??

It is impossible to make a value judgment against one person's view of a literary work. The Heart of Darkness's muddled nature can be attributed as a symbolic triumph meshing dark and light symbols to illustrate the biased, perhaps even racist nature of the european colonial time period. On the other hand, the muddled nature of the work could simply be attributed to a writing style that is over ambitious and painstaking to read. The question is are you a symbol hunter or a symbol hater? The readers of this work can easily file their opinion based on this question. You either love Conrad or you hate him. No middle ground.

Ralph, Ashie, and all who agree,<br>Open your God Damn eyes. Personal enjoyment of the story, and respect for literary talent are completely separate, and you have none of the latter. I think Anna and An AP Student accurately depicted you and your ability to assess letierary works. I chose to read Heart of Darkness in high school. I nderstood the literature quite well and still feel this is one of the greatest works written. Do I feel the book should be required reading for a high school calss? No, but for an advanced, dual enrollment, or AP calss it is fine. If you are in these classes, then you should have the ability to understand this great work. That does not mean you have to like the story or the underlying themes, but you should respect the work.

I am studying this book fo A-level i am only 16 years old, and i have more respect for good lit than you. This book is truely amazing the book is hard to understand yes i agree but thats the whole point it is a in depth book with numerous interpretations. This is why the book is so exciting to read. Is is not boaring as many critics say, maybe you are just blind, and dont know a good book when you read one. I have not read many books but i am glad that this was one of the first, it has inspired me to read more.

I don't understand Aaron's comment "...boring or not, this novel is a masterpiece of English Literature". How can a book that is "boring" be a masterpiece? If it's boring, no-one is going to read it and as such, it will just be a collection of boring words, rather than literature. I liked this book and didn't have a problem understanding Conrad but I understand that some people don't like it and they're perfectly entitled to their opinion of it; it is hard going for people who are not used to this style of writing. I also understand where Ralph is coming from, I have just had to study a book called 'Dispossessed" by Phillip Hodgins. It was a terrible book but we studied it because it was written in blank verse. Just because a book is written in blank verse doesn't make it good but my teacher had orgasms over it anyway!

Dear Ralph,<br><br>Although I do not agree with your sweeping condemnation of the book, I know exactly where you are coming from. The first time I read the book, I was roughly bout the same opinion as you regarding the book's merits. However, on the advice of my former English teacher, I undertook to read the book a second time. I am now firmly of the opinion that "Heart of Darkness" is probably the best thing I have ever read. The seemingly impenetrable writing you complain of, serves largely to imbue the monstrous horror with a sense of subtlety. It adds an atmosphere of enigma to Kurtz's descent into debauchery.<br><br>Give it another shot. Read it again.

The critics have presented the following evidence:<br><br>"poorly and confusingly done" <br>"utterly boring and clouded "<br>"Reading this novel was horrible"<br>"convoluted and boring "<br>"Even my lit teacher hates it"<br><br> Although this novel's plot is not neatly laid out and does require careful reading, I cannot agree that it suffers from either a poor or confusing structure. While not "utterly boring," it is not a Dan Brown, Higgins Clark, or Tom Clancy reproduction of literature. <br> Do not take Heart of Darkness with you to the beach because it is not meant to entertain your brain in lieu of television! It presents the nature of the primitive man and of a man restrained by the opinion of society. The horror is that a man can flip between both with ease, but can never fully leave either stage. For example, the fireman in the steamboat becomes caretaker of the boiler after some simple training, but still wears a charm of rags and leaves the bone above his lip. He fires a gun at the attackers in defence, and is the only one struck down by an arrow. Kurtz is the "civilized man" set loose---he controls the natives with a showcase of violence and dies realizing the revolting fate of man. Marlowe analyzes all of this but does not judge. Kutz is still a "remarkable" man and the natives are not at fault. It is really hunger and self preservation that drive both groups. <br><br>A similar point of view is seen in Lord of the Flies (although nature plays a larger role in HOD) and Robinson Crusoe (although less overwhelmingly condeming of the fate of man). It is through Nature that we see our true selves...within this Heart of Darkness it is possible to glimpse the animal instinct and recoil in horror. This is what Conrad wants to show us.<br><br>PS: Lit teachers who say, "I hate this book but you must learn it anyway" are hypocrites.

We're studying it right now and I must say Ralphs "reading" of Heart Of Darkness put the sunshine back into my day. Why is everyone so in love with this book? In my opinion this is just some guys way of showing off his intimate knowledge of the english dictionary while telling a story that might have succeeded had he come off his high horse and gotten over the whole "no words under three syllables" rule. And we can relate to the mental masturbation thing as our lit teacher is obsessed with this book and it's painful as noone takes it seriously in our class except for my boyfriend-I'm wprking on that. Cheers, Love some sick and tired lit students

Heart of darkness is stupid-I see what it means so I am not an uneducated simpleton, yet I still dislike it. Yes, a lot of people post hate messages simply because they do not understand-I am not one of them and neither is the majority of my literature class. Yet it must be saying something that informed, educated young adults who have taken the time to read and analyse this frustrating novel, still find reason to dislike it. If anything, it should be taken off the lists. It is not aimed at young people and thus should not be forced upon us. Those who choose to read it, all the power to you, your opinions are your own. However, when a book this complex is forced upon a class of 16-18 year olds, disaster is immenant. Good day to you

Just because something is difficult to comprehend does not mean it's a failed piece of literature. However i do agree with certain points both 'parties' have brought up. It is a deep novel, as it was written describing the human psyche; some people prefer those genre of novels and some do not. My teacher also found it a distasteful novel whereas I am throughly enjoying it. Seriously though, just because you can't appreciate a piece of literature that is too deep for you does not reduce it's value in anyway. If anything is reduced, it is your argument against the novel by your allusion to crude allegory's: "Mental Masturbration"? Yeah that's really what the teachers love to do Ralph, just spend all day pleasuring themselves over English texts.<br>

This is one of the most poorly and confusingly done novels ever written. With such an interesting plot, I was amazed at how utterly boring and clouded the novel became, the only reason this novel is still in print is because english teachers get hard-ons through mental masturbation trying to analyze this overly ambiguous work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashie

Ralph, your amazing! lol! I totally agree! hahaha . You people get offended when someone criticize's this novel. WOW get a hobby! lol . Reading this novel was horrible. Thinking about reading it makes me cringe. I'd rather pour table salt into my eyes or even chew my own hand off! Yeah! So... Go cry you Conrad Lovers.. THIS BOOK SUCKED!<br>

---

OMG lol like, WOW! I totally no wat U meen! hahaha...

A literary criticism, Ashie, involves the analysis, evaluation and judgment of the quality of a text based upon circumstantial evidence. If provided this those who read this novel, will not to be offended. Rather, it builds greater appreciation and in-depth understanding.
I (and I think I can safely say 'we') are however offended by your of despotic resistance to the utilisation of intellect. I'd suggest pouring your hand in your eye while chewing on some table salt.