Kelly Doyle
“Africa as setting and backdrop which eliminates the
African as human factor. Africa as a metaphysical
battlefield devoid of all recognizable humanity, into
which the wandering European enters at his peril. Can
nobody see the preposterous and perverse arrogance in
thus reducing Africa to the role of props for the breakup of one petty European mind? But that is not even the
point. The real question in the dehumanization of
Africa and Africans which this age-long attitude has
fostered and continues to foster in the world. And the
question is whether a novel which celebrates this
dehumanization, which depersonalizes a portion of the
human race, can be called a great work of art. My answer
is: No, it cannot” (343).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzeYK6DzSWE
 Conrad’s overt racism in both Heart of Darkness and
in his personal life
 How this racism is overlooked by scholars who
proclaim that Heart of Darkness is “among the half-dozen
greatest short novels in the English language” (337).
 We as a society should reevaluate the importance of
Heart of Darkness, past and present.
 Heart of Darkness perpetuates a dangerous stereotype
of Africa
 Frame (like in Heart of Darkness)
 Instances of Racism in Heart of Darkness
 Examples from Conrad’s personal life
 Why our collective view of Heart of Darkness needs to
shift
 Differences in versions of the article 1977/1988
 Title: “An Image of Africa”
 Kinship: “hint of kinship and common ancestry” (338) Conrad … is
concerned not so much about distant kinship as about someone laying
a claim on it (343)
 Humanity: “What thrilled you was just the thought of their
humanity-like yours…Ugly” (339)
 “Place”: “He might not exactly admire savages clapping their hands
and stamping their feet but they have at least the merit of being in
their place” (340)
 Language: “it is clearly not Conrad’s purpose to confer language on
the ‘rudimentary souls’ of Africa” (341).
“The first is that it is no concern of fiction to please
people about whom it is written” (346).
2. “Secondly, I may be challenged on the grounds of
actuality. Conrad, after all, did sail down the Congo
in 1890 when my own father was still a babe in arms.
How could I stand up more than fifty years after his
death and contradict him?” (346).
1.
 How can Achebe’s claims further our understanding of






Heart of Darkness?
Do we completely buy into his claims? Why or why not?
What more is needed to take his claims into account?
Should Heart of Darkness be taken out of the literary
canon as Achebe suggests? If not, what are the merits of
Heart of Darkness that Achebe may be overlooking?
Heart of Darkness is influential for many reasons that are
glossed over in Achebe’s article.
Achebe asserts Conrad’s authorial intent.
Does/would historical context explain some of Conrad’s
views?
RESPONSE HANDOUT