Like Things Fall Apart, Heart of Darkness addresses the colonization of Africa in the late 1800s, but even with this similarity, they are very different stories indeed.
Some things to consider as you read:
FIRST
We have a double narrator, here--first an unidentified sailor aboard the Nellie, a ship currently anchored at the mouth of the Thames River, and then Marlow, a fellow sailor who recalls his time in the Belgian Congo. Marlow's tale becomes the central storyline with only occasional interruptions to remind us of the frame. How does this "double narration" affect the story? Why do you think Conrad created this type of frame structure?
SECOND
In an essay about Heart of Darkness, Chinua Achebe says it is "an offensive and deplorable book," which "depersonalizes a portion of the human race." He adds that Conrad does not provide enough of an outside frame of reference to allow the novel to be read as ironic or critical of imperialism and colonization.
On the other hand . . .
A review by Phil Mongredien states that Heart of Darkness is "as powerful a condemnation of imperialism as has ever been written," and "an invaluable historical document offering a glimpse into the horrific human consequences of the imperial powers' scramble for Africa."
- Which point of view do you think is more accurate and why? Find evidence in the book to support your opinion. We will be debating this. Come prepared to argue either Achebe or Mongredien's point of view.
FINALLY
If you have questions, thoughts, or ideas as you read, post them here!
