Facilitating Ignorance

The role of women in the home, in the work place, and in the media is constantly under fire. What do we expect of women? Misogyny says they should be condescended, chivalry says they should be protected, forward thinking says they should be respected.  In Joseph Conrad's short novel, Heart of Darkness, set in Africa when european countries were at the height of their imperialism, the two main female characters are incredibly naive to the reality of the darkness of the Congo. Many readers critically interpret the shallow thinking of these two women (protagonist Marlow's aunt and Ivory Lord Kurtz' 'betrothed') as a representation of Conrad's opinion on women. However, when Marlow ends his journey down the Congo River and returns to the ignorant betrothed of Kurtz, the reader notices irony in the fact that Marlow, who once criticized the naivety of his female aunt, actually contributes to the problem. Perhaps Conrad was trying to relate a different message?

Notice how this man effectively protects the female by lovingly closing her ears.

Marlow and Kurtz' betrothed meet for the first time as Marlow returns from his dark journey, where he met a deeply affected Kurtz. As she blubbers ignorantly about what an incredible man Kurtz was, the betrothed demands to know what Kurtz' last words were. Marlow relates:

"'I was on the point of crying at her, 'Don't you hear them?' The dusk was repeating them in a persistent whisper all around us, in a whisper that seed to swell menacingly like the first whisper of a rising wind. 'The horror! The horror!' 

''His last word-- to live with,' she murmured. 'Don't you understand I loved him--I loved him--I loved him!' 

'I pulled myself together and spoke slowly. 'The last word he pronounced was--your name'" (Conrad, Loc 1409).

In attempts to protect Kurtz' betrothed from Kurtz' horrifying downfall, Marlow lies. His warm-fuzzier version of Kurtz' death adds fuel to the raging fire of the betrothed's naivety. This entire exchange highlights the irony and hypocrisy imbedded deep within countless social structures, especially the double standards of feminism.

This principle applies as we attempt to adapt to and understand the ever-changing social norms that prevail in society today.

As readers venture deeper into cyberspace, are we too, contributing to the narcissism, anonymity, and misconceptions associated with the internet? We encourage young girls to not base their self worth off of the pictures they see on the internet--"It's not real!"--but how long do we spend picking out the filter that is least noticeable but most flattering for our skin tone? We ridicule the loudest anonymous mouths on online forums, but how comfortable are we connecting our on and off line personas? I, for one, don't like the idea of my picture being connected to my Goodreads profile... why is that? We acknowledge that so much of what exists online is not completely true, but we contribute to it.