Sunday, August 14, 2011

Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness III

"Oh, Joseph Conrad. I find you to be ever-so-overrated."

"Not enough sex."

"Don't get me wrong, I love Apocalypse Now, but I wouldn't want to read the novelization."

"This book was very hard to understand. There were too many words. These words cluttered up what was really going on in the book. The only reason why I read it was because I was assigned it for college. If you are having trouble falling asleep, read this book. I guarantee it will put you to sleep."

"I really don't think this book had a point except to infuriate me. Nothing drew me in, and thankfully I haven't wasted brain cells remembering the characters' names."


"It was difficult to get through; most of the 'action' being psychological and in form of flashbacks."

"This book totally disillusions readers. Conrad makes it seem as though the atrocities which take place in this colony do so in all. This assumption which many readers get is false. For this reason I think Conrad should have made it clear that the Belgian Congo was an extreme condition."

"'The Emperor's New Clothes', no less...
Arriving at this page, inspired, enthused by Coppola's cinematic masterpiece 'Apocalypse Now'? Or maybe from the documentary 'Hearts of Darkness - A Filmmaker's Apocalypse'? Eager to learn more? maybe drink at the fountain from which perhaps the greatest piece of cinema, was born? Think again. What we have here is purely and simply a VERY mediocre novella, a work that was written not by a writer, but by a Mariner with a typewriter - a hobbyist. On no account could or should this be taken as a seminal work of either fact or fiction, and I wish those who are forever trying to have this work classified as such a literary milestone would find a real cause to champion. I mean why is this one of the supposed greats? Is it original? No! Well written? No! Does it have well-drawn characters? No! an intriguing plot, perhaps? No. Does it use language in a new or creative way? No. Does it re-define the novella? No! Does it have potential to influence, either in style or content, the works of other writers? No! - then what? What is it that reverberates so loudly? If not the work then the noise of the crowd surrounding the pedestal - eager for a glimpse of the masterpiece that (they have been told) is so revered, so special.

Between the pseudo-intellectual and the literary professor's attempts to 'interpret' this work (for interpret read: paint it their colour) there is nothing hidden, nor magical here, no genius lies between the poor structure and the even worse punctuation. A simple tale, nothing more. Had one not know Conrad actually ventured to the African Continent, one could have easily mistaken his poorly drawn figures, his stereotypical characters as being the stuff of a boyhood imagination - too many comics and children's novels read under the blanket with a torch...

The only extra-ordinary factor here is the fact that Coppola, in his undisputed genius, took this simple, fragmented tale of no real literary worth and from its inspiration produced a moment in cinematic history which will never again be glimpsed, a peak never again scaled. That is the only thing one need be in awe of here."

"My daughter had to read this book as part of a summer assignment for English. I, being one to read classics, looked forward to reading another good book.

Conrad's rambling tale is difficult to follow, but even more, BORING to follow.

I can more easily read a book on quantum physics. To require someone to read Conrad is more like punishment than education."

"the novel show us the reality of Europeans
realy i d'ont like this novela ,because it is very complex ,it needs a lot of atention .It shows us the primitive aspect of man ."

"I was able to get through it by force of will. This is one of those over-rated classics that were declared a classic a long time ago and now are blindly accepted as such. More than that, I see that many try to affirm it's alleged greatness by saying 'me too' in clever ways."

"How many English professors would be up a creek (you know which creek) if everybody suddenly figured out that authors like Conrad are overrated?"

"I believe I am unimpressed with this book because man has not changed in the last 100 years. Man is still just as greedy today and he was then, if not more so. Now, the deeds of men (the darkness of men) are normal practice. Maybe I am just terribly jaded."

"This book is a horrible collection of excess verbiage and meaningless slime I have ever read. The book is extremely suicidial in nature and implies that human nature is purely evil and the best thing that can happen is for us to look over the edge, discover, 'the horror, the horror' that is life, and die. My, isn't that inspiring and uplifting? The 'depth' of this book is discovered only as one looks for depth in a pond and mistakes the reflection as depth. This book is a thin veneer covering a lack of creativity due to Conrad using up all his good material in earlier writings. This book should not be combined with alcohol or other depressants. Scratch that, this book should not be combined with breathing humans. Let this book lie with its subject, dead."

No comments:

Post a Comment