham says, "our own Just in case Graham's

and cannot

construct

a reasonable

have no

whole

exploits amongst the 'niggers' of to-day" resemble "the record of in the Old Testament crimes, of violence" (62). that are of particular There are specifically two ideas in this document of Conrad. First, since the British control the relevance for my interpretation themselves as Chosen People and Africans they can ontologize God-concept, this distinction, the British could perpetrate By making on Africans acts of violence either without the Ten violating or Christ's Golden Rule?only humans have rights, so Commandments extreme killing an African tantly, by making it could be moral impor (animal) would not be immoral. Second, and more illustrates how colonization part of God's "plan," Graham to kill Africans. This is amuch stronger claim than my first does not imply that British as sub-human.

point. To say that it is not immoral to kill Africans it just means that the prohibi should seek out and kill Africans; colonizers second claim makes tion against killing has been removed. The killing a necessary act whole tribes of them") a moral obligation, ("exterminating out his plan." While understands that genocidal action "to carry Graham that is part of God's plan, his could be a moral obligation against Africans such action. But where fails to make clear the logic that justifies essay Graham fails, Conrad succeeds.

MichaelLackey 29 read "Bloody Niggers," which he considered "very he did have some objections. The telling" (1969, 89). However, to the Graham ends up preaching subtlety, and as a consequence, more poignant more To make and the essay effective, Conrad Conrad Graham to hold his thoughts

good,

very

essay lacks converted.

encourages to form a back, letting them gather "together so that they could become solid and penetrating phalanx" "perhaps victori ous" (1986, 2:70).10 Put differently, to reach an audience that might not be or imperialism, Conrad to write more critical of theology urges Graham cogently. certainly helped Conrad explain the theological men "Bloody Niggers" whole that justified "exterminating tribes of "Africans, or, as Kurtz puts tality to "[exterminate all the brutes! "What makes Heart ofDarkness more effec it, is Conrad's aesthetic tive, however, control, his ability to frame the issues

within

a more context and to maximize the emotional comprehensive on his reader. The downside of Conrad's call for subtlety is that his impact "idea" could so easily be lost upon his reader. In fact, Conrad mentions this in a letter to Graham. After Graham read the first installment of the problem in Blackwood's Magazine novella which in 1899, Conrad told appeared Graham that "the idea [of the novella] is so wrapped in secondary notions up miss it" (1969, 116). Here we return to Graham thatYou?even You!?may as the ideal reader of Conrad's texts. If Graham, who is Conrad's ideal read er ("I always thought that He will understand"), could potentially miss the "idea" of the novella, how much more apt is the average reader to miss it? for much subtlety has, no doubt, been the occasion interpretive But if we can specify what it is about Graham that makes him ambiguity. Conrad's ideal reader, then we might to be more strategically positioned Heart ofDarkness. For the sake of clarity, let me spec interpret the "idea" o? Conrad's

I consider the crucial links between Graham and Conrad. ify what like Graham, had very little respect for Christianity. In fact, Conrad, tells Edward Garnett how he, "from the age of fourteen, disliked the Conrad Christian ceremonies and festivals" (1986, 2:468). To religion, its doctrines, in Christianity Conrad's mind, lends "itself with amazing facility something to cruel distortion," and consequently, "has brought an infinity Christianity of anguish to innumerable souls?on this earth" (5:358). Not surprisingly, an evangelist presented Conrad when "with a pocket copy of the English Bible," Conrad, who noticed that the book "was printed on rice paper," "used the leaves for rolling cigarettes" (1924, 96).n While Conrad had just as little as Graham, his critique of was much for Christianity respect Christianity more in Heart ofDarkness, while Conrad subtle. Therefore, exposes the the to be as overt as Graham, of colonization, he resists the temptation ology though Graham, who understands how British Imperialism has its roots in

30

32.1 2005] CollegeLiterature [Winter Christian to understand precisely how the theolog theology, is in a position ical mentality of Heart of Darkness has been used to justify the European of Africa.12 exploitation More

that the the again like Graham, understands specifically, Conrad, not just permissible, makes genocide but, under certain ological mentality a moral obligation. But Conrad's conditions, analysis of the dangers of the ismore comprehensive than Graham's, and as a conse theological mentality is much more quence, his critique convincing. The demonstrate how the theological mentality functions a moral as in Heart of Darkness. obligation IV.
"it is the highest importance to know whether we are not duped by moral

task at this point is to to legitimate genocide

ity." (Emmanuel Levinas, 1969, 21) is the first step toward justifying epistemological superiority Establishing as moral. As Marlow claims, "[t]he inner truth is hidden" genocide (Conrad facul 1996, 50), so a person must have cultivated a superior epistemological in order to access the hidden truth.13 The average person will look but not ty looks at us with an "air of hid see, listen but not hear, for the material world are in possession den knowledge" But for those who of a "higher (73).14 secret truth can be known. At this point, I want to (40), the intelligence" examine specifically
as

how Marlow
and

impenetrable
ogize themselves

epistemology
superior

an invulnerable and Kurtz construct and similar to Paul's, one that they can use to ontol
others as inferior.15

one must be spiritual things, spiritual. can appraise everything, the person Consequently, including the spiritual person's life can be appraised life, whereas non-spiritual person's a spiritual discourse is frequently used throughout by no one. Significantly, Heart of Darkness to illustrate white European and black African superiority As Paul claims, the spiritual to see claims that white inferiority. For instance, in his report, Kurtz Europeans as "supernatural must appear to "savage" Africans beings," individuals who could wield the might "of a deity" (Conrad 1996, 66). Given Kurtz's uncan to influence people's minds, it should come as no surprise that ny power Marlow Dane adopts his rhetoric when he describes Fresleven, the mild-mannered who was killed: "The supernatural being had not been touched after real

gets ruled by an august Benevolence" (66). Immensity The reason why Kurtz can supposedly access higher realities is because he is if he chosen. Marlow indicates exactly this when he asks Kurtz specifically how Kurtz and understands the "roaring chorus" of natives shouting. Notice "the notion of an exotic

he fell" (24). For Marlow, Kurtz is an incarnational bridge to the highest ities, for it is through Kurtz's "burning noble words" (66) that Marlow

MichaelLackey 31 then Marlow been

ers

replies: "'Do I not?' he said slowly, gasping, as if the words had torn out of him by a supernatural power" (84). Kurtz can see what oth
and this is the case, Marlow suggests, because a "supernatural

cannot,

like Jeremiah's power" assisting him, tearing In essence, God in the Old Testament and Paul's God in the New Testament. as Paul's spiritual man. Kurtz is in the same epistemological position These references to the supernatural are important, because for humans, to human cannot be known?it is "impenetrable the world thought" (Conrad 1996, 72).To know one must be more world, both Marlow Significantly, which is clear from an ultimate truth or a spiritual a supernatural than human, reality about the of sorts. being

has been

the words

out of him

and Kurtz this supernatural possess capacity, their ability to see spiritual things, especially truth. That Kurtz is supposedly truth is one of the central points capable of disclosing text. For instance, the Russian the tells Marlow about running throughout see things? Kurtz's ("'He [Kurtz] made me epistemological superiority to conclude that Kurtz is an extraor leads the Russian things.'" [72]), which man who is not bound by ordinary laws:'"You can't judge Mr. Kurtz dinary

as you would an ordinary man'" (72). As for Marlow, Kurtz has helped him to see "the appalling face of a glimpsed truth" (87), which makes Marlow on those rush through the streets of the Sepulchral City spitting contempt who do not possess his privileged knowledge: "They [ordinary people] were life was to me an irritating presence, because whose intruders of knowledge I felt so sure they could not possibly know the things I knew" (88). Although it is through Kurtz that Marlow of the world, gains special knowledge Marlow flaunts his ability to access truth throughout the narrative. He knows about the "inner truth" (50), the "truth stripped of its cloak of time" (52), the
"truth" that one "must meet . .. with his own true stuff" (52), and the "sur

face-truth"

thought." to truth, Marlow and Kurtz can ontologize others as By claiming asmore animal than are ontologized and not surprisingly, Africans they will, them non-spiritual human, which makes beings. Let me provide just a few examples to illustrate how the African's animality is underscored throughout access Heart
is

to ordinary is "impenetrable

and Kurtz are ontologically (52).16 Obviously, Marlow superior to know what humans because of their more-than-human ability to human

has to supervise ofDarkness. Marlow instead of belonging "improved specimen,"

merely a means to a European's end:

a "savage who was fireman." This to a Kantian Kingdom of Ends,

He
bank, full ed;

ought
instead of

to have been clapping his hands and stamping his feet on the
of which he was He hard was at work, useful should a thrall because to he strange had in witchcraft, instruct transparent knowledge. was knew been that

improving he

and what

this?that

the water

32

32.1 2005] CollegeLiterature [Winter thing disappear, the evil spirit inside the boiler would
greatness of his thirst, and take a terrible vengeance.

get angry through the

(Conrad 1996, 52)

What

is the implicit definition in this passage? It of "improving knowledge" a recognition is the of oneself as capable of negative freedom, which to overcome nor it is an animal inclinations and physical ability impulses, is the ability to legislate to oneself of positive freedom, which understanding the moral law. It is a superstitious belief that terrifies the "improved speci men" into filling a boiler with water. In essence, the improving knowledge is is not African an effective instrument of a white European. The makes Africans uses an is a mere means, like an animal. Not coincidentally, Marlow to describe animal discourse the fireman: "to look at him was as edifying as on his hind and a feather hat, walking seeing a dog in a parody of breeches as an animal, Marlow the African legs" (Conrad 1996, 52). By ontologizing that which (humans are ends in and of themselves, can be used as amere means to human of human rights (humans have rights,

effectively converts him into ameans while animals, in relation to humans, and thereby divests him well-being) animals do not).

when Marlow's helmsman dies later in the text, Marlow Consequently, does not mourn the loss of a full-fledged human being; he laments the death of a deficient tool:
Perhaps no more he had a help?an you will think than a it passing of grain he had It was strange sand steered; a kind this regret for a savage don't at my who you back? was see,

account done

in a black for months

Sahara. Well, I had He him

something, instrument.

of partnership.

steered

for me?I

had to look after him, Iworried

bond had been created, of which

about his deficiencies,

I only became aware

and thus a subtle

when it was sud

denly broken. Marlow cient

(Conrad 1996, 67) be looked savage in terms of his utility; he is a defi after (the sub-"human" is not an inde and who enables (serves as an "instru itself) their ends.

thinks of this little-account instrument who must agent chosen

pendent

ment") Africans

that can govern superiors to achieve

because of their inability to Such is the implicit view Marlow noble principles. be governed betrays by when he discusses how the thirty starving Africans on his steamboat resist the to revolt against the five whites on board. On noting the Africans' temptation into instruments restraint, Marlow responds, "And these chaps too had no earthly reason for Iwould restraint kind of scruple. Restraint! any just as soon have expected the corpses of a battlefield" from a hyena prowling amongst (Conrad 1996, 58). For Marlow, hungry animals do not forgo a feast in the name of a high er principle; in fact, their most their behavior. basic needs determine that transcend animal contrast, cultivate values and principles Humans, by

can be converted

MichaelLackey 33 needs, so they can resist the temptation of a higher principle. Because Marlow to satisfy an animal need considers Africans more in the name animal than Such

of the African. More to hyenas, Marlow does more than just by likening Africans importantly, are more the natives as animals; he implicitly specifies why they ontologize are governed animal than human?animals by animal appetites, exclusively humans can be governed by a moral precept. And Marlow's whereas obser vation that the natives on his steamboat igate his racist view; these Africans rule. The last example, while the least overt and considers the African/hyena in Heart is the most significant in terms of the genocidal mentality offensive, rites about the unspeakable ofDarkness. Kurtz's Russian disciple tells Marlow offered up to Kurtz. In his brief narrative, the Russian spec ifies that the natives "would crawl" (74). From awhite European perspective, as sub-human this act of crawling justifies savages. For labeling Africans that the natives instance, when obsequious his fawning "If it had come
more

human, he is surprised by the restraint of the Africans is obviously his view inconsistent with self-control

in his steamboat.

to mit show restraint does nothing are an anomaly, an exception to what he

to the Russian, Marlow cannot tolerate the harlequin's to Kurtz. To condemn the Russian, Marlow likens relationship behavior to an act of crawling, which he links with the "savages": talking

as the ver to crawling before Mr. Kurtz, he crawled asmuch iest savage of them all" (109). The more deferential the crawling behavior, the
savage one is.

this animalization of the African has a very specific function Significantly, in relation to Kurtz's and Marlow's spiritual discourse. Specifically, humans can know to these truth and they can live their lives according spiritual are independent truths. As rational beings with free will, agents who they cannot be reduced abilities,
as an not end. act

to ameans. certain
animals For this

On
cannot reason,

they possess
By contrast, responsibly.

inalienable

the basis of their God-given include rights, which

reason, they must and be as a consequence, "looked

faculties being
they Moreover,

and
can

treated

after."

given
rights,

their underdeveloped
which means that

faculties
they can

and abilities,
be used as

they do not possess human

a means, "an instrument."

to Graham's model as in "Bloody Niggers," Africans According ontologizing to justify exterminating animals has been enough for the British them. But on a psychological level, there is something system. If I lacking in Graham's a dog, this does could demonstrate is the ontological that an African equal of not give me the right to kill either the African or the dog. Another condi tion must Wretched be met that condition in order to justify genocidal to the Bible, action. According is the adulteration of the Chosen People's spiritual life. In The

of theEarth, Frantz Fanon describes this process incisively. The native "is the corrosive all that comes near him; he is the element, destroying

34 College 32.1 Literature [Winter 2005]

deforming all element, disfiguring the native Contact with (1968, 41). for the Chosen People: "All values, eased as soon as they are allowed in toms of the colonized myths?are depravity" the Chosen that has to do with beauty can only have debilitating in fact, are irrevocably contact with the colonized and morality" consequences and dis poisoned race. The cus

all, their people, their traditions, their myths?above the very sign ofthat poverty of spirit and of their constitutional (42). If it can be shown that Africans adulterate the spiritual life of People,

not just permissible; it becomes then genocide becomes amoral obligation. This iswhere Conrad goes beyond Graham. because less than Graham suggests that Africans, they are considered . . .have no have no rights ('"Niggers' which makes geno human, rights"), that "exterminating tribes of cide permissible. Aside from suggesting whole them" is part of God's plan ("to carry out his plan"), Graham offers no expla and onto links the Chosen nation that necessarily People's epistemological a moral obligation for genocide. He only demon logical superiority with to exterminate strates that it is not immoral for chosen Europeans whole tribes of Africans. ismuch more Conrad, however, thorough. Let us see how the final con Kurtz of Darkness. When of Africa, he goes, like (1996, 28) as aminister a typical Christian missionary, of light, Truth, and civilization; he must elevate the "savages." But instead of his transforming the natives, they lives in a state of denial, transform him. At first, Marlow, who frequently dition first enters
refuses to acknowledge Kurtz's "fallen" condition. For instance, when Kurtz's

is met for making genocide moral the "God-forsaken wilderness"

in Heart

has participated in unspeakable rites, disciple used when don't want to know anything of the ceremonies Marlow says:"T (74). But after seeing impaled heads on stakes in approaching Mr. Kurtz'" can no longer deny the facts. The most damn front of Kurtz's house, Marlow Russian ing evidence when Marlow comes Kurtz's however, confirming spiritual degeneration, Kurtz has become finds Kurtz "crawling on all-fours" (81). one of "them." In essence, "crawling on all-fours" suggests that Kurtz has the higher "a veriest savage," a brute that cannot see or experience become realities of the spiritual life. the logic of Heart Given cific connotations.
to human

intimates

that Kurtz

of Darkness, humans Supernatural

thought." Moreover,

an animal has very spe becoming can know a hidden truth that is
they can overcome their ani

"impenetrable

malistic

to noble principles. When Kurtz becomes urges and live according no an animal, he implicitly loses two more-than-animal capacities: he would no truth and he would be able to know a hidden, more-than-human longer to conform to a spiritual principle. In essence, he his life longer be able is governed would be like a hyena who solely by animal appetites, so the idea

MichaelLackey 35 this animalistic of being amoral agent would be out of the question. Given no longer belong to a Kantian Kingdom of Ends; he nature, Kurtz would
would become "an instrument," a mere means to the true human commu

nity's end. So by becoming tion of superiority. Since it is the natives Kurtz

an animal, Kurtz

could no longer justify his posi

"would crawl") who have degraded (those who is crawling on all-fours"), Kurtz must all the ("he "[e]xterminate "lest they teach" other Chosen Europeans "to make any such abom brutes," as they [the Africans] make to their gods, and you thus sin inable offerings to use the word "brutes" is against the Lord, your God." Kurtz's decision

In "An Outpost of Progress," which Conrad before important. published Heart ofDarkness, one of the main characters, Carlier, talks "about the neces Kurtz said all the niggers" (1987, 102). Had sity of exterminating of Savage the report on the Suppression all the niggers!," Customs would not have been nearly as internally consistent as it iswhen he all the brutes!" Because animals ("brutes") do not have says: "Exterminate "Exterminate and spir rights, Kurtz can endorse genocide with emotional, psychological, itual impunity?most about killing humans, but people have reservations most have no problem with the killing of animals. This is doubly the case since the natives have already begun to corrupt the spiritual life of a Chosen Person into a brute. From a traditional Judeo-Christian is Kurtz's only moral choice. To therefore, committing genocide perspective, state this more strongly, were Kurtz not to endorse genocide, he would be in and to transform him

lead to spir animalized, which would danger of allowing others to become on a massive itual degeneration scale. So to achieve a moral victory, Kurtz must make a moral call for genocide. To put this inMarlow's words, "It was an affirmation, a moral victory paid for by innumerable defeats, by abom But it was a victory! That iswhy to the last" (1996,88). Kurtz's vision is amoral scholars could argue, as does Firchow, that Marlow victory. Of course, endorses only Kurtz's noble vision, the desire to "exert a power for good But ifmy intuitions are right, that the underbelly of practically unbounded." the "altruistic sentiment" document then it does not mat implies genocide, inable terrors, by abominable I have remained loyal to Kurtz satisfactions. ter whether Marlow because Marlow endorses the the report minus endorsing it is the altruistic sentiment In fact, the postscript. report minus is all the more dangerous, the postscript that effectively the genocidal conceals challenge incarnate in Heart devils who of

impulse implicit in the document's philosophy. To conclude, let me briefly discuss the aesthetic Darkness. Like Graham, Conrad realizes that it is not have formulated tification

or the theological the political doctrine of colonization jus of genocide. On the contrary, the individuals who have originated

36

32.1 2005] CollegeLiterature [Winter to a veritable and perpetrated systems have belonged gang of oppressive in a letter to Graham: "Posterity shall be busy thiev virtue. As Conrad says and shall ing, lying, selling its little soul for sixpence (from the noblest motives)
remember no one except perhaps one or two quite too atrocious mounte

banks"

are not crimes against humanity (1969, 47-48). For Conrad, heinous inconsistent with noble and moral discourses. In fact, some of the worst atroc in the name of the "noblest motives" like morality. ities are cornmitted a culture's sacred idol, like morality, as the But how can a writer expose effective

most

for perpetrating crimes against humanity? After all, weapon is inviolable; it is beyond morality reproach, beyond critique.17 But that is create In short, the culture's noblest motives it is so dangerous. precisely why an epistemological but never blind spot; we can criticize certain moralities, as such, and as a consequence, we can critically interrogate degrad morality as such. For a writer like Conrad, who but never morality ing moralities, so dangerous, morality's creates a considers morality seeming inviolability formidable aesthetic dilemma. On the one hand, were he to critique a sacred too overtly, he would idol like morality fail to replicate the subtle psycholo a liberal man of virtue to so effective in persuading gy that makes morality
cornrnit or conceal atrocities. On the other hand, were he to critique moral

run the risk of sounding at a frequency too low to ity too subtly, he would of Marlow's narratorial complexity that has so be heard. It is this dimension even the most astute scholars. For instance, in Gone Primitive, often baffled Marianna mological
Heart The ical ent about

Torgovnick limitations:

fails to understand

the significance

of Marlow's

episte

is narrated and shares many of his limitations. by Marlow of Darkness to is willing rad narrative but finally backs away from, really approach, in an indiffer the human mind modern about themes?about Europe, universe, the about degree sacrificial to which men and violent are driven rituals as a charm their against essentiality death, and to affirm

identity. (Torgovnick

1990, 152)

and Marlow For Torgovnick, Conrad (as if the two are one and the same) would politics only through amore successfully address Europe's problematic overt and direct critique. But for Conrad, Europeans have been able to jus to self and others through a beneficent like their atrocities discourse, tify morality, Conrad Darkness mindset that effectively to make Marlow more conceals its dark underside. Put more critical and aware, were he the very have failed to depict direct and overt, he would of recognizing the genocidal dangers that makes aMarlow incapable in the altruistic sentiment part of Kurtz's report on the Suppression differently, were to make Heart of

implicit a Marlow to understand and Put another way, were of Savage Customs. the altruistic sentiment and the call between the logical connection expose

MichaelLackey 37 for genocide, he would have been less inclined to admire the seemingly orig inal or sham Kurtz or to conceal Kurtz's crimes against humanity. But it is so many decent, law this lack of critical awareness that has made precisely (Kurtz) and/or subjects of the empire capable of committing atrocities against others with impunity. Lack of aware to make are, contra therefore, connections, inability logical the "radical themes" ofHeart ofDarkness; they are the very things Torgovnick, fail to realize how they have been duped by that make Kurtz and Marlow abiding, moral concealing ness and (Marlow) morality
another

into participating
culture and race.

in a large-scale

project

of degrading

and violating

as narrator is Marlow's understanding complex position Significantly, sense of Kurtz. Marlow crucial for making does not wholeheartedly support of madness. Kurtz. He is horrified by what he perceives as Kurtz's moments
In essence, Marlow detects a conceptual gap in Kurtz's report. On my inter

there is no such gap. The report is so horrifying because pretation, however, it is logically and internally consistent. Kurtz merely articulates in the post script what the report logically implies. From this perspective, Kurtz's crime is not genocide; his crime is stating overtly the usually hidden genocidal logic ofWestern a logic that the west has felt comfortable morality, implementing all the brutes!"), but never admitting ("Exterminate (Marlow offers a repre sentative "the report of the 'Suppression of Savage Customs,' with the post to others or itself. Marlow may not scriptum torn off" [Conrad 1996, 89])

the brutes, but he does not have to. By approve of Kurtz's call to exterminate the first part of Kurtz's report, Marlow endorses the endorsing implicitly whether he knows it or not.What differentiates Kurtz and Marlow postscript, is that Kurtz, having been forced to follow his altruistic-sentiment moral ide its logical end, ultimately what his philosophy acknowledges on the other hand, lives in a state of denial. But this state of implies. Marlow, to understand denial is precisely why he is so dangerous. Were how people ology Kurtz's moral be less apt to system logically leads to genocide, they would it. By concealing the logical end of Kurtz's moral philosophy, Marlow accept founda effectively prevents himself and others from seeing the justificatory to

in Africa. tion of Europe's crimes against humanity scholars could reject this critical inter Of course, many contemporary in Heart of Darkness by claiming of morality that they use true pretation not the sham moralities to interpret Conrad's that have con texts, morality such a view indi veniently justified human rights abuses. But, for Conrad, Conrad cates a naive understanding of the way morality is constructed. To my mind, was not being a sloppy, irresponsible, or nihilistic intellectual when to the contrary, he was being unabashedly he rejected morality; honest and realistic. For those scholars who would import a moral discourse

politically

38

32.1 2005] CollegeLiterature [Winter texts, their moral gesture puts them at odds with Conrad, not in terms of morality, but also in terms of epistemology. But just because just it does not follow that he lacks a vision of social jus Conrad rejects morality, to establish amore politically just society, Conrad seeks to tice. Paradoxically, and a subtle ear for the logic of banish morality. As aman with a conscience into Conrad's oppression, that makes
trying to

Conrad

would

the atrocity
awake.

the moral mechanism have us call into question a nightmare from which we are still against humanity

Notes 1 Iwould
Literature thank

like to thank John G. Peters, John Lestat, and the readers of College
valuable von suggestions for revising for this essay. Iwould financial also like to Humboldt Foundation the generous assistance

for making the Alexander this project have essay, been

that made 2 There sake of this

possible. many excellent only those studies that of Conrad's have influenced epistemology, my reading but for the

I mention

of Conrad

most: Watt (1980),Wollaeger (1990), Peters (2001), and Roberts 3 In The Curse Cain: The Violent Legacy ofMonotheism of
Schwartz leads does a first-rate acts study of My the work to ruthless of violence. theological is in the psychology same tradition

(2000). (1997), Regina

that so

M.

consistently as Schwartz's, but

I offer a different model

4 For an excellent

to explain this psychology.

study of Conrad's extensive knowledge to R.B. with and use of the Bible,

see Purdy
5 In C.T.Watts 6 Watts

(1984).
the "Introduction" sheds much mentions light the dedication to foseph Conrad's on Conrad's close debate Letters friendship in his Cunninghame Graham. on Conrad's letters Graham,

commentary

(1969,136-37).
7 Watts he made was claims that "Graham seems to have and noted Conrad's to criticisms, this article because before 90). and atheism it uncharacteristically the digressions many centuries. large and excisions topical atheism studies alterations were in the

republished: 8 There were

references emerging about

curtailed" the

(1969,

varieties Some

of

late-nineteenth of

early-twentieth

useful

emergence

include: Berman (2001).

9 For

(1988), Miller
of Frantz

(1963),Thrower
Fanon's scathing

(2000),Wilson
critique of

(1999), and Nielsen

theology, see my essay

a discussion

(Lackey 2002). 10 This quotation comes from The Collected Letters offoseph Conrad. The passage I quoted is in French in the original. The Watts version does not have an English
translation.

11 This (1984, 8-9).

incident is documented
that Conrad

in Ford (1924), but I first came upon it in Purdy

does not savage just Christianity. In Almayer's

12 It is worth

noting

Folly, the Arabs refer to Almayer

same kind of psychological tactics

as "that Unbeliever"
as Christians to justify

(1936, 29), and they use the

acts of cruelty and violence

MichaelLackey 39
see was same

towards Nietzsche

unbelievers. and

We

this less

Freud,

interested

in Lord Jim. I suspect that Conrad, dynamic in the shortcomings of any particular

like reli

claims in On the gion than the common failings of all religious belief. As Nietzsche Morals, "a\l religions are at the deepest level systems of cruelties" (1989, Genealogy of
61), those belong or as Freud claims, whom to 13 For the context it embraces; it are natural an of excellent the "every while to every discussion social religion cruelty religion" of the is in and this same way intolerance 39). of Heart within of Darkness see late-nineteenth century, a of love for all religion towards those who do not

(1959,

epistemology of the

emergent

Darwinism

Lindquist
14

(1996).
E. Lorsch has written an excellent study documenting the reasons why

Susan

nature and the world

Lorsch, eth since there writers, is no

could no
God, can

longer be signified after the death of God.

to many language late-nineteenth to signify and the world.

For

century

there

according be no ideal

early-twenti For this rea

son, both Victorians

and modernists

wrote
or to

extensively
the world. expand on

about their inability to find a

and to rework Edward Said's

nature that adequately language signified 15 In a is an attempt this essay sense,

interpretation
motivated experience of power man, me and

of Heart
to write if we must

of Darkness
this essay: therefore as a white "For

(1993). Here
if we cannot upon in use them thing the depend man is no

specifically

is the quote

that has

someone else's truly understand the assertive of the sort authority jungle or for that Marlow, other, them another

that Kurtz wields the the

wields

white

as a narrator, system has simply of

there

looking

non-imperialist unthinkable.The but also

alternatives; circularity,

eliminated the whole

and made is not only

perfect

closure

aesthetically

mentally
system

unassailable"

(24).My

task has been to demonstrate

how

this invulnerable

on a is based theological mentality. 16 It is worth or Kurtz's that Conrad did not share Marlow's noting is clear from which the following truth, logical optimism regarding is just Graham: "And Truth round the corner like the elusive suppose loafer it is? I can't tell. No one can tell. It is impossible to know.

epistemo remark and useless

to

It is impossible

to

know anything tho' it is possible

Chinua Achebe, Firchow, results makes which Conrad's, 17 Nietzsche

to believe a thing or two" (1969, 45). Scholars like

view from

to and Brantlinger fail Marlow's distinguish in very of the novella. clumsy interpretations a similar in Twilight observation about morality

of the Idols

(1989, 80).

Works Cited
Berman, David. 1988. History and New York: Routledge.
Brantlinger, Patrick. 1996. In Heart Impressionism?" Bedford/St.

ofAtheism
"Heart

in Britain: From Hobbes

toRussell. London
Racism, and New or York:

of Darkness: ed. Ross of Darkness,

Anti-Imperialism, C. Murfin. Boston

Martin's.

Conrad, Joseph. 1936. Almayer's Folly. New York and London: Penguin Books.

40

32.1 2005] CollegeLiterature [Winter

-. to R.B. Press.

1969.foseph

Conrad's

Letters University

Cunninghame

Graham.

Ed.

C.T.Watts.

Cambridge:

Cambridge

-.
-. Books. -.

1986. The Collected Letters

1987. Cambridge "An Outpost University of

of foseph
Press.

Conrad. Ed.
of Unrest.

Frederick R.
New York:

Karl.

Cambridge:

Progress."

In Tales

Penguin

1996.

Heart

of Darkness.

Ed.

Ross

C.

Murfin.

Boston

and

New

York:

Bedford/St.Martin's.

Daleski, H.M.
Meier. Fanon, Frantz. Grove

1977. foseph Conrad:The Way ofDispossession. New York: Holmes

1968. Press, The Wretched Inc. of the Earth. Trans. Constance Farrington.

and
New

York:

Firchow, Peter Edgerly. 2000. Envisioning Africa: Racism and Imperialism in Conrad's
Heart Ford, Ford Brown, of Darkness. Madox. Lexington: 1924. foseph The Conrad: of Kentucky Press. University A Boston: Personal Remembrance. Little,

and Company.

Freud, Sigmund.
Strachey. New

1959. Group Psychology and theAnalysis

York and London: WW Norton

of the Ego. Trans. James Selected Writings

Presses.

& Company.

Graham,

R.

B. Cunningham.
Graham. London

1981.

"Bloody

Niggers," Camden,

of

Cunninghame

and Toronto:

Associated

University

Holy Bible: The New American Bible. 1971. Nashville,

Nelson Lackey, Publishers. 2002. "Frantz Fanon on Michael.

and New York: Thomas

the Theology on

of Colonization,"

fournal

of

Colonialism Levinas, Emmanuel.

& Colonial 1969.

History. Totality

3.2:1-29. and Infinity:An Essay Press. University all the Brutes. Ends: New Exteriority.Trans. Alphonso

Lingis. Lindquist, Lorsch,

Pittsburgh: 1996. Sven. E. 1983.

Duquesne Exterminate Where

York: Responses University

New

Press. to the Designification Presses. of

Susan

Nature

Literary

the Landscape.

London

and Toronto:

Associated

Miller,
Nielsen, Nietzsche,

J. Hillis.
Kai. 2001.

1963. The Disappearance

Harvard University Press. Naturalism 1968.

of God: Five Nineteenth-Century

Writers.

Cambridge:

Friedrich.

The Will

New York: Books. and Religion. Prometheus Amherst, to Power. Trans. Walter New Kaufmann. York:

Books. Vintage -. 1989a. On Hollingdale. New

the Genealogy York: Random

of Morals. House.

Trans.

Walter

Kaufmann

and

RJ.

-.
House.

1989b. Twilight of the Idols Trans. RJ.

Hollingdale.

New

York: Random University

Peters, John G. 2001. Conrad and Impressionism. Cambridge:

Press.

Cambridge

Purdy, Dwight
Press. Roberts, Said, Andrew Edward W.

H.

1984. foseph Conrad's Bible. Norman:

2000. Conrad and Masculinity. of Darkness." New

University
York: In Culture

of Oklahoma
Press.

Michael. 1993."

St. Martin's and

Two Visions

in Heart

Imperialism.

New York: Vintage Books.

MichaelLackey 41 Schwartz, Regina M. 1997. The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy ofMonotheism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Smith, Johanna M. 1996. "'Too Beautiful Altogether': Ideologies of Gender and
Empire and New Thrower, Torgovnick, in Heart York: 2000. of Darkness!' Bedford/St. Western 1990. In Heart Martin's. Atheism: Gone A Short History. Savage Amherst: Prometheus Lives. Books. Chicago of Darkness, ed. Ross C. Murfin. Boston

James.

Marianna.

Primitive:

Intellects, Modern

and London: The University

Watt, Ian. Press. Watts, C.T. Graham, Wilson, A.N. 1969. "Introduction." 1980. Conrad

of Chicago

Press.
Berkeley: University of California

in the Nineteenth

Century.

In Joseph

Conrads

Letters

to R.B. Press. Norton

Cunninghame

ed. C.T. Watts. 1999. God's

Cambridge: Funeral. New

Cambridge University York and London: W.W

& Company.

Wollaeger, Mark.
University

1990. Joseph Conrad and theFictions of Skepticism. Stanford: Stanford

Press.