|
|
Due to spam and off-topic content, these forums are being phased out and replaced with new great books forums. Please join us!
Posted by SDG on July 25, 19100 at 10:59:14:
In Reply to: 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. posted by Ishmael on July 25, 19100 at 10:20:41:
: Don't forget that 'Heart of Darkness" is a story written from the point-of-view of a man who heard a story from a man named Marlow once upon a time. You have all obviously read the story. Why do you insist that "Marlow wouldn't have done that"?
**Weeell, "insist" is rather strong language for making an intelligent case on either side. I think that both sides COULD be well represented, but in no way could anyone insist on one side against the other when all the arguments have to be made based on inference. If this went to a judge and jury, we'd all be laughed out of court. But as a matter of dialectic and thoughtful argument, it really breaks ground for a new kind of literary ysis -- a brave new world of wider and wider thinking, ever expanding circles of thought that enable us to think better about Conrad and the novel, notwithstanding the character or characters in question.
Conrad's whole intention was to call attention to your illusions of civilization and the fragile balance of your ideals and the real world.
**Cool, dude. Not a problem, but is this intention used as a generalization of his purpose which is, by implication, supposed to make us believe that the very thought that Marlow could not be a murderer is an illusion? Isn't that kind of reasoning sophistic, specious, and backwards?
: [SWILLEY: How can you presume to know what Conrad's "intentions" were?
: ISHMAEL: The same way you can presume to know what Marlow would or wouldn't do based on the second-hand characterization of him in the context of a frame story.]
Well, Ishmael, answering Swilley's q. with yours is interesting and thought-provoking in the sense that none of us can ever presume to KNOW anything through hearsay, inference, etc. But Swilley has made a very good case based on a well-studied and considered ysis of the novel and its characters. I would very much like to see you, or someone, make another case, just to see how it would play out, with like brilliance and scholarship.