Too Many Motifs

Once my group was assigned the motif of black and white, I began to only look for that particular motif as I read Heart of Darkness. When other groups showed examples of their motifs during class, I felt like I missed them while I read through the book. Since Heart of Darkness is an incredibly dense book, did anyone else feel like they missed out on some themes and motifs because they were stuck trying to find out the significance of their own motifs?

Comments

[Sarah Pyle]

Definitely, I mean, I missed out on most of the themes just trying to figure out what was even going on sometimes. However once I got to the middle part two it got a lot easier for some reason

[Lauren C.]

I think I did, too. Also, I think this shows how much we are ammature readers. I did notice a few things, but definately not all of them. This makes me go back to the article "Good Readers and Good Writers" that we read in the beginning of the year. A good reader has to reread, which is actually what Mr. H suggested we do if we have the time just because the book is so dense.

[Amy P]

I do feel like I missed out on most of the motifs. There is so much to look for in the Heart of Darkness that I feel like I miss half of the book because I'm only looking for my motif. I think it's good that groups are tracking a single motif because if instead of looking for one motif everyone looked for all of the motifs it would be too hard. I think that for an initial reading of the book focusing on one motif is easier then just reading the book looking for many motifs. It would be harder to connect the motifs with the book if you were looking at all of them.

[Lindsey H.]

I agree with Greg completely. Due to the fact that I was constantly looking for my motif and struggling to figure out what the "hidden meaning" was, I feel like I missed out on the rest of the novel. Though focusing on one motif did in fact help me grasp some meaning, I think it also drew attention away from other details in the novel.

[anon]

I think it is a mistake to look for 'motifs' in Conrad. This kind of criticism (as seen in Leavis's 'The Great Tradition') constrains Conrad to as a kind of Victorian writer. It refuses his status as an essentially modern (and perhaps even postmodern) novelist.

For me at least, the main 'motif' to grasp, is in fact, that through the series of intra-homodiegetic narrators (frame narrator, Marlow, the Russian, Kurtz) the novel resists being reduced to motifs of race, gender etc.

Look at my other posts on 'Why a frame tale', 'why' or 'time lapse' for some more stuff on this theme (sorry its very repetitive, I'm currently writing on the problem of taking Conrad as a modernist sage so am a bit preoccupied with this problem of 'form' in Conrad)

[Erin M.]

I completely agree with Greg. When reading the book you get so caught up in the meaning and what your supposed to be looking for that you end up missing out on the most important part. Reading the book for enjoyment. It is good to look for figurative language etc... but you can't forget to just read sometimes.

[marit]

I also agree, you get so caught up that you miss out on a lot. I enjoy the book but feel like sometimes I miss the deeper meanings.