From Part 1, ¶ 9:
The yarns of seamen have a direct simplicity, the whole meaning of which lies within the shell of a cracked nut. But Marlow was not typical (if his propensity to spin yarns be excepted), and to him the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the tale which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze, in the likeness of one of these misty halos that sometimes are made visible by the spectral illumination of moonshine.
From Part 1, ¶ 14:
We looked on, waiting patiently—there was nothing else to do till the end of the flood; but it was only after a long silence, when he said, in a hesitating voice, “I suppose you fellows remember I did once turn fresh-water sailor for a bit,” that we knew we were fated, before the ebb began to run, to hear about one of Marlow’s inconclusive experiences.
In the narrator’s indirect way (Marlow’s experiences are “inconclusive,” the meaning of his yarn is “not inside” but “outside”) he—with the author—is warning his audience about the tale Marlow will relate.
This post will remain open for comment over the Thanksgiving holiday, with a cut-off time of 5 pm Tuesday December first.
33 comments:
Marlow is a deeper man than the average sailor. He understands broader ideas, ideas which are niether easily contained, nor meant to be. One gets the impression that his tale will be complex, forboding, and unlike other stories which have yet been told. It is an "inconclusive" experience, one which he has kept to himself. It can be concluded that, knowing his nature as a person who feels that the meaning of an experience isn't completely contained in the experience itself, and the fact that he is hesitant to share it, that this story is one which is eye-opening and distinctly uncomfortable.
From past experience, I have not found the stereotyped “sailors” as being bright and insightful fellows. Often they are considered runaways, ex-convicts, and a generally rough-shod group of menial laborers too flighty to settle down into land-based jobs. Little more is expected in the scene portrayed by the ultimate narrator of Heart of Darkness. He notices this trait as “simplicity,” likening the meaning of their yarns to the “shell of a cracked nut” (Conrad 5). Quite obviously, I found this simile as being similar to our (rather overused) cliché, “in a nutshell,” which reveals that their stories are compact, predictable (creating a smooth sloping shape), and concrete, thus the physicality of the nut, a commonly used and discarded object. The narrator explains that Marlow’s tales aren’t inside the nut or “kernel” at all, but are instead “outside” (5). These stories incorporate abstract ideas that do not exist in other yarns. Marlow thinks “outside the box,” yet another cliché that the narrator seems to almost use in this passage.
The narrator also hints that the ideas pondered in these stories are slightly religious, perhaps celestial, by using the terms “halo” and “spectral” (5). Not only does Marlow speak of higher beings, but of the demons of the world as well. This becomes especially apparent later in his yarn as he explains Kurtz and the emotions surrounding his existence.
Regarding the use of the word “inconclusive,” I felt that the narrator said this because Marlow’s yarn were always simply conglomerations of contemplation and emotion, never quite reaching a technical climax and certainly never involving denouement (5,9). I consulted my handy-dandy (pardon the colloquialism, I just had to use it!) thesaurus and found that synonyms for “inconclusive” are “full of loopholes,” “uncertain,” and “proving nothing.” The narrator warns with this word that a reader or listener will not be satisfied by this story. In fact, many previously neat, orderly loops will have been cut in two, leaving a new multitude of loose ends.
As was said previously, Marlow is not an average sailor. He is kind and intelligent. I also think Marlow is a "tell it how it is" kind of guy. I get the impression that many sailors would tell exaggerated tales and those of fantasy but Marlow tells the straight forward truth. Even admitting things that he has done wrong or that might be embarrassing. For example he retells about his experience with his dead sea mate, "I dragged him out, after jerking the spear out of his side, which operation I confess I performed with my eyes shut tight" (112). He admits to closing his eyes and gives this detail which adds to the story.
Like Katie, I looked up "inconclusive" to better understand. Instead of the synonyms I looked up the antonyms of the word to compare the opposite definition. I found out where "decisive," "convincing," and "beyond question." I thought this was interesting because it shows that the story is not the final say on the subject and can be and most likely will be debated.
These warnings convey the sense that Marlow is certainly an unconventional, if not eccentric, sailor. His apparent unusual approach to tales and their essence as well as the phrase, "We knew we were fated," leads the reader to suspect that Marlow is not the shallow, average man that many seamen are thought to be. Consequently, the yarn that is about to unfold is not the traditional seaman's tale.
The first passage leaves me with the impression that we should not look within Marlow's tale for meaning, "like a kernel," but in the surrounding shell that encases it. I believe that this is what the author meant; however, I'm not quite sure I understand the analogy. Usually the "shell" of a tale is what we first recognize and comprehend. We must break through this outer layer to get to the true meaning within. When first reading Heart of Darkness, I thought that this analogy applied. The shell is the tale of Marlow and his quest up the Congo, while the kernel must be derived from the metaphors and symbols within this first impression. Conrad, however, seems to approach this a different way. If the story's meaning is actually what we needed to break through in order to get to the yarn, or is somehow illuminating the tale itself, then perhaps the meaning is more obvious than expected. How the essence of Heart of Darkness reveals the tale is beyond me right now, but perhaps it will come in due time.
It's funny how a group of people can all interpret the same metaphor in different. I guess that's why we have the blog. The forty page introduction to my book (At least I think it was forty, LII pages for any of you who were born in the Mediterranean region several thousand years ago, apparently my book was written for you Mediterranean types) analyzes the nutshell metaphor, stating the tale of a seaman is aimed at "revealing an unambiguous and easily accessible kernel of truth"(XXXVII). I took this to mean an Aesop's fables type of story, where at the end the reader is supposed to learn a simple moral, like slow and steady wins the race.
Heart of darkness is differentiated as an "inconclusive" story, a story without a simple moral easily withdrawn. My introduction quotes Ian Watts who says that the purpose of an inconclusive story such as heart of darkness is to "lead the listener to become aware of 'a circumambient universe of meanings which are not normally visible, but which the story, the glow, dimly illuminates'"(XVII). This means to me that Heart of Darkness is a thinking story. A story with the purpose of broadening ones perspective and making the reader more aware of an entire situation with all factors involved. An inconclusive story does not try to synthesize the facts, but rather presents them in a way that will not only enlighten, but provoke deeper contemplation.
This definition leads me to believe Marlow is a very perspicacious seaman, a seaman who has observed how a story acts upon the minds of men. He recognizes that causing his companions to think about something themselves and draw their own conclusions will lead them to become more zealous despisers of the Congo, then if he were to present a story with all the conclusions tied on the end. In modern society there are so many activists clamoring for support and claiming abuse that such an approach may have been lost upon such men. A story depicting the atrocities in the Congo, vilifying the Belgians, and calling for action may have gotten his companions excited for a moment, but then it would fade to the back of their consciousness like every other cause they have heard about. If they feel, however, that they have divined some truth from a situation for themselves, that conclusion becomes a part of them that cannot be denied, nor easily forgotten. This truth will then arise with them every day, and gnaw upon their soul and conscience until they get involved in the fight for the Congo. "If you give a man a fish it will feed him for a day. If you teach a man to fish it will feed him for a lifetime." (Assuming pollution doesn't wipe out the supply of fish and he's not a vegetarian.)
The narrator’s early observations and descriptions of Marlow’s storytelling give the reader clues about the story to come. The narrator describes Marlow as different from your average sailor. “He was a wanderer,” complex and contemplative, as opposed to the more simple, superficial seamen who “find the secret not worth knowing” (48). Conrad suggests that Marlow, and his tale, are going to require a bit more thinking and contemplation than we are used to. The description of Marlow’s style of storytelling contrasts him with standard sailors, whose stories are simple. Their meaning is obvious; you just have to crack open the nut and there it is. However, Marlow sees the meaning as “misty halos.” His stories are harder to understand- the meaning is there somewhere, it just isn’t where you expect it. The meanings are “sometimes are made visible by the spectral illumination of moonshine,” subjective and difficult to find at first, but existent and enlightening.
The narrator warns us from the start that Marlow’s story will not be straightforward or simple, and we expect the unusual narrative style and complex, multidimensional writing. As well as the ominous foreshadowing in this section about the darkness of civilization, the insight provided into Marlow’s storytelling shows that this is going to be an untraditional tale. I found what Trevor wrote about the ambiguous story enabling people to draw their own conclusions and be more attached to them very interesting. In addition, I think that Marlow’s ways suggest that he is a sophisticated, thoughtful sailor who finds his own experiences ambiguous and open for interpretation. His experience “seemed somehow to throw a kind of light on everything about me – and into my thoughts. It was sombre enough, too – and pitiful – not extraordinary in any way – not very clear either. No, not very clear. And yet it seemed to throw a kind of light” (51). The meaning is unclear to him too, so it is no wonder that the essence of Heart of Darkness is so complex and often difficult for us to follow.
It is clear that these sailors have experience listening to Marlow’s stories when the narrator says “…we knew we were fated...to hear about one of Marlow’s inconclusive experiences.” I think that the others sailors admire and respect Marlow because he is open to telling the truth about his adventures and allows them to make their own decisions as to the significance of his stories. You would not be able to look at Marlow and make a general characterization of all seamen because “he did not represent his class.” The narrator also notes that Marlow begins his story in a “hesitating voice” maybe because Marlow doubts the importance of what he is about to tell.
We should expect to read only a direct count of how Marlow saw things and his thoughts about what he observed. He does not analyze the significance though, and this forces the other seamen and the reader to finish the story with their own interpretation of what it all means. We must take the time to think about what we have read because the answer will not be obvious and there really is no correct answer!
A kernel has a definite shape. The meaning contained in a kernel is unambiguous and absolute. A haze on the other hand, is amorphous and has a mysterious or “inconclusive” feeling attached to it. Using the metaphor of the kernel and the haze, Conrad contrasts the directness of the typical seaman’s tale with vagueness of Marlow’s. Marlow does not hand out the meaning of his tale nicely wrapped in a well-formed shell; instead he only provides the fodder with which a meaning—unnamed—can be made. Marlow’s tales reflect his inquisitive and empathetic character. As Conrad explains earlier in paragraph 9, “[Marlow] was a seaman, but he was wanderer, too, while most seamen lead, if one may so express it, a sedentary life. Their minds are of the stay-at-home order… there is nothing mysterious to a seaman unless it be the sea itself”’. Unlike most seamen, Marlow keeps his mind open. When he goes to Africa, he does not have any idea about what he wants to accomplish there. He decides to go simply because “the snake had charmed [him]” (paragraph 18). Marlow must be telling the story as he has experienced it, and his experience must have been just that hazy and inconclusive to him. The European agents who deny the reality of the evil around them (the bookkeeper who dresses himself in impeccable linen as the black slaves waste away in the jungle is one example) see only the image of Congo they want to see—unwavering in their almost religious faith in the ivory—and never let such mystery as Marlow experiences get to them. As Marlow tells the story, he seems to be looking for new meanings in it rather than teaching a meaning to his listeners. In paragraph 62, for example, he lapses into a private meditation (…”No, it is impossible; it is impossible to convey the life-sensation of any given epoch of one’s existence…) in the middle of his narrative. Marlow keeps his story open to interpretations not only for others but for himself as well, perhaps because the darkness he sees is just too big and too powerful to be held in a kernel and handled by men.
From the get-go, the description of the men and their surroundings conveys a sense of peace, like the calm before a storm, and this is juxtaposed with dark diction. The words "brooding" and "gloom" come up multiple times in the first 3 pages, warnings of Marlow's horrific story. As readers, we can expect a tale about conquest from the in depth description of the kind of business that went on upon the waters of the Thames river (par. 6) and its insight from the use of religious diction like "halos" and "spectral" (par. 9) and the remark about Marlow having "the pose of a Buddha preaching in European clothes" (par. 13).
Marlow is differentiated from the average European seaman when he is described as being Buddha-like physically because he has "sunken cheeks, a yellow complexion, a straight back, an ascetic aspect...[he] resembled an idol" (par. 4). His description hints to his wise character and later on, his enlightening tale. Since Marlow is not a typical seaman, it is inferred that his tale will not be typical either and the meaning behind it will not easily be found. This also warns the reader that Marlow's tale will not satisfy the want for a conclusive meaning but instead it will simply act as the glow that brings out the haze on the subject of the Congo.
I feel Katie's analysis of the first paragraph is quite perfect. I had a difficult time understanding the first paragraph but after reading her analysis and then rereading the paragraph, that makes complete sense to me. Seamen are simple, yet Marlow is not like a typical seaman. From his story, insight is expected. He sees more meaning in experiences than just the obvious ("meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside"). However, this deeper insight is, as said in the second paragraph, inconclusive. Though deep insight is expected from Marlow, the insight may not be credible.
evan sucks eggs.
ill have to agree with sarah (tommy) here. these 2 passages went over my head when i read them but then i read katie's post and now its os much clearer. thanks katie!
being the maing character marlow will obviously have more substance than your average sailor in the story. he's one of the more human character as he is actually digusted by the crimes he seeing in the congo. i found him to be a bit ironic but you'll have to excuse me mr. duncan as i find myself without a copy of the book at the moment. i had to look up the meaning of yard for this context and what it means is basically an interestion story. so yes, his yarn will be out the nutshell, or "outside the box" as it will lead him down a complex story unlike any of the other sailors or characters.
In the beginning of Heart of Darkness, Conrad heavily emphasizes the light-dark metaphor he will be using the rest of the novel (kind of like the title). On the first page of my copy, he uses words that describe light and darkness six times. One repeated adjective is "luminous" which gives me the impression that his story will be one of illumination. This means that Marlow is going to tell a story that will be interpreted in an inconclusive fashion. Quite a few people have already talked about the individualized experience of the novel and how is deeper than the average sailor yarn and I agree with them. But it is also important to think about the definition of "yarn." One specific aspect of this definition is that yarn can mean a fictional story or a kind of hyperbolic nonfiction. By differentiating yarn from the story of Marlow, Conrad makes the distinction between fiction and nonfiction. Simply put, he is saying that the story of Marlow is absolutely true with no embellishment. This heightens the effect of the anticipation created by the "gloomy" atmosphere. In my mind, I see a bunch of sailors sitting around on a deck in the middle of a foggy river at dusk when a narrator's voice appears and says that the following story isn't like all of the other sailor stories; this tale is more profound than you can imagine and it's also true.
and rene sucks more eggs
In the context that Conrad uses 'inconclusive', it seems to me more like Marlow doesn't give a satisfactory ending to his tales, or that they don't seem very connected. There is no real denouement in HOD, which draws the reader away from the euphoric feeling of the traditional "THE END".
I feel we have not done sailors justice. Some of my peers have said that sailors are 'criminals... can't settle down to land-based jobs.' Traditionally, becoming a sailor was like being a fly drawn to honey. Becoming a sailor promised long sought for glory, as Marlow describes for us at the beginning of HOD. Men would buy commissions from the Navy and would serve a period of time until they felt fulfilled in their naval career and sold their commission to a new, fresh sailor. That is the Royal British Navy was run for many years. And yet, even with all that, Marlow is something else entirely from the fresh-faced youths who he worked beside.
This in itself is a warning about the tale that Marlow tells. His yellow appearance hints at his struggle with malaria, and so we know that illness will appear in our tale. However, nothing could prepare us for the horrors of what is to come, not even the Satanic allusions made about the head of the Company. We marvel at the way Marlow went through all these trials, yet the only thing that has left him changed was his bout with malaria.
In class Mr. Duncan briefly mentioned that Conrad may have told sailor’s tales about a noble past, which was a fluttering thought in my mind when I read this blog topic. The narrator goes into detail about the sea and its surroundings, being verbose about even the simplest objects. He calls Marlow an “idol” and describes “knights-errant of the sea,” which, to me, seems to inflate their persona’s. Like other sailors he tends to fluff up his experiences, which is a juxtaposition to Marlow, who explains his tale with only the necessary observations to be noted. It seems that Marlow is the one who probes deeper into the meaning of everything he saw, he does not sit idly by living a “sedentary life,” but he sees the meaning “outside,” where many people seem to overlook, because once a shell is cracked the insides are thought to be more interesting. But my own interpretation contradicts itself because later Marlow seems to be fascinated with the “idea” that is “at the back” of all the exploitation of ivory.
The term “inconclusive” tells the reader that if he/she wants a book with a definite ending and an “a ha” moment, then they would be better off reading Sherlock Holmes instead. Marlow takes the reader through his exact voyage and unlike normal sailor tails with a grand finale, he concludes his tale with unanswered angst and ambiguity.
tales*
my mistake:)
The narrator’s subtle hints about Marlow’s forthcoming tale lead the reader to expect something rather out of the ordinary from the seaman. The narrator starts off by saying that “Marlow was not typical,” which gives the reader the initial impression that Marlow is undoubtedly unlike other seamen. The narrator says that “there is nothing mysterious to a seaman,” depicting the stereotypical sailor (5). But since Marlow is described as being different than other seaman, we know that to Marlow there are indeed many mysteries – one of which is found in the story he tells. When the narrator goes on to describe how Marlow interprets an event, looking to the outside the shell of a cracked nut rather than at the inside kernel like most others do, the reader learns that the significance of the story Marlow is about to recount lies much deeper than the surface level. This simple fact itself contrasts with the typical seaman tale, which is known to be simple and direct. The meaning of Marlow’s story is not as easily discerned. Additionally, the narrator’s tone with respect to Marlow reveals a disparity between the character of Marlow and that of the average seaman. Marlow’s thoughts and observations are much more profound. As in his narrative, he examines the grave realities of humanity, imperialism, and civilization; which are not light subjects.
The narrator also alludes to the inconclusiveness of Marlow’s stories. One of the unique aspects of his account is that it is not a judgment or argument. There is no definitive conclusion to the issues indirectly presented in Marlow’s tale. Instead, Marlow recounts his journey in the Congo via his thoughts, feelings and observations. Consequently, there is ample room left for the reader’s interpretation, provoking further thought and discussion.
Heart of Darkness is not a fable. It’s not an obvious metaphor. Marlow shares one thread of his life story, and, as the narrator warns us, Marlow’s tale, and real life don’t add up to one conclusion. However, the “glow brings out the haze”. I extend this simile to say the events in the book are subject to a universal truth outside the events; the events do not encompass the meaning. However, the unusualness of Marlow's interactions allows us to better see the rules in play. I don't think I've discovered what the rule is, partially because I'm not sure there is one, and only, one message. Other bloggers have identified this feeling as Marlow allowing his listeners “to make their own decision regarding the significance of his stories” (Kirsten). From my own experiences I think one interpretation of Marlow’s message is that discomfort from being in an unfathomable context causes irrationality and stupidity.
Traditional stories that have the meaning inside will draw closer and closer to that meaning and at the end all that is left is the meaning, and every other thread is neatly tied to it. The narrator warns the audience to not expect a tidy ending. As I’ve written this response, I’ve caught myself almost using and re-using clichés, just as Katie suggests that the Narrator does.
Joseph Conrad’s purpose is to explore human nature by providing examples of human behavior in absurd circumstances. Exploration can stumble upon a treasure, but in many cases just collects a lot of observations. To derive meaning from these observations requires time and analysis. Rereading Heart of Darkness is providing the time to think, and both this blog and in class discussion are providing analysis. Let’s see what we will discern from Heart of Darkness.
Along with Marlow’s stories, Heart of Darkness as a whole is an “inconclusive experience.” Like the sailors who patiently waited for Marlow to slowly unveil his tales, the readers patiently wait as the inner secrets within the depths of the Congo are revealed. This short passage foreshadows and warns the readers of the experience to come. The word “inconclusive” alone rings an ominous tone of uneasiness. With synonyms (courtesy of Katie) such as “uncertain” and “proving nothing,” the word inconclusive cautions readers that the whole Heart of Darkness experience is one that will not resolve in a peaceful or calming way. Instead with the feeling of unease, the inconclusive ending challenges readers to slowly digest and contemplate the moral an ethical dilemmas presented.
Conrad very directly states that Marlow does not possess the “direct simplicity” that typical sailors do. Something about Marlow makes him different from the common sailor. Using the kernel and yarn analogy, the narrator conveys that Marlow saw the world in a different lens. Whereas most people might define a kernel as the contents inside, Marlow interprets beyond the physical make-up of the kernel. He examines all aspects “enveloping” it, analyzing events through a broader and more complete perspective. As Marlow is not typical, neither is the tale about to be revealed. The meaning of this tale will not be enclosed in the simple kernel of the words presented. Rather, readers must search beyond the bindings of the book and outside the rigid shells to faintly distinguish the meaning through the haze, warning that the true contents of the books are not concepts that are easy to grapple with.
Marlow introduces himself in the context of his tale by saying he was a “fresh-water sailor,” meaning he was inexperienced or, if I understand the proper connotation, naïve, at the beginning of his trip into the Congo. He isn’t aware of the darkness that pervades the land at the start of his journey, only thinking it of the blank spot on a map. His story is atypical, as it doesn’t have a climax revealing a moral lesson at the end. Rather, the meaning behind his tale is outside the shell. The reality behind the company and the powers of the jungle do not need to be reasoned out or discovered, but are present the whole time. It just needed a context to be placed in, a glow to show off the haze. In fact, the “grand truth” of it all is itself hazy (as Katie has pointed out with her definitions of “inconclusive”). The “halo” could refer to the mists around the African coast that are shown by the moon. This haze, this inconclusive truth behind Marlow’s experiences, surrounds Africa. Moonshine never illuminates what’s behind a fog, it never unlocks the truth. It merely exposes it, showing that there is something encompassing the heart of darkness.
The narrator certainly does not view Marlow as the typical sailor storyteller and suggests that Marlow’s tales are deeper and more profound. Marlow has a considerably different and overall larger perspective compared to general, typical seamen. His experiences are considered “inconclusive”, showing that those who hear his tales do not hear straight, simple stories with morals. Instead, Marlow’s stories of his experiences are about topics that are much more ambiguous and complex than a simple story or a fable. The narrator’s mentioning of the meaning of Marlow’s “yarn” is “not inside like a kernel but outside”, saying that there is a grander perspective and meaning than what it first seems to be. The narrator’s warnings about Marlow’s tale provides us to think that Marlow’s story will be, in the end, left to be pondered upon by the listeners as there is a deeper and more profound meaning, making his story ambiguous and uncertain. The metaphor of the meaning enveloping the tale brings it out as a “glow brings out a haze”, comparing the meaning of Marlow’s tale with the “misty halos” made clear by the “spectral illumination of moonshine”. This suggests that Marlow’s tale will only bring about the “haze”, or the larger conflict about the darkness in the Congo, never fully uncovering it, only exposing it.
I first realized that Marlow was different from the stereotypical seamen when Conrad wrote "he did not represent his class." (39, My book is weird. It has other short stories before Heart of Darkness). Conrad described Maslow as a wanderer, different from the sedentary seaman. I wondered if he could be hinting that Maslow is a wanderer in mind and he may be deeper than the average seaman. Further, Conrad writes "generally he finds the secret not worth knowing." This seems to introduce Maslow as a character skeptical of society. Believing that he has a wandering mind and a skepticism of society, I felt that he would be a character I could align myself with.
The use of "inconclusive" may encompass Maslow's wandering contemplative mind. One may expect a cut and dry story, but not from Maslow. The story can not be fit into a small easily-understood kernel, but it is filled with folds of confusion and disarray.
In paragraph 9 of part 1, Marlow is said to be “not typical”, after stating that the “yarns of seamen have a direct simplicity, the whole meaning of which lies within the shell of a cracked nut.” This means, that while the yarns of seamen have one purposeful meaning, Marlow’s can be interpreted in more than one way and are somewhat vague—hence the “haze”.
As Kirsten mentioned before, Marlow hesitates to tell his tale, possibly because he doubts its importance and also because even he’s not sure how to interpret it, himself. And as Kathy mentioned, he gets lost in his own thoughts as he tries to grasp some meaning from it, rather than trying to convey a meaning to his audience.
Conrad describes Marlow as a “wanderer”, unlike most other sailors who live “sedentary” lives, which shows that Marlow is a complex character—an intellectual. The primary goals of seamen are wealth and glory, which doesn’t change when they reach Africa—Marlow is still unsure of what he wants.
The warnings of the narrator leads the reader to anticipate, a long, “enveloping”, tale, with no detail of description is to be left out. But at the same time with the use “inconclusive” one feels as if Marlow’s tale will be long and vivid, but never reach an answer, moral, or definitive end as is “typical” of “the yarns of seamen”; for seamen love their stories. This ideal is further reinforced with the image of “one of those misty halos that sometimes are made visible by the spectral illumination of moonshine”. One pictures a foggy night, dark except for the blurry radiance of the moon, lines unclean and muddled through the fog, light reflected upon the darkness, making “halos” or wisps of fog clear, and then unclear in the moonlight. The dark, foggy, but moonlit night is Conrad’s metaphor for the ambiguity of Marlow’s tale; no “direct simplicity”, no “whole meaning which lies within the shell of a cracked nut”.
In the second passage Conrad writes Marlow “hesitatingly” began his tale, “only after a long silence”. To the reader, Marlow appears uncertain of whether to begin his tale, his hesitance almost cautionary of the “inconclusive” and heavy tale to come. The sailors listening sat, feeling “fated”, for they knew, as Marlow was no typical Sailor of superfluous, meaningless, uncomplicated narratives, that this tale would not leave them self-assured, but unsettled and quizzical, much the same as readers experience today after reading Conrad’s tale.
Like Becca, I see Marlow in the role of a "wanderer", or even a journeyman- exemplified when he tells of being a "little chap" looking, fascinated by maps, and the "many blank spaces on the earth". At the same though the journey in to the heart of Africa destroyed his, or disillusioned his dreams of exploration;"the glamour's off".
-Oh & I believe the above references to "kirsten"'s post, were actually kristen's :)
The first paragraph exposes the reader to the fact that the coming yarn is not a straight forward one. It's real meaning is not one that "lies within the shell of a cracked nut". It states that Maslow is not a normal seamen, the meaning of his yarn lies outside the kernal, sort of like outside the box or one that requires a deeper understanding to interpret. His story serves as the light behind the fog, casting a shadow but not quite creating a clear image. Maslow's story will not spell out exactly what it's true meaning is but will point the reader in a certain direction and leave the rest to interpretation.
The second paragraph shows that Maslow at first hesitates to tell the yarn, which means that it was in fact a difficult time for him leading one to expect the terrible things happened when he was a "freshwater sailor". Also as the narrator calls his stories "inconclusive" it brings us back to the point of much of the tale being up to interpretation, not completely spelled out for the reader and without an actual ending or conclusion telling the reader what to get out of the tale.
The words "there was nothing to do till the end of the flood", "we were fated...to hear about one of Marlow's inconclusive experiences", and even "his [Marlow's] propensity to spin yarns", as he would, perhaps, spin a long winding tale, suggests that the story will be indeed a long one. Marlow's noted hesitation and the gloomy atmosphere already built by the author's words could be interpreted as a foreshadowing of a dark, heavy tale to come, an "inconclusive tale with no real happy ending, and no satisfying solution... a tale that may leave the audience with a sense of discomfort or distress.
As for Marlow's character, the author makes a point of it to highlight his differences from the average seaman, even specifically saying in paragraph 9, "Marlow is not typical". The reader, or at least I, was given the sense that he was deeper than most, looking at and interpreting things with a different perspective, and understanding things in different ways - demonstrated by the phrase "to him the meaning...was not inside...but outside, enveloping the tale which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze..misty halos that sometimes are made visible by the spectral illumination of moonshine", which almost has a poetic feel to it.
From the beginning, Conrad describes the scene with the sun setting and the dusk falling on the stream, but the mood of the scenery shows that it’s only the start. Marlow is known as the only man who still “followed the sea.” He’s set apart from the expectations of an average, typical seaman. He was also a wanderer (Conrad 39), meaning that he was a very open person, with a thoughtful outlook. Even as he tells the story, he is inconclusive about it and continues to think about it. Marlow gets a lot of respect from his men, and is well aware of it.
The atmosphere of Marlow and his men is very meditative and calm. But with the serenity exists a certain mystery and uncertainty. His insightful tales that his men gather around to listen to is inconclusive, and can only make listeners more confused. In this way, Conrad warns readers of this feature first by introducing the glow in the haze.
As a forward, I would just like to apologize for my late entry. I realize that the blog is closed but would like to make a post anyway.
The author uses phrases like "to him the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside" and "in the likeness of one of these misty halos that sometimes are made visible by the spectral illumination of moonshine" to let the reader know that Marlow is not the archetypical sailor that we've encountered in the past, but a new breed (so to speak) all together. Marlow doesn't tell the same old rehearsed tale that the others do. He continues to think of the story as he tells it, which makes the ending inconclusive and leads those listening to his story, to become confused by it. Although the story isn't entirely clear, the men listening to it can't seem to pull away.
By comparing Marlow to the ethereal glow of the moon, Conrad is warning the reader that Marlow is character like none ever seen before.
Ugh. I missed the deadline again...and I will remember tissues. I will.
I think that the narrator warns that Marlow never quite gets around to telling people what they really want to know or hear. For example, when Marlow says that he doesn't want to bother his listeners with tales of what he, personally, did, he is completely missing the point because there is nothing his listeners want more than to hear of his experiences. Additionally, his tales are "inconclusive" because they do not have the clear morals or purposes that I'm sure many sailors' tales used to, and it is probably more difficult to see the logic in his circular reasoning and thinking.
Marlow is different from others because he doesn't think the significance of stories lies in the details, but rather sees the meaning in the whole. Also, saying that he sees meaning in "haze" shows that he does not see issues in black and white--he recognizes that there are many shades of gray, and Marlow can see and appreciate these.
My apologies for posting super late, but I also still wanted to comment on the post.
From paragraph 9 the narrator describes Marlow as a seaman who views everything from the whole. It seems as though he is saying that Marlow does not look at one part, "one of these misty halos that sometimes are made visible by the spectral illumination of moonshine" but foreshadows that one small thing is part of something bigger. This characterized Marlow as being rather smart and more insightful than most other seamen might be, Marlow's views are from the bigger picture.
I feel like he is saying that in the story he is about to tell the other men they will see one thing or see someone do something small that may not be significant alone but if you look at the bigger picture of why and how something is occurring you will see something more important. From the 14th paragraph the narrator says, "that we knew we were fated," and that sounds as if Marlow tells these experiences to the other men who may or may not be prepared to hear them. Marlow tells his experiences like they were; straight forward and with insight. He does not sugar coat them or even exaggerate and because of his truthfulness, his stories are moving. Perhaps that's why he tells them, to warn the men and hopefully give them a point of view that Marlow considers necessary.
Yes, yes, my reply is late. Sorry about that, and here is my excuse (as every late reply is apt to include): my mom forced me to complete college apps before doing other stuff and since I got home at 4, it took me a few hours to complete my wonderful app.
The other characters introduced on the Nellie besides Marlow are all described by their profession. Each of those characters embodies their respected job while Marlow is the only person to be actually given a name. Already Conrad is telling us that Marlow doesn't represent his profession, the sailor, which is elaborated in paragraph 9. "Marlow was not typical". Given the tendency to spin long tales that seem to ramble on and on, Marlow isn't going going to be like any of the assumptions or stereotypes we normally give to seamen.
The usual sailor's tale is simple, and the meaning of the yarn is just as simple and easy to locate. But this is not the case with Marlow's tale. In paragraph 14, the other characters brace themselves for another recitation of Marlow's stories. The tales Marlow tells seems inconclusive to them, only because they are used to hearing the simple and straightforward tales of the average seaman. To them, Marlow's ramblings seem long, boring, and meaningless. The whole meaning is part of the haze that surrounds the simple understanding of his tale. Conrad warns the readers that Marlow's tales will not be so easy to understand. The meaning is hidden within the background. Only when viewed under the right light with the right information, can Marlow's train of thought be illuminated.
My post is late. I have no excuse. I will have spectacularly soft tissues for tomorrow.
At my first reading of these passages I did not look too closely at these paragraphs. Then I gave them consideration in regards to the prompt. After getting caught up in everyones post, I built up a splendid plan for a response. As I read the prompt one more time, I realized my interpretation didn't fit it at all. But its where the class has taken the discussion so, I'm going to go with it.
The nut shell is like the simplicity and blunt truthfulness of Marlow's tale. However, the actual meaning of his tale is not bound by a completely concrete shell. The shell is cracked, allowing the haze and mist (those unique interpretations) to seep out.
As many people above have shared the common knowledge of Marlow's inconclusive tales, makes him an uncommon sailor and prepares the listener for a story that will be interpreted for more time to come.
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
You can also follow any responses to all entry through the RSS Comments feed.