A Journey of Choice

After finishing Heart of Darkness I am bewildered and confused. The first because I began to find Kurtz a compelling but judicious person (similarly to Marlow) and the latter because I do not know how to interpret Conrad's work. What exactly are the ends of earth and the heart of darkness? This darkness even seems to be present at the Thames suggesting the "darkness" in colonization is vast, but ambiguous.

The novella begins as a bright day finishes and ends in a very dark day, where even the Thames looked hazy. Marlow recounted his story noting his skepticism towards imperialism and at the same time he noted his admiration towards Kurtz: a different type of savage. I find Marlow somewhat of a hypocrite because he took no real stand towards either of the extremes. While he allowed imperialism to prevail, he allowed Kurtz's legacy to prevail too. Both of these extremes overcame Marlow and took over him. "'I was on the point of Crying to her, "Don't you hear them?" The dusk was repeating them in a whisper of a rising wind. "The horror! the horror!"'" (page 145), said Marlow proving that Kurtz's presence is over him even one year after his death. Darkness outshines every river, every empire and every conqueror. Those who went to the extremes or the ends of earth to achieve greatness the way Kurtz did were shadowed by Darkness, however those in between light and dark are trapped  too. Evidently Marlow feels the society that Kurtz envisioned is still on the ground and and furthermore he has yielded to it. Yet, Marlow lives under the English rule and is submissive to it too. Darkness seems to be present everywhere along the novella and it is part of the paradoxical society presented in Heart of Darkness. Light and dark, and good and evil are clashes that Condrad presents everywhere along his story that complement that ambiguity in the "heart of darkness". 

Darkness and evil are present everywhere in Marlow's journey. He is overcome by these, failing to see the horrors of life. For his misfortune, there was nothing to do. Certainly imperialists had evil ways, but Kurtz and his followers had too. As a reader I distrust Marlow because this darkness over him shadows us from a wider spectrum of imperialism, colonisation and persuasion. This second hand narrator did not provide a concise and direct statement, therefore I maintain that the darkness Conrad refers is open to ambiguity and interpretation. As a reader I feel I stand in the heart of darkness and now I have to begin a journey wherever I feel it right. Certainly I will not follow Marlow or Kurtz, but I could readjust some of Kurtz's charismatic techniques.