"They were no colonists; their administration was merely a squeeze, and nothing more, I suspect. They were conquerors, and for that you want only brute force— nothing to boast of, when you have it, since your strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others. You grabbed what you could get for the sake of what was to be got. It was just robbery with violence, aggravated murder on a great scale..."
The discussion of the European "conquerors" in Africa (and elsewhere during the era) is especially. These people, like Conrad claims through Marlow, were not colonists. They did not seek this land to live in, they merely wanted to exploit the nation's labor and natural resources for their own gain. Their conquest was successful because they were stronger, not necessarily physically, but mostly technologically. The Africans could not compete with the Europeans guns or other 'modern marvels.' This unequal competition was in no way the fault of the Africans themselves or the result of the triumph of the Europeans, it was the result of chance (if you've read Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel, you know that it could be considered only the result of geography!). Marlow also depicts the greed of these European explorers. They pillaged and plundered what they could, not caring what devastation they left behind.
No comments:
Post a Comment