“Travellers with closed minds can tell us little except about themselves”
Texts, particularly fictional texts, often do not tell us much except about themselves. This brings us back to the notion of representation within texts- and the precarious relationship it has with the author. Since we’re all mere cultural products of the prevalent ideologies- who is responsible for the representation?
“It was and is the dominant image of Africa in the Western imagination and Conrad merely brought the peculiar gifts of his own mind to bear on it”.
Perhaps this is why Achebe posits the change to move “the bloody racist” out of our literary canon. It seems to be the only way to negotiate within the system that is largely Eurocentric.
Now, Achebe writes with a passion against HoD’s position as part of “permanent literature”. His points are valid on all account. I’d like to posit that instead of perpetuating the distorted image of Africa within HoD, the continual dissection of Conrad’s text in academia allows for alternative interpretations of Conrad. Ideologies present within our present reading of the text, the readings before us and the context during Conrad’s time become evident with each dissection. Shoving HoD to the back shelves of the literary canon would merely leave such racist sentiments to perpetuate freely without voices like Achebe to point it out for us.
(225 words)
Texts, particularly fictional texts, often do not tell us much except about themselves. This brings us back to the notion of representation within texts- and the precarious relationship it has with the author. Since we’re all mere cultural products of the prevalent ideologies- who is responsible for the representation?
“It was and is the dominant image of Africa in the Western imagination and Conrad merely brought the peculiar gifts of his own mind to bear on it”.
Perhaps this is why Achebe posits the change to move “the bloody racist” out of our literary canon. It seems to be the only way to negotiate within the system that is largely Eurocentric.
Now, Achebe writes with a passion against HoD’s position as part of “permanent literature”. His points are valid on all account. I’d like to posit that instead of perpetuating the distorted image of Africa within HoD, the continual dissection of Conrad’s text in academia allows for alternative interpretations of Conrad. Ideologies present within our present reading of the text, the readings before us and the context during Conrad’s time become evident with each dissection. Shoving HoD to the back shelves of the literary canon would merely leave such racist sentiments to perpetuate freely without voices like Achebe to point it out for us.
(225 words)
Posts
1 comment:
Check/check plus
Good! The initial point was also very interesting; could have been made even clearer.
Post a Comment