Originally Posted by
OrphanPip
I don't think the distinction is lost on Achebe. You suggest that we should suspend judgment of what the novel says about Africans, simply because they are a symbol being used to explore European issues. That's the kind of argument that Achebe has so often railed against. I think it's fine to say that the Africans in the novels are being used for a specific purpose by Conrad, but that doesn't mean the novel isn't saying something about Africans. In fact, that's almost worse than if the novel were saying explicitly that Africans are brutish animals; instead, it's saying Africans are useful props, like umbrellas or a stage backdrop.
What seems selfish here is not Achebe pointing out how this novel speaks negatively about Africans, but rather the fact that people seem to think it's OK to completely ignore that this novel says anything bad at all, because really it's all about Europeans. Well I guess that makes it all good, because if it's about Europeans then it doesn't matter at all that it contains black characters described as dogs standing on their hind legs. I may not agree with Achebe that Heart of Darkness is not worth teaching at all, but I'm fully behind him in the belief that the novel is thoroughly racist.