Classics and the Western Canon discussion
Conrad, Nostromo
>
Week 7 - Part 3, Chapters 3-7
date
newest »
newest »
Nostromo waking up from his long sleep after his swim to shore immediately brought to mind Odysseus waking up in Phaeacia after his swim to shore. And just as this is the last stop for Odysseus before he goes to Ithaka "to set things right," I'm wondering if Conrad is drawing a parallel and setting up Nostromo as the hero who will similarly set things right. He is certainly portraying him as a wild beast ready to jump into action:Handsome, robust, and supple, he threw back his head, flung his arms open, and stretched himself with a slow twist of the waist and a leisurely growling yawn of white teeth, as natural and free from evil in the moment of waking as a magnificent and unconscious wild beast.
Nostromo seemed to me like a Greek god, waking from his slumbers and ready to go forth and set everything right.
I did not have Ancient Greek allusions in mind reading this, but now can't think otherwise of it. I hope we will see him playing his own part in the story, now he was born anew.
Alexey wrote: "I did not have Ancient Greek allusions in mind reading this, but now can't think otherwise of it. I hope we will see him playing his own part in the story, now he was born anew."Born anew is a good way of putting it since Nostromo has been immersed in water. Like you, I hope he rises to the occasion.
Tamara wrote: "Nostromo waking up from his long sleep after his swim to shore immediately brought to mind Odysseus waking up in Phaeacia after his swim to shore. And just as this is the last stop for Odysseus bef..."Great comparison. I was grateful to find out he’d reached the shore
I'm not sure that Conrad's perspective had anything to do with it, but this was the week when I started to feel like reading this novel is more work than it's worth. If I'm honest, I would have stopped reading because I'm not sure the ending will have any emotional meaning for me no matter what it is.Other people have said they enjoyed this so much that I'm forced to wonder if I just encountered it at the wrong time. I'm actually finding Heidegger's often mind-numbing Being and Time rewarding, but plodding through these chapters of Conrad's flowery prose just felt like a work.
It probably doesn't help that I don't see the protagonists as heroic or the villains as villainous because all I can see is the colonizer-colonized relationship and, to me, the colonizer is on the wrong side of that moral equation. But Nostromo is on the side of the colonizer, so...
Aiden wrote: "I'm not sure that Conrad's perspective had anything to do with it, but this was the week when I started to feel like reading this novel is more work than it's worth. If I'm honest, I would have sto..."Aiden, As you and others have remarked, Nostromo is a challenging read, for a whole variety of reasons. In the introduction to the Oxford World’s Classics edition, the editors even say “Its acknowledged greatness notwithstanding, “Nostromo” is also notorious as the novel which cannot be read unless one has read it before.” I’m not sure how helpful that is ;), but obviously, it is not every novel that requires one keep track of the fictional geography and history, a multiplicity of characters and their different perspectives and motivations, a complex unfolding of the story, a vocabulary that requires a Spanish/French glossary, etc.
For me, there has been a payoff in the richness of the world Conrad creates, his skill in writing and the construction of the novel, and his perceptive insights into each character’s thoughts and actions, but since this is my first time reading it, I’ll be as surprised as anyone by what happens next
I love plenty of books that I know are hell to read for other people (19th century Russian literature particularly), so I'm reserving my judgement until the end. All I really wanted to get across is that I guess I agree (I skipped the intro until after a first reading) that aesthetically, Conrad may have failed in every writer's job of maintaining their readers' interest the whole time. It doesn't necessarily weaken the message, but it means fewer people will bother to keep reading long enough to find out what that message is.In any case, I've read far too much of it not to find out what Conrad is ultimately saying, whether I like it or not.
Aiden wrote: "In any case, I've read far too much of it not to find out what Conrad is ultimately saying, whether I like it or not..."I hope you help us (me!?) understand what that ultimately is. (I find myself wanting to compare with current S.A. writers like Mario Vargas Llosa. (I feel as if I am lacking the bandwidth to process right now. It has been awhile since I read Llosa. Still, the themes seem to include corruption, foreign influences, native cultures in stress?)
This part of the novel delves deeper into the hidden motives of all the characters and it's hard to keep up with all the different personal quirks and histories. I'm surprised by the doctor's almost romantic worship of Mrs. Gould and his resentment at Mr. Gould for leading her on to this risky business. Sotillo and Pedrito and Fuente seem to show what kind of leadership (or lack thereof) that are on the Monterist side whereas the Oligarch side, although not as crass or silly as the Monterist army, is still very self-involved. Not even Charles Gould seems to worry so much about what will happen to the indigenous people of Costaguana. I feel sorry for the people who have not much say in the whole matter and blindingly are scattered between the two factions.
Lily wrote: "Aiden wrote: "I hope you help us (me!?) understand what that ultimately is. (I find myself wanting to compare with current S.A. writers like Mario Vargas Llosa."I'm certainly going to do my best.
The Llosa comparison is an apt one. Though he's much more than a postcolonial writer, that's what Mario Vargas Llosa is in essence. He often shows through his novels how colonialism is still affecting South American countries in different ways.
Even though Conrad wrote in England, he was born in Ukraine and was ethnically Polish. One of the reasons he's seen as so relevant still is that he was something of a precursor to postcolonial writers. As a Polish emigrant, he was more familiar with what things were like on the other side of the Empire-Colony dynamic. He sympathized with the colonized because he knew what it was like to live in a Poland that was regularly used as a battleground and prize for other empires, to the detriment of the people (including Conrad's family, which was apparently Polish nobility).
Borum wrote: "Sotillo and Pedrito and Fuente seem to show what kind of leadership (or lack thereof) that are on the Monterist side whereas the Oligarch side, although not as crass or silly as the Monterist army, is still very self-involved. Not even Charles Gould seems to worry so much about what will happen to the indigenous people of Costaguana. I feel sorry for the people who have not much say in the whole matter and blindingly are scattered between the two factions..."Charles Gould’s concern for the stability of Costaguana seems more abstract and idealistic to me, while Mrs Gould, Doctor Monygham, Father Roman and Father Corbelan are more focussed on the needs of individuals. In this section, Gould also seems to regret getting involved in politics. Perhaps he now sees a benefit to the steamship and railroad companies’ attitude of political neutrality. It’s hard to pick a winning side in Costaguana.
That said, I found the bias toward the Blancos/Oligarchs seems almost taken for granted, and some of the language denigrating the democrats seemed racist to me. I wonder what others think?
Susan wrote: "Borum wrote: "Sotillo and Pedrito and Fuente seem to show what kind of leadership (or lack thereof) that are on the Monterist side whereas the Oligarch side, although not as crass or silly as the M..."Yes, Gould's irritation seemed to be more focused on his irritation at the corruption or the way he's being taken advantage of, whereas Mrs. Gould seems to take a more personal attachment to the actual people and that may be why Dr Monygham is more attracted to the lady and repelled by the husband.
Even the word Blancos (Whites) seem to reflect a racist aspect of the different social hierachies. I've heard that unlike Africa, South America had the indigenous people virtually wiped out by the lack of immunity to the Old World pathogens and unlike North America where the colonists brought their wives with them, the colonists in South America tended to have more interracial relationships among the native people. With the mixture of the various mixed races such as Creole, Mestizo, etc. the social class distinction depended much on the lightness of their complexion.
Susan wrote: "That said, I found the bias toward the Blancos/Oligarchs seems almost taken for granted, and some of the language denigrating the democrats seemed racist to me. I wonder what others think?"I think I know what you mean. One of the difficult things, for me, is determining whether Conrad intended the way that certain things hit our inner ear as racist or ignorant to be that way for his contemporaries. This was also written before WWI and WWII weakened the empires enough that independence movements became all but inevitable. Presumably, Conrad wrote this with no expectation that the situation as he saw it would change radically in the way it did.
Borum wrote: "Even the word Blancos (Whites) seem to reflect a racist aspect of the different social hierachies ... the colonists in South America tended to have more interracial relationships among the native people."In South America at this time, I'm pretty sure Blancos would just be a catch-all term for Europeans. There definitely was a social hierarchy aspect because the Europeans were always the colonizers; they owned everything, as they saw it. They "negotiated" while effectively holding a gun to the colonized peoples' heads and the colonists definitely didn't think of the colonized as equal.
As a point of clarification, I think the term "interracial relationships" in this case would be a pretty euphemistic way of putting it. They did, indeed, leave their wives behind in many cases, but their "relationships" with the native women tended to have the character of forced prostitution, rape and sex for survival, not love and respect. A European colonist who took an actual equal relationship with a native woman would have been an outcast among colonists. I'm not sure how sharp the distinction was at the time of our story, but that mentality would have influenced how natives saw all Europeans.
Aiden wrote: "Borum wrote: "Even the word Blancos (Whites) seem to reflect a racist aspect of the different social hierachies ... the colonists in South America tended to have more interracial relationships amon..."In South America, Blancos and Colorados were one pair of terms for the Conservative and Liberal (respectively) parties. Names vary from country to country, these used e.g. in Uruguay, but the struggle between two parties was a common feature among countries of South and Central Americas. Often wars between countries indeed fought on the party lines. Particularly, the war, which the old Garibaldist recalled, was fought between Uruguayan Colorados, Argentinian Unitaristos, and Brazilian government on one side and Uruguayan Blancos, Argentinian Federalistos, and Brazilian separatists on the other.
So no relation to the race, both parties were governed by Hispanic elite. I believe Constaguena resembled the southernmost countries of the continent (Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile) which were mostly white across all classes.
Interesting that in reality these two party system at the time of the novel was obsolete in most countries with the emergence of Radicals as a coequal force, usually in alliance with Liberals.
You're right. I forgot there was a reference to the Colorados earlier in the novel. I assumed the Blancos party were called such because they favored the white Europeans, but maybe not.
Alexey wrote: "Aiden wrote: "Borum wrote: "Even the word Blancos (Whites) seem to reflect a racist aspect of the different social hierachies ... the colonists in South America tended to have more interracial rela..."Ah Thank you. I got misled by so much mentions of words like Negro and Indio and 'the people'. So 'the people' they keep mentioning may refer to the white people who aren't so rich and privileged?
Aiden wrote: "Borum wrote: "Even the word Blancos (Whites) seem to reflect a racist aspect of the different social hierachies ... the colonists in South America tended to have more interracial relationships amon..."You're right. Interracial relationships was a euphemism and I think that between all the biological and human genocide and all the 'interracial relationships' and their illegitimate mixed-race children there was few indigenous race that remained at all. I wonder if that might have had an effect on how Conrad regarded the colonization in Africa and South America. I haven't read the Heart of Darkness or any of Conrad's other words yet, so I am curious to know.
I'm not sure how Conrad regarded colonial relationships in general, but I know that Heart of Darkness was a critique of the "civilizing mission" that over time turned into a mission for plundering natural resources and then into complete madness and mayhem, exemplified by the brutalities the Belgian King Leopold's Congo Free State. Conrad was a supporter of the human freedom and the independence of colonized countries.My view of human history is that there is no such thing as indigenous races. The closest comparison would be pure descendants of the first humans to move from water to that particular piece of land during evolution. However, most societies have moved and changed and most of the world has housed various conquering or assimilating societies throughout the past several thousand years and as one "people" moves in, they tend to intermingle both peacefully and otherwise with the current inhabitants. The sheer number of generations of "tampering" with blood through intermingling means even a single people are genetically remote over the distance of hundreds of years.
The focus on a theoretical ethnic purity is fairly recent. It may have come from the eugenics movement that the European colonialists embraced to justify brutalizing other humans because they were "tainted" by native blood.
Alexey wrote: "I believe Constaguena resembled the southernmost countries of the continent (Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile) which were mostly white across all classes. ..."Interesting. I have no idea what is correct, but I’ve seen a number of comparisons of Costaguana to Colombia, partly because of its geographical similarity in having coastlines on two oceans.
Susan wrote: "I’ve seen a number of comparisons of Costaguana to Colombia"You're correct in that Costaguana has been interpreted as a fictional version of Columbia. However, I wanted keep that in its historical context by clarifying that the "Columbia" of Conrad's time isn't the same as what we know as the country of Columbia today.
At that time, Columbia was a territory that included all of modern day Panama (until 1903, one year before Nostromo's publication) and northwestern parts of Brazil. I think the civil conflict happening in our story is the fight over the various natural resources of those three countries. As a result, the Republic of Columbia (what we know it as) is a smaller geographic space than the Columbia that Costaguana is being compared to.
Aiden wrote: "Susan wrote: "I’ve seen a number of comparisons of Costaguana to Colombia"You're correct in that Costaguana has been interpreted as a fictional version of Columbia. However, I wanted keep that in..."
Thanks, Aiden, for the info. That makes the reference to Colombia much clearer since I kept imagining Costaguana as a Central American country with two seacoasts and it didn’t seem to fit the Colombia idea.
Part 3, Chapters 3-7
Imprisoned in the Custom House by Colonel Sotillo, Captain Mitchell and Dr Monygham discuss the overall situation, and it becomes obvious to the reader (but not the captain) that the doctor is planning to mislead Sotillo about the silver. Sotillo releases the Captain with his prized watch. The doctor offers Sotillo some hope of getting the silver and is released, too. Sotillo learns of the pending arrival of Pedro Montero and his troops with dismay.
Meanwhile, on the urging of Father Corbelan and in one of the last actions of the Ribiera administration, Hernandez the bandit chief has been made a general. Now, Father Corbelan sends a message to Don Jose that General Hernandez is holding Los Hatos and the surrounding area pending the return of General Barrios (whom Decoud had planned to contact after the handoff of the silver). Antonia decides to take her dying father, Don Jose, and go to her uncle, Father Corbelan, in Los Hatos, where many other pro-Ribiera citizens of Sulaco are fleeing for safety. Charles Gould accompanies them part way through the crowds, makes a promise to accept Father Corbelan’s arrangements with General Hernandez, and returns to Sulaco.
Señor Gould is having doubts about meddling in politics. The Provincial Assembly asks Gould to join their planned delegation to Pedro Montero. Gould declines. The doctor returns to the Casa Gould and recounts Señor Hirsh’s story about the silver to Charles and Emilia Gould. Emilia thinks of the loss to Antonia, Charles of the mine and Decoud’s idea of an independent Sulaco. How can they get word to General Barrios now that Sotillo holds the harbor and Decoud and Nostromo are dead?
The bells of every church in town begin to ring to welcome Pedro Montero and his forces, including those of Gamacho and Fuentes. They ride through the town into the Plaza where Montero makes a speech and then takes over the Intendencia, the town hall, which has been gutted by the rioters. Gamacho makes a speech, while Montero and Fuentes plan to send him and his troops/rioters off to fight Hernandez.
At the San Tome mine, Don Pepe gets a letter from Pedro Montero asking for his terms to surrender the mine, and Don Pepe and Father Roman discuss the situation. While they could defend the mine, if their food supplies are cut off, the people in the mine villages would starve. Don Pepe has promised Charles Gould if an armed force approaches the mine, he will destroy everything with dynamite. What he would like to do is organize and arm the miners with what’s available and march to Sulaco to fight, but he needs someone else to carry out the destruction of the mine in case they lose the battle. Would Father Roman do it? (We don’t get to hear his answer)
Charles Gould meets with Pedro Montero who wants the San Tome mine handed over to him. Gould says he will never surrender it to the government and points out the success of other governmental undertakings depends on the security of the mine. For the moment, Montero backs down. The doctor later talks to Gould about possible options, all rejected, and then confides in Mrs Gould that he plans to play a “game of betrayal with Sotillo”. He heads back to the harbor. And finally, near the harbor, Nostromo wakes up from a long sleep after his swim to shore.
Discussion starters:
1) This week’s reading brings out many facets of Costaguana politics at a party level. Conrad displays a bias, I think, toward the conservative Oligarch/Blanco side favored by Don Jose, the old aristocratic families, and Charles Gould and away from the democratic/Colorado side represented by the Monteros, Sotillo, and others. Does this strengthen or weaken the story?
2) This week, we get more insight into Doctor Monygham’s and Pedro Montero’s backgrounds, characters and motives as well as Charles Gould’s attitudes and reactions to the current state of affairs. I guess Montero is a bit of a power-hungry villain while the doctor is more heroic in his loyalty to Mrs Gould, but how would one characterize Charles Gould?