Our blog is something casual. It will be used for good times, and the occasional sweet-as assignment. Feel free to be silly, adventurous, supportive, and curious.
Monday, April 7, 2008
The Coast Line & Enemies(?) (13-14)
5 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Shelby and I looked at this section in class today.
"The idleness of a passenger, my isolation amongst all these men with whom I had no point of contact, the oily and languid sea, the uniform sombreness of the coast, seemed to keep me away from the truth of things, within the toil of a mournful and senseless delusion." (13)
We looked at this passage and thought it was interesting that he says the sea is keeping him from the truth. Earlier on this page he mentions that the dark continent is surrounded by the white surf. While he says the above quotation he is still in the white sea. White's connotations are usually "pure", "angelic" and often "truth" while darkness is "lies." However, in this quotation Marlow is referring to the dark continent of Africa as the truth. This is contrary to what other imperialists would say, as they thought they were bringing the truth to the "savages." On page 6 he also says that "they were man enough to face the darkness." In this sentence we talked about in class how he may be referring to the darkness as the truth, because usually you would face the truth.
"Pop, would go one of the six-inch guns; a small flame would dart and vanish, a little white smoke would disappear, a tiny projectile would give a feeble screech--and nothing happened. Nothing could happen. There was a touch of insanity in the proceeding, a sense of lugubrious drollery in the sight; and it was not dissipated by somebody on board assuring me earnestly there was a camp of natives--he called them enemies--hidden out of sight somewhere." (14)
In his use of "insanity" and "drollery" Marlow shows that he thinks the idea of shooting onto the continent with no real reason is not the best way to treat the situation. He also distances himself from calling the natives enemies by saying "HE called them enemies." This emphasizes the fact that is was not Marlow that called them enemies, but another man on the ship.
continuing where Tenaya left off, we also looked into the ideas of the term 'enemies' and the descriptions of the shore.
In the latter quotation Tenaya referenced on page 14 there is a reference to the Africans as 'enemies'. Marlow himself does not call these people enemies and hesitates to repeat the term as his own. He instead distances himself from this negative term by intentionally telling us that it is not his own. This term later morphs as Marlow questions it. Later on he says "They were not enemies, they were not criminals they were nothing earthly now, nothing but black shadows of disease and starvation lying confusedly in the greenish gloom" (17). The progression and changing of the term indicates Marlow's hesitance to lay blame (as the other terms, enemy and criminal, indicate) on the Africans for what ever they had done (if anything) which defies common standards of the time. Marlow, however, does not definitively blame anyone else for their hardshit. He instead describes them in a pitiful and pathetic way, which is not necessarily any better than the term they were given originally. Again, Marlow takes an ambiguous and undefined stance.
The pithy descriptions of the shore are likely a metaphor for more than one thing but Tenaya and I chose to relate it to race and imperialism. The description on page 13 goes as follows “I watched the coast. Watching a coast as it slips by the ship is like thinking about an enigma. There it is before you – smiling, frowning, inviting, grand, mean, insipid, or savage, and always mute with an air of whispering—Come and find you. This one was almost featureless, as if sill in the making, with an aspect of monotonous grimness. The edge of a colossal jungle so dark green as to be almost black, fringed with white surf, ran straight, like a ruled line, far far away along a blue sea whose glitter was blurred by a creeping mist.” (13). The description of the land (Africa) is described as so dark that it is almost black. This is both ominous and enticing. The African people and the land that they sit on are represented by the dark color and the invasion of the Europeans is represented by the “white surf”. These, from a European perspective at the time, two colors, white and black, represent knowledge and ignorance, respectively. In the passage there are a set of adjectives that are juxtaposed to make the entire statement ambiguous.
Hannah and I discussed these two incidences Monday in class. We focused on the conflicting views that Marlow is constantly relaying. First, we are presented with a long description of the coast and surrounding scenery, which has a ton on contradicting diction. On the one hand, Marlow describes the voice of the surf as “a positive pleasure”, and that it “had its reason, that had a meaning”. Marlow also describes the natives that he sees as “natural and true” and “a great pleasure to look at”. However, Marlow constantly refers to the “somberness of the coast”, the “monotonous grimness” and the “God-forsaken wilderness”, which seems a paradox in itself. We also are presented with the image of the black coast line, “fringed with white surf”, which seems to be a symbol for the native, untouched forest being invaded with white settlers. Another interesting image is of “the formless coast bordered by dangerous surf, as if Nature herself had tried to ward off intruders”. These images parallel the idea of colonialism, and the fact that Marlow describes these conflicting images show his unwillingness or inability to come to a conclusion as to what his views on colonialism are. Then, we have the image of the ship shooting aimlessly into the continent. This image is presented with a much more negative description, “a touch of insanity”, “lugubrious drollery”. Marlow seems to be emphasizing the ridiculousness of the situation, juxtaposed with the coast and the natives which have such great “meaning” and “truth”. However, Marlow still holds off as to coming to any conclusions as to what this great truth is, proving that he has yet to take a definite stand on the situation.
5 comments:
Shelby and I looked at this section in class today.
"The idleness of a passenger, my isolation amongst all these men with whom I had no point of contact, the oily and languid sea, the uniform sombreness of the coast, seemed to keep me away from the truth of things, within the toil of a mournful and senseless delusion." (13)
We looked at this passage and thought it was interesting that he says the sea is keeping him from the truth. Earlier on this page he mentions that the dark continent is surrounded by the white surf. While he says the above quotation he is still in the white sea. White's connotations are usually "pure", "angelic" and often "truth" while darkness is "lies." However, in this quotation Marlow is referring to the dark continent of Africa as the truth. This is contrary to what other imperialists would say, as they thought they were bringing the truth to the "savages." On page 6 he also says that "they were man enough to face the darkness." In this sentence we talked about in class how he may be referring to the darkness as the truth, because usually you would face the truth.
"Pop, would go one of the six-inch guns; a small flame would dart and vanish, a little white smoke would disappear, a tiny projectile would give a feeble screech--and nothing happened. Nothing could happen. There was a touch of insanity in the proceeding, a sense of lugubrious drollery in the sight; and it was not dissipated by somebody on board assuring me earnestly there was a camp of natives--he called them enemies--hidden out of sight somewhere." (14)
In his use of "insanity" and "drollery" Marlow shows that he thinks the idea of shooting onto the continent with no real reason is not the best way to treat the situation. He also distances himself from calling the natives enemies by saying "HE called them enemies." This emphasizes the fact that is was not Marlow that called them enemies, but another man on the ship.
continuing where Tenaya left off, we also looked into the ideas of the term 'enemies' and the descriptions of the shore.
In the latter quotation Tenaya referenced on page 14 there is a reference to the Africans as 'enemies'. Marlow himself does not call these people enemies and hesitates to repeat the term as his own. He instead distances himself from this negative term by intentionally telling us that it is not his own. This term later morphs as Marlow questions it. Later on he says "They were not enemies, they were not criminals they were nothing earthly now, nothing but black shadows of disease and starvation lying confusedly in the greenish gloom" (17). The progression and changing of the term indicates Marlow's hesitance to lay blame (as the other terms, enemy and criminal, indicate) on the Africans for what ever they had done (if anything) which defies common standards of the time. Marlow, however, does not definitively blame anyone else for their hardshit. He instead describes them in a pitiful and pathetic way, which is not necessarily any better than the term they were given originally. Again, Marlow takes an ambiguous and undefined stance.
The pithy descriptions of the shore are likely a metaphor for more than one thing but Tenaya and I chose to relate it to race and imperialism. The description on page 13 goes as follows “I watched the coast. Watching a coast as it slips by the ship is like thinking about an enigma. There it is before you – smiling, frowning, inviting, grand, mean, insipid, or savage, and always mute with an air of whispering—Come and find you. This one was almost featureless, as if sill in the making, with an aspect of monotonous grimness. The edge of a colossal jungle so dark green as to be almost black, fringed with white surf, ran straight, like a ruled line, far far away along a blue sea whose glitter was blurred by a creeping mist.” (13). The description of the land (Africa) is described as so dark that it is almost black. This is both ominous and enticing. The African people and the land that they sit on are represented by the dark color and the invasion of the Europeans is represented by the “white surf”. These, from a European perspective at the time, two colors, white and black, represent knowledge and ignorance, respectively. In the passage there are a set of adjectives that are juxtaposed to make the entire statement ambiguous.
Hannah and I discussed these two incidences Monday in class. We focused on the conflicting views that Marlow is constantly relaying. First, we are presented with a long description of the coast and surrounding scenery, which has a ton on contradicting diction. On the one hand, Marlow describes the voice of the surf as “a positive pleasure”, and that it “had its reason, that had a meaning”. Marlow also describes the natives that he sees as “natural and true” and “a great pleasure to look at”. However, Marlow constantly refers to the “somberness of the coast”, the “monotonous grimness” and the “God-forsaken wilderness”, which seems a paradox in itself. We also are presented with the image of the black coast line, “fringed with white surf”, which seems to be a symbol for the native, untouched forest being invaded with white settlers. Another interesting image is of “the formless coast bordered by dangerous surf, as if Nature herself had tried to ward off intruders”. These images parallel the idea of colonialism, and the fact that Marlow describes these conflicting images show his unwillingness or inability to come to a conclusion as to what his views on colonialism are.
Then, we have the image of the ship shooting aimlessly into the continent. This image is presented with a much more negative description, “a touch of insanity”, “lugubrious drollery”. Marlow seems to be emphasizing the ridiculousness of the situation, juxtaposed with the coast and the natives which have such great “meaning” and “truth”. However, Marlow still holds off as to coming to any conclusions as to what this great truth is, proving that he has yet to take a definite stand on the situation.
Post a Comment