Oh Lordy Jim..

"[T]he horror, the horror" - Heart of Darkness

Here are just some characteristics of modernism that I gleaned from the first 30 chapters:

1. There is an “emphasis on impressionism and subjectivity in writing … an emphasis on how seeing (or reading or perception itself) takes place, rather than on what is being perceived” (Klages, 165)

This is evident in the way Marlow sees/reads Jim’s reactions and the focus on seeing and perceiving: “I am trying to interpret for you into slow speech the instantaneous effect of visual impressions” (Chap. 5), “He drew up his heavy eyelids. Drew up, I say – no other expression can describe the steady deliberation of the act” (Chap. 13), “I strained my mental eyesight …” (Chap. 19)

2. There is a “blurring of distinctions between genres” (Klages, 165)

I found the first 30 chapters to be like an interview (?) and a captain or rather water clerk’s log all mixed in one. Does this count?

3. And obviously, there is “an emphasis on fragmented forms, discontinuous narratives”, which I suppose is the root of my confusion/frustration with the text.

The sudden bridge in chapter 4:
“And later on, many times, in distant parts of the world, Marlow showed himself willing to remember Jim, to remember him at length, in detail and audibly” – It moves from Jim at trial to how Marlow would remember him, to Marlow’s memory of setting his eyes on Jim for the first time at the inquiry and then back to the inquiry and so on and so forth.

In addition there seems to be reluctance on Jim’s part for his story to be told: “His voice ceased” (Chap. 13), he leaves a lot hanging – “It was as if I had jumped into a well – into an everlasting deep hole…” (Chap. 9)

(300!)

P.S.: I got the characteristics of modernism from Literary Theory: a guide for the perplexed. Klages, Mary.

P.P.S.: My version of the text is terrible compared to the “toilet paper” text, so only chapters provided, my apologies!