Heart of Darkness: Moral Ambiguity
In the imperialistic novella Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad establishes Marlow as a character of incontrovertible moral ambiguity. For insight into his wavering morality, one could analyze what is perhaps the greatest contradiction in the novella itself. Marlow, a character seen among his peers as virtuous and vigilant, discusses passionately his detestation for the immoral act of lying. This tirade against lying not only creates a sense of moral high-mindedness in Marlow to the audience, but more specifically, creates what appears to be a firm, unalterable belief in the iniquity of lies. After comprehending the degree to which Marlow despises lies, the reader should be fully confident that Marlow should not tell a lie for the rest of the novella. However, a single lie on Marlow’s behalf to Kurtz’s mistress would consequently bring into fruition the possibility of a highly dubious and unreliable narrator. Not only this, but it would make unclear whether Marlow was forced to lie under a stressful situation, or if his morality is in fact abstruse and ambiguous.
Marlow himself proclaimed, “You know I hate, detest, and can't bear a lie, not because I am straighter than the rest of us, but simply because it appalls me. There is a taint of death, a flavour of mortality in lies - which is exactly what I hate and detest in the world - what I want to forget. It makes me miserable and sick, like biting something rotten would do.” A substantial amount of one’s moral solidity is dependent on one’s capacity to tell the truth. In Book II of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle gives insight into how a reader should analyze Marlow’s contradiction, “With regard to truth, then, the intermediate is a truthful sort of person and the mean may be called truthfulness.” In other words, a truthful person will consistently tell the truth, and he will do this because it is the virtuous thing to do, not in the fear that his lie will be discovered. A morally virtuous person, by Aristotle’s definition, will tell the truth under all circumstances regardless of the pressure placed on that person. Marlow nearly makes it to the end of the novella without telling a single lie, however his apparent hatred for lies was not enough to prevent a sudden collapse in his morality. Marlow tells Kurtz’s mistress that her fiancee’s last words were her name, when in actuality they were, “The Horror! The Horror!”
Certain critics believe that Marlow was simply being polite, as a man should be to a woman in the late 19th century more so than in this era, in order to prevent any further emotional pain in Kurtz’s mistress. However, whether Marlow was attempting to mollify the pain of the mistress or not, he negated the credibility of his so-called detestation for lies. With such a drastic inconsistency in his beliefs, Marlow opens up the reality that he is a morally ambiguous character, and perhaps more importantly, an unmitigated hypocrite. There is also a possibility that Marlow lied to Kurt’z mistress as a result of the lack of purpose he felt at the time. He had made it a top priority to see Kurtz and finally meet him, but Kurtz dies shortly after they meet. This lack of fulfillment led to a sharp decrease in Marlow’s morality, as he just lost the person whom he admired most. In this pitiful state, Marlow may have lied simply because he felt that morality was no longer important. He claims that he didn’t tell the truth because it would have been “too dark—too dark altogether.” However, a virtuous person will tell the truth, regardless of how dark the result will be. Morality is not something that can be modified based on a stressful or trying circumstance, rather, an individual must adapt the situation itself to fall in favor of his/her moral principles. Marlow, if he desired to be viewed as a morally astute character, would have to tell the truth to Kurtz’s mistress. Marlow, had he told the truth, would be seen as a virtuous man because he would have supported his claim of his distaste for lies. He allowed the situation to dictate his morality, which is a clear sign of Marlow’s weak moral values.
Marlow is a character of unquestionable moral ambiguity as he establishes himself as the greatest hypocrite in the novella. He boldly claims his antipathy for lies, yet he himself is one who lies. Whether Marlow’s fabrication of Kurtz’s last words were an act of civility and kindness, or if the result of the lie would have been too dark for him to manage, he remains a morally ambiguous character for this contradiction. The reader is deceived into believing that Marlow is an honorable character, one who is respected by his companions, based on the proclamation of his hatred for lies. It would be an injustice to the novella to simply allow Marlow to lie to Kurtz’s wife and still maintain this feeling of reverence. Therefore, Marlow is neither a character of virtue nor a character of absolute evil, he is simply a character of hypocrisy; specifically, he is one who claims to have moral standards yet his behavior does not conform to his beliefs.
Works Cited
Conrad, Joseph. Heart of Darkness. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1963.