Mark is of course right, and Marlow specifically exempts “the red bits on the map” where All Is Done Properly, and civilisation is preserved.
But that’s Marlow, who is off-and-on close to Conrad, but ... Marlow is presented as just a little too smug to be true in the text as a whole.
Certainly in terms of Conrad’s own life, it grew very specifically from his experience of the Belgian Congo and his meeting there with Casement. Before Casement was persona non grata.
Robin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Weiss
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 4:50 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Conrad and conservativism
I think Heart of Darkness was specific to Leopold's Congo. My sense is that Conrad had no big argument with British colonialism. Conrad's take on colonialism in general tends towards the perils and temptations of going native. But the opening and closing sections are pretty clear about the moral ambiguity (to say the least) of the project.
Best,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Hamilton
Sent: Aug 24, 2011 11:33 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Conrad and conservativism
Well ... _The Secret Agent_ is a tricky one – leave aside all the other problems (i.e. Winnie Verloc, and Conrad being inadept at female figures) the damn book is rooted in a specific moment, not just Anarchist bombs going off, but people *writing* about Anarchist bombs going off. So how much it was a joke, like Stevenson’s Nero in _The Dynamiters_ expiring in a burst of “anonymous infernal glory”. _Nostromo_, like Whitman, contains multitudes, and I guess could be mined for any particular political stance. _Under Western Eyes_ seems to me the most sophisticated of Conrad’s political narratives, as well it should be since it takes off pretty specifically from Dostoevsky's _The Devils_.
_Heart of Darkness_ – well, yeah, I’m one of the ones (the minority these days?) who read it as an anti-colonialist narrative. But that was Conrad the Artist – later, Conrad the Man refused to sign an appeal for clemency for Roger Casement.
Go figure.
Robin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Bircumshaw
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 11:22 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Conrad and conservativism
You know Robert the reason I initially mentioned Conrad, who was paired with St Augustine, apart from the pleasure of an unusual link, was because in the back of my mind was Marjorie Perloff's reaction (on the Buffalo list) to the events of 9/11: she suggested people should go back to Conrad, to The Secret Agent in particular. So it was plucked out the associative logic of memory.
I agree that Conrad's conservatism is nuanced, but I think it is very much there in both The Secret Agent and (very much) Nostromo, but of course the issue isn't whether Conrad is conservative but what that implies for a reader now in the interchange between past and present. I think Conrad identified very strongly with a notion of a defeated aristocracy, he was, after all, a displaced Polish 'pan'.
I am afraid I am continually 'at the doctors' these days, I refused to pay homage to 'the happy box' though. :)
I quoted some lines from the Wikipedia article on Conrad, which included the excerpts from letters, because I had neither the time, physical energy, or access to academic journals and libraries on-line, to do more. I did think I'd intimated this was so but I probably didn't make that clear.
best
dave
On 23 August 2011 12:08, Hampson, R <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
David,
Thank for this. Conrad often tailors his views in his letters to the correspondent – in his letters to the Sanderson’s he speaks to their Christian mindset, for example – but the letters to Graham are probably the most intellectually engaged – and it’s interesting that he carries on a long friendship and long political dialogue with him. He doesn’t simply dismiss him as a socialist ... the exchange leads Conrad to statements about the wickedness of mankind and the need to control that wickedness … and challenges to CG’s politics. But they carry on this dialogue for half a lifetime, so there is obviously something more complicated going on. It is also easy to misread the letters – or citations from them. For example, CG invites JC to attend a political event at which he will be speaking; JC objects that he can’t come ‘because there will be Russians’ there (ie Russian anarchists etc). This is often quoted by critics as evidence of JC’s position … but JC actually did go: so what he says in the letter doesn’t give a clue to his action.
I was trying to open up the idea of JC’s ‘conservativism’ to arrive at something more nuanced. On the one hand, he does say, in one of the CG letters, that mankind is ‘wicked’ – and, as you say, this is a standard conservative standing-point (as we see in the current lust to punish), but he is also anti-imperialist, alert to the new imperialism of material interests etc. He opposes the Boer war, is critical of US imperialism as manifested in the US was with Spain, supports women’s suffrage, attacks theatre censorship …
Sorry to hear you are at the doctors.
Best wishes
Robert
From: British & Irish poets [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Bircumshaw
Sent: 22 August 2011 19:51
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Conrad and conservativism
Robert, am writing on my mobile from the doctors waiting room so briefly, Conrad's political views are very well-documented, particularly from his own letters. His friendship with RB Cunningham-Graham is moot, he said that if people like him could 'reform a street' he'd believe them.
Sent from my BlackBerry smartphone from Virgin Media
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Hampson, R" <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: British & Irish poets <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 18:13:11 +0000
To: <[log in to unmask]>
ReplyTo: British & Irish poets <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Conrad and conservativism
I wouldn’t have thought The Secret Agent was conservative: the account it gives of the Greenwich bombing – in terms of police spies and agent provocateurs was the line taken by the anarchists. ‘Under Western Eyes’ only works on the assumption that Razumov feels guilty for ‘betraying’ Haldin – if you assume that it is one’s duty to report terrorists to the authorities, then there is no novel. Nostromo critiques US imperialism – and shows how international capitalism operates…
I am not sure who you are quoting – or why we /I should believe them. What does it mean to say that ‘Conrad in his private life was predominantly conservative’? Does this mean that he was married and had a family – or something else?
Equally, I would want to know the sources (and context) for the two quotations. Nostromo, with its analysis of the operation of capital (and capitalists) in the creation and construction of the new state of Costaguana might justify a scepticism about the operation of ‘democratic politics’. Is the US a good avert for democracy – or the Coalition here?
Conrad was certainly very sceptical about ‘human nature’, but does this make him a conservative?
Conrad was also certainly very critical of socialism, as a result, but what do you make of his long and close friendship with the socialist Cunninghame Graham – one of those arrested during the ‘Bloody Sunday’ riots?
Best
Robert
From: British & Irish poets [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Bircumshaw
Sent: 22 August 2011 18:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The King Blues
A bit off-topic, but what did you have in mind with your reference to Joseph Conrad?
Robert
Conrad's conservativism, I would have thought. Even without looking at his biography it's rather hard not to notice, vide 'The Secret Agent', 'Under Western Eyes' or 'Nostromo', which espouse a political pessimism about 'human nature' that look towards a conservative stance as thereby vindicated. It was a kind of original sin without the religion.
"Conrad in his private life was predominantly conservative. He maintained a deep abhorrence for socialism ("infernal doctrines born in the continental backslums") and democracy ("I have no taste for democracy"), and held a patronising attitude toward the common folk."
On 22 August 2011 17:09, Hampson, R <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
A bit off-topic, but what did you have in mind with your reference to Joseph Conrad?
Robert
From: British & Irish poets [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Bircumshaw
Sent: 21 August 2011 23:17
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The King Blues
Yes, I grew up next door to an English football club.
I always remember once, after a local derby, across town, sitting upstairs in a traffic-stalled bus watching as about 50 supporters of one side beat and kicked a writhing, grounded, solitary supporter of the others to an inch of his life. In a park and facing a fine Jacobean hall and about a quarter of a mile from where the English Football League was formed. It was like animated Goya.
I could have been that guy on the ground. And I could have been one of his attackers.
One of the troubles the left has had in dealing with how people are is the prevalence of mythologies of predisposition to evil in the literature of the right wing, whether it be St Augustine or Joseph Conrad. The political nature of theories of original sin is indubitable, but so is the problem the politics exploits. The truth is we are just as capable of gratuitous violence as we are of disinterested altruism.
Which does not mean, here in Britain, we should ignore the real issue of the riots, which is that Cameron & Co. are set on exploiting the events for their own agenda, the main target is starting to look like our subscription to the European Bill of Human Rights: on the tv this morning the founder of the Big Issue (!) was speaking for its rescinding, while Cameron too has taken pot-shots at 'health and safety legislation', not to mention the further increase in volume on attacks on Welfare and Housing rights.
That's where the real politics is, not in conflating looters with a protest movement.
I think I've ended up talking to the air.
On 21 August 2011 21:42, Jim Andrews <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
It's very interesting to me to read the discussion you are having of the riots. It makes me think about the Vancouver riot in a different light.
On the one hand, riots happen in Canada after big hockey games, often, like I suppose it happens concerning big football matches in various countries. Political? Well, yes and no. When it happened here, it certainly highlighted the politics of hockey. In the sense that here was a situation where there were a hundred thousand or more people downtown for a celebration--it's hard to drum up that sort of interest for anything, but there they were for the hockey game--hockey is hugely popular here. And the values of hockey, as promulgated by the NHL, are in many ways quite congruent with criminal violence. And there were many rioters wearing Vancouver Canucks jerseys. The many images of young people wearing Canucks jerseys participating in the riot, of little street-version Vancouver Canucks doing violence, were unescapably symbolic. And the Canucks's organizational response was very disappointing. "Those aren't Vancouver Canucks fans!" they proclaimed. Disavowing all responsibility for the riot. And saying nothing they do or stand for encourages this sort of thing.
The Canucks' profit soared this season to $45 million dollars. They are the most popular entertainment in town. They are so much more popular than art that it's ridiculous. And, say what they will, they do stand for criminal violence. Thuggery, in a word.
And that was very clear to more or less everybody, I imagine, after the riot. After the Canucks lost game 7 in a blowout and the riot ensued, the subject of the Canucks themselves simply disappeared. People talked about the riot, but the excitement about the Canucks themselves went to absolute zero.
I played a lot of hockey as a kid and I've been a hockey fan all my life, but seeing the riot up close has changed my attitude. The Canucks do good things for kids' hospitals and similar causes, but the culture they're all about is revolting.
ja
--
David Joseph Bircumshaw
Website and A Chide's Alphabet
http://www.staplednapkin.org.uk
The Animal Subsides http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/books/animal.html
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.bircumshaw
twitter: http://twitter.com/bucketshave
blog: http://groggydays.blogspot.com/
--
David Joseph Bircumshaw
Website and A Chide's Alphabet
http://www.staplednapkin.org.uk
The Animal Subsides http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/books/animal.html
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.bircumshaw
twitter: http://twitter.com/bucketshave
blog: http://groggydays.blogspot.com/
--
David Joseph Bircumshaw
Website and A Chide's Alphabet
http://www.staplednapkin.org.uk
The Animal Subsides http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/books/animal.html
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.bircumshaw
twitter: http://twitter.com/bucketshave
blog: http://groggydays.blogspot.com/
