“(He) is as edifying as seeing a dog in a parody of breeches and a feather hat, walking on his hind legs...(with his) shaved, patterned hair and ornamental scars”
Joseph Conrad in Heart of Darkness (a description of the ‘African fireman’)
Was Joseph Conrad, one of the all-time greats of English literature, a “racist”? Certainly, black Africa’s number one novelist, Chinua Achebe, felt that he (Conrad) was; judging from his writings. Sadly, the younger African literary generation might not know much about Conrad.
Happily enough, the year 2011 witnessed a lively debate – thanks to Deon Simphiwe Skade’s Cape Town blog – on Conrad. Here are some illuminating comments on the matter by four perceptive African writers/critics..
1. O Bolaji:
Quite refreshing essay here by the dexterous Deon, which juxtaposes two celebrated books written by two of the best writers in the world – Joseph Conrad “representing” Europe; and Zakes Mda, representing black Africa! The exhilarating factor here is that Joseph Conrad, dubbed a “thoroughgoing racist” by Chinua Achebe, could hardly have ever imagined that the very heart of black Africa (like west Africa) and South Africa (with its ravages of apartheid) could have produced novelists of great genius like Achebe and Zakes Mda. Conrad, in his Heart of Darkness was not even kind enough to give the black “natives” the simple gift of language or speech! As such natives could only speak in “babbles” and roll their eyes in frenzy! (Forget the facade of the narrator in Conrad’ book, since Marlow’s life very much mirrored the life of Conrad, and his life-attitude to “niggers”) The simple fact is that Zakes Mda comes across as the better writer (than Conrad, yes!); certainly Mda is cosmopolitan, broad-minded, fair and brilliantly witty. Mda is more than fair enough to his white creations in The Madonna of Excelsior; which we can for example juxtapose with the “dog in breeches” (black man!) in Conrad’s novel. We might as well admit that in view of the horrific insults and prejudices the white world (including its writers) have hurled at Africa over the centuries, the black man (its writers) can hardly be condemned for painting whites etc as very bad ...perhaps the most famous example is Ayi Kwei Armah’s very powerful Two thousand Seasons which condemns the white man in no uncertain terms - a novel that made virtually every white reader and critic cry out in protest when it came out decades ago. Yet it is still indicative of how fair distinguished black writers and critics can be, when Wole Soyinka remarked in an essay at the time (on 2000 Seasons) that “the humane sensibility tends to recoil” i.e Armah had overdone things in his novel! Anyway there can be no doubt that in Mda’s The Madonna of Excelsior the style of the writer, whether it be collective or singular, is breathtakingly brilliant, fair and sardonic. We can not accuse Conrad of this despite being one of the all time greats of European writers. For me the most resounding condemnation of Conrad is the fact that the “Heart of darkness continent” (black Africa)which for him teemed with “grunting savages” sans any culture could have produced world class, intellectual novelists like Mda, Achebe, Soyinka, Lewis Nkosi, Es’kia, Awoonor, Munonye, Armah, Ngugi etc eventually. Asseblief, excuse me while I laugh!
2. R Mokoena:
The Madonna of Excelsior – one of the best books ever written and published in the world. We are all proud of Zakes Mda for his accomplishment. The book might not have had the extraordinary success of Achebe’s first book; but in modern times The Madonna is as successful as any book can be; published in many different parts of the world with many translations. That in itself is proof that the book is excellently written with superb, realistic characterization. The western world feels bad when Conrad is referred to as a “racist”, a man who looked down on blacks etc but the evidence is overwhelming. Conrad was humane in his own way, pitying the plights of the natives in Heart of Darkness, but we all know that many people are humane towards their pets or animals but at the same time can never imagine any sort of equality with them. Other books written by Conrad – like the Nigger of Narcissus again show his attitude towards blacks; eg referring to the “repulsive Jimmy” in the book; never mind the “ugly” feelings that washed over him in the Congo area at the people who were “not inhuman” (ie the blacks). At best this is patronising and still insulting, even if the western world cannot see this. It has been said time and again by white literary experts that Heart of Darkness is one of the all-time masterpieces of fiction. And enough of this CORDON SANITAIRE nonsense that Conrad was not Marlow...whilst black African writers like Lewis Nkosi, Achebe, Zakes Mda created convincing, fair European characters, Conrad failed WOEFULLY in portraying his own black characters. Ka nete
3. Pule Lechesa:
Chinua Achebe also criticised other white writers who used to be celebrated overseas then for writing “great” books on black Africa. One of them was Joyce Cary, a brilliant novelist who wrote famous works like Mister Johnson and The African Witch – both based on colonial Africa. Achebe pointed out again that Cary had some disgust for many of his black characters too. I have read The African Witch and it is a fine work; but with the usual prejudices so many whites seem to have; including Conrad! For example the author Joyce comments: “A black man’s sleep is like death”. Pure nonsense – does this mean we do not dream? I think that is why Achebe’s Things fall apart made such an international impact – showing the world that black Africans are humans too, with their own culture, ways of life, superb conversations in their own language, etc. Zakes Mda is keeping up the very fine work of portraying black Africans as humans too, sometimes flawed, but still human – like whites!
4. Deon Simphiwe Skade (Acoustics Strings administrator):
It is precisely conversations like this one that I relish a lot about the literary world, as it depicts our reality with all its follies and victories.
All the gentlemen who commented above raise very crucial points, which are not confined to literature. They interrogate some sociocultural discrepancies, misconceptions and anything else that torments the mind with the need to understand why people act the way they do. Indeed! African writers have achieved an awe-inspiring victory by creating the legacy that continues to inspire the modern world. They established themselves as a force to be reckoned with, in spite of the harshness and disregard from the political climate of the time. The might of the colonial force and its remnants, could not deter them from telling their stories in the remarkable manner that they did, even though it was through the colonial language.
The bottom line is that they managed to tell these stories through their own voices, without the elaborate and often condescending attitude that African stories had been told through the colonial eye. Of course this mode of storytelling had always suggested and entrenched the belief that the colonialists were superior to black communities. Otherwise why would they always tell the African stories on behalf of Africans? As a result, crucial elements of the African life had suffered terrible distortions and created the enduring stereotype we continue to see in the 21 century; an era that best reflects the sophistication of the human mind. The colonialist’s sense of superiority, was easily concealed behind the likes of Marlow, the fictitious character (I will explain this below).
My one argument when we discussed the effect of Conrad’s Heart of Darkness in an English literature class, was that Marlow was in fact all the things that his peers and fellow colonialist were to Africans (I’m being very polite here by the way). He used a powerfully deceptive tool to try to portray himself as not having condescending opinions/mindset towards the natives of the Congo, by presenting the Europeans as ‘racists’ in his narration. He attempted to sit on the fence and present a narrative that would see him emerge as a hero, who denounced the horrendous acts of the colonial forces. However, this only culminated into a dismal failure of someone who was claiming innocence, in spite of the overwhelming evidence of his ‘guilt’. His continued use of derogatory terms throughout his narrative reflected the air of superiority that was embedded deeply in his psychology. Of course this is a world of fiction, which Joseph Conrad admirably constructed. I praise him greatly for such an astounding craftsmanship, and hail his book as one of the best I have ever read - my personal favourite
Touching base on another literary matter that I believe is of a similar vein in subject matter, even though more so for its ‘sexist’ of patriarchal’ theme, let me briefly talk about Tsitsi Dangarembga’s Nervous Conditions. Some people call the narrator, Tambu, a feminist that only embraces this position much later in her life. Some say she supports the patriarchal culture and only presents Maiguru and Nyasha as rebels who cannot escape the reality of lives, thus mocking their efforts.
It’s amazing how people attach meaning to various phenomena, often distorting the intended purpose.
Now, back to the essence of my comment. Literary texts and anything ‘artistic’ should evoke a reaction from those who come across the work. This is part of the social dialogue that people should continue to have, in interrogating some of the ills we have and find remedies for them. It is also a way of celebrating our achievements. We ridicule ourselves through the arts and also reflect just about anything of the human experience. After all, we live in an imperfect world.
* The four comments here (above) are reproduced by kind permission of ‘acoustic strings’ blog.
