Posted by SDG on July 25, 19100 at 09:41:15:

In Reply to: Re: regarding the fine Conrad scholarship shown on this board... posted by Ishmael on July 22, 19100 at 11:58:54:

Ishmael,

I really appreciate your questions and tenacious hold onto the idea in your mind that Marlow killed the malarial fat man. I also appreciate Swilley, Smith, and LA for their comments and answers. It's only through dialectic and debate like this that we grow in our own thinking and learn to appreciate Conrad as a true master of ambiguity and the human condition.

I didn't realize that Michael had given up on the argument, though perhaps he is reading the board and enjoying himself immensely.

I will say this. I did read "Youth" and I do believe that the Marlow in that story is exactly the same Marlow in HofD. But there is absolutely nothing in that story to indicate that Marlow would kill anyone, though he might get so angry or frustrated with someone like Mahan that he would wish him dead or be glad if he were. But this is precisely so stated in that story. Nothing is so stated in HofD.

Now here's something in HofD that no one has discussed yet. That is that a very clear distinction from Marlow is shown in Kurtz's alarming revelation of his umed power, lawlessness, and sense that he cannot be held back or restrained from outright murder when he threatens to shoot the Russian over an insignifant amount of ivory poaching. And he would have done it too if the Russian hadn't given up the ivory.
Marlow, on the other hand, is always shown in crisis, just trying to survive or get through a difficult journey. How far he would go to survive is just pure speculation, but I suppose it could possibly extend to killing a man if that was the only way he could continue the journey unhindered, perhaps out of a sense of duty or responsibility to the people with him, and especially to Kurtz, who he has an incomplete knowledge of at that point. But there is no real need to do that is there, because the fat man is pretty well incapacitated. Marlow could just as well leave him there. But why not entertain the possibility that he sent the fat man back to camp and just got on with the journey? He might have had some murderous thoughts at the beginning, especially when the fat man wants him to shoot somebody -- but they might just as well be for the men who left him there as for anyone.

Now, I am not the most qualified to speak of Marlow's character. My knowledge of Lord Jim is very vague and sketchy, basically a memory of Peter O'Toole in the jungle, and an early attempt to read the book which I found difficult and unappealing at the time (I know, so immature, but what can I say?). And I know nothing about Chance. I plan to read these two books soon, so I can speak more intelligently on these subjects.

As far as I know, Mr. Swilley and Mr. Smith are very able advocates for Marlow as a man of action who grows into a humane antithesis to Kurtz. They are very thoughtful scholars and deserve complete respect. You may not agree with them, and that's fine. But it's probably a good idea to crank up our level of thinking and scholarship to theirs instead of trying to take petty digs or make unfair attacks in a futile attempt to bring them down to a lower level. It's not gonna happen because you don't get to that level of learning and thinking without gaining a kind of worldly high-mindedness along the way. If you want to walk with them on the higher ground, you're going to have to climb.

Sue

Follow Ups:

• If Marlow did shoot the fat man, it wasn't for some kind of thrill. Are you people sick? It would have been because it was the only humane thing to do. Ishmael 10:20:41 7/25/100 (1)
  • What is this? -- ok let's rumble? -- oh pulleeeze, give me a break! SDG 10:59:14 7/25/100 (0)

Post a Followup