Achebe on Conrad

[jbor]

http://www.thenation.com/issue/000710/0710north.shtml

You probably need to read the full review to get the context. Better still,
have a look at the earlier essay itself:

*Hopes and Impediments: Selected Essays* by Chinua Achebe (1990)

It's only quite short.

I think the difference between colonial and post-colonial perspectives is
captured in the distinction Achebe is making. It also illustrates the/a
major difference between *Heart of Darkness* and *GR*. In Conrad's novel the
focus is always on Kurtz, while the "dusky natives" are merely an
abstraction. In Pynchon's novel the Kurtz figure *and* the African
experience receive equal prominence in the text.

best


----------
>From: "David Morris" <fqmorris at hotmail.com>
>

> This seems to me a kind of novel-fascism.  It reeks of a "politically
> correct" yardstick.  Mythic places ARE!  We take them where we find them.
> If they MOVE YOU, that's all that matters.  The "why do they move me?" is a
> great subject to explore, but let's not downgrade art for choosing the
> "wrong" mythic "backdrop."