Heart of Darkness #1: The Portrayal of the Natives

            In the first eleven pages of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, the reader is introduced to Charlie Marlow, the man telling the story about his experience in Africa.  In this first section of the book, Marlow is only at the outer station.  Here he first comes into contact with the African natives.  The way Marlow portrays the natives he encounters on the hill shows how the Caucasian males did not think of the black natives as humans but instead as uncivilized savages.  When Marlow was walking along the hill, he describes the natives he saw as “’Black shapes crouched, lay, sat between the trees leaning against the trunks, clinging to the earth, half coming out, half effaced with the dim light” (71/83).  Describing the natives as shapes takes away any sense of humanity given to the men and “clinging to the earth” gives the image of someone suffering and begging for help due to the fact that clinging has a hopeless connotation.  Also, saying the men are “effaced with the dim light” gives the idea that the natives hide from the sun, making them less relatable and seemingly less human.  When Marlow is still on the hill, “’While [he] stood horror-struck, one of these creatures rose to his hands and knees, and went off on all-fours towards the river to drink’” (72/84).   The image created by this sentence is one of an animal crawling to drink water.  The image one has when they think of a human drinking water is typically one of an affluent white male standing on his two legs drinking water out of a glass.  This observation of the black man crawling to the river starkly contrasts this image the reader has and shows just how different the black men were from the white European males and how the natives were looked upon as uncivilized savages.  Marlow’s descriptive imagery and wisely chosen diction gives the reader insight into the view of the native Africans as uncivilized savages.

**In the parenthetical citations, the number before the slash equates to the page number in the Signet Classics 2008 version and the number after the slash equates to the page number in the Signet Classics 1997 version.

"Harlem"

            Figurative comparisons in the form of simile and metaphor play a major role in Langston Hughes’ poem “Harlem.”  The poem focuses on the idea of what happens to a lost dream by using a series of similes and a metaphor.  An example of one of the similes comes at the beginning of the second section of the poem; “Does it dry up / like a raisin in the sun?” (Hughes 2-3).  The comparison of a deferred dream to a raisin in the sun highlights how many black Americans had to give up their dreams in order to work and earn money to take care of their families.  When a raisin dries in the sun it takes extended exposure to brutal heat, and when compared to what happens to a dream that has been put on the back burner shows that when the dreams of black Americans in the early twentieth century were put off they often stayed there to dry up until they were no longer the same thing.  This simile gives the idea that the process of the dream dying is slow, but the metaphor at the end of the poem contrasts that idea entirely.  The poem ends with the question: “Or does it explode?” (11).  This question metaphorically relates a tabled dream to an exploding bomb directly contrasting the simile at the beginning of the poem.  The first simile suggests a slow transformation of the dream but the closing metaphor suggests the process is as quick as an explosion and just as destructive.  The dream not only ceases to exist after the explosion of said bomb, but it is blown into millions of pieces with no hope of ever realizing said dream as well.  The usage of figurative comparisons by Langston Hughes highlights the lack of hope black Americans in the early twentieth century had for their dreams and the various ways that those dreams could fall apart.

"Cross"

Thesis:  Langston Hughes uses colloquialism, imagery, and tone in his poem “Cross” to highlight the profound contrast between his mother and father, and his relationship with each them, leading to an identity crisis.

Colloquialism

            “My old man died” (Hughes 9).

The lack of colloquialism in reference to his father shows the type of relationship that he has with his father, especially when compared to his mother.  By calling his father “old man,” it shows that he has a strict relationship with his father based on a required respect, similar to a relationship between a member of the armed services and their commanding officer or a slave and his master.  The title old man has a more respectful and formal connotation than the more informal “dad” or “pop” giving insight into the nature of their relationship. 

            “My ma died” (10).

The use of colloquialism while referencing his mother by calling her “ma,” which is more informal than “mother,” shows how his relationship with his mother is much more relaxed and loving than his relationship with his father. Also, in line ten, he addresses his mother as “ma” instead of as “old mother” showing how he feels more remorse and sadness with her death as opposed to his father’s death when he doesn’t change what he call his father.  The contrast between the formal and informal titles he uses for his mother and father highlights how his relationship with his mother is more enjoyable and loving than with his father.

Imagery

            “A fine big house” (9).

When reading the description “a fine big house” in reference to a white man and a black woman, there is the image of a slave owner and his plantation.  It also portrays the idea that the white man is quite affluent due not only to the use of fine to describe the house but also big, because to have a fine and big house you need to have money.  The contrast is drawn with the economic situations of his mother and father based on where they died.

            “A shack” (10).

Using “a shack” to describe where his mother died gives the image of a black slave living in poor conditions.  The idea that his father doesn’t care about his mother also starts to appear since his father and mother die in completely opposite conditions.  The image of a poor black woman adds to the contrast between his mother and father and starts to portray this idea that he is lost in between both of his parents, not belonging to ether social or racial group.

Tone

            “I take my curses back” (4).

In reference to insulting his father, the speaker says how he had to take them back.  However, the tone in which he said this was not remorseful at all; it seems like he was forced to take his insults back as his father continued to use his power over him.  The angry and forced tone used by the speaker in line four shows the nature of the relationship between father and son and how it does not seem to be a loving relationship that the son enjoys.  Also, the use of the word curse has the connotation that the son intended and wanted his father to be cursed, because those with the power to use curses use them intentionally to harm others.  The son does not like his father very much and wishes that he was actually able to curse his father and shows no remorse when saying that he takes them back.

            “I’m sorry for that evil wish / And now I wish her well” (7-8).

Every child has those moments when they are angry with those they love and wish them harm, especially early in life.  However, they tend to feel remorse for those thoughts and realize that they never actually wanted their loved ones hurt.  In the case of the speaker’s father, this was not true; he had no remorse.  However, in the case of his mother, he felt quite remorseful for his thoughts.  The tone set by the speaker when talking about his mother is one of genuine remorse and sadness when apologizing for his thoughts and with wishing her well.  The speaker has a much better relationship with his mother than his father and loves her much more and wishes her well.

"The Clod and the Pebble"

Thesis: William Blake uses parallel structure along with multiple personified speakers to show the contrast between the two ideals of love coming from speakers with similar backgrounds.

Parallel Structure

“’Love seeketh not itself to please, / Nor for itself hath any care; / But for another gives its ease, / And builds a Heaven in Hell’s despair’” (Blake 1-4)

“’Love seeketh only Self to please, / To bind another to its delight, / Joys in another’s loss of ease, / And builds a Hell in Heaven’s despite’” (9-12)

The quotations above, quatrains one and three respectively contain multiple aspects of parallel structure, highlighting the contrast between the two quatrains.  The first line of each of these quatrains have the same number of words, six, with the same words except “not itself” in line one is replaced with “only Self” in line nine.  The parallelism between these two lines exemplifies how each speaker is talking about the same idea, but has a completely different view on it.  Lines four and twelve have the same effect; the order of Heaven and Hell are switched in each and the last word in the respective lines sound similar but have entirely different meanings, adding to the contrast between the two views.  In line four when a Heaven is built “in Hell’s despair,” it symbolizes how the speaker believes that love can create good when it seems that all hope is lost.  Line twelve symbolizes the complete opposite when a Hell is built “in Heaven’s despite”; this speaker believes that if one attempts to please more than themselves, there will be a refusal to make anything good and all that can be left will be bad.  The parallel usage of Heaven and Hell by both speakers shows the extreme to which they both believe love will make things, even if they beliefs are in total contradiction of each other.  Another parallel aspect to these two quatrains drawing comparisons between the two speakers is the rhyme scheme.  In each quatrain, alternating lines rhyme; similarly, lines one and three as well was nine and eleven end in the same words, “please” and “ease.”  The repetitive rhyme scheme between these two quatrains leads the reader to draw comparisons between the views of the two speakers and realize the differences.

Multiple Personified Speakers

“So sang a little Clod of Clay, / Trodden with the cattle’s feet; / But a pebble of the brook, / Warbled out these meters meet” (5-8).

The two different personified speakers are symbolic of two types of people that would have the respective views on what love should be like.  Both clay and pebbles have ties back to bodies of water, showing that they have similar backgrounds, just as different groups within the human race all come from a similar background.  The Clod of Clay makes the argument in the first stanza that love should seek to please others.  This argument is fitting of the clay because clay is a medium that is used by putting pieces of clay together to make one larger creation, similar to it’s view on love being meant to please others and create a pleasing atmosphere.  The clay is representative of a type of person that feels the need to please and be in the company of others.  The pebble makes the second argument that love should be used to please oneself.  Pebbles are independent solid objects that cannot be easily combined with other pebbles in a manner such as clay.  This provides insight into the argument being made by the pebble because the pebble is making the argument that a self-sufficient and independent human being might make, so the pebble feels as if pleasing others is unnecessary because a pebble has no physical ability to do so and feels that its only concern is with itself.

"Dulce et Decorum Est"

Thesis: World War I saw a change in warfare from the traditional gentleman’s warfare to the more brutal and unforgiving total war.  “Dulce et Decorum Est” shows how the usage of new technologies such as mustard gas have made dying in war much more torturous and less honorable than in the past.

Imagery

“someone was still yelling out and stumbling / And flound’ring like a man in fire or lime” (Owen 11-12).

At this point in the poem everyone has just put their gas masks on.  This is where the reader is first introduced to the man that dies from the gas; he was unable to get his gas mask on in time.  His yelling, stumbling and floundering gives the visual of a man struggling and the comparison to being in fire or lime gives the image of inhumane suffering.

“In all my dreams before my helpless sight / He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning” (15-16).

The man that died from the gas continues to haunt the speaker.  This man has entered the speaker’s dreams, which could signify that this ex-soldier has PTSD, which was another illness that was brought to light by World War I.  The image created in the dream is haunting and horrific; the speaker sees his comrade suffering as he dies and there is nothing that he can do to help.

Simile

            “Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,” (1).

To start the poem, the author compares the soldiers to old beggars.  This comparison is important because it shows just how brutal and debilitating the war is to the soldiers.  The image of old beggars is common throughout history and considered low class and awful, so the author compares the two to show just how awful life is for the soldiers.

“His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin” (20).

The author compares the face of the man who died from the gas to that of the devil, but not just the normal devil, the devil sick of sin.  This says that his face not only looks devilish and inhuman, but also old and decrepit, showing the horror that the gas brings to all of those affected by it.

Symbolism

“Many [men] had lost their boots, / But limped on” (5-6).

The losing of their boots by the men symbolizes the effect that trench foot had on soldiers in World War I. The fact that the men kept going without their shoes is symbolic of the fact that the men feared their opponents much more than trench foot, which in itself is quite the formidable foe that should be feared.

            “the white eyes writhing in his face,” (19).

The man’s white eyes symbolize his surrender to his imminent death.  This poem centers around World War I, and in war a white flag symbolizes surrender.  The man here is dying in war from the gas, and knowing there is nothing left that he or anyone else can do to save him, he accepts defeat and surrenders to the gas and his death.