Real intentions

I was surprised to find out I was not the only one kind of confused by the novel. As I read Yvette’s blog, I saw we had very similar questions regarding the narrator and Marlow.

Just like Yvette, I was surprised when I found out the narrator was not telling the story. I have not read many books where another person narrates an entire chapter. I think this gives even more importance to Marlow from the one he already has: being the only “named” character. I believe the narrator has some sort of admiration and respect for Marlow. That is why he names him, and allows him to take his role as narrator. Now that I think about it, it is almost like if the narrator wouldn’t be able to show how important Marlow was with his narration. Instead, he glorifies him by allowing him to be kind of the narrator. It also makes me think of when we read One Flew over The Cuckoos nest. I had the same doubt weather to believe what the chief was telling us or not. In this case, just like Yvette said, what can we be sure of if we don’t know who the actual narrator is?

I do think Conrad is being ironic when he talks about the Europeans job. We can see it by the way Marlow describes the people he sees and his morals intervening. For example, when he feels like an impostor for working for profit, or when he gives a biscuit to one of the dying men. I think that is the reason he is telling the story to his friends, to show them what’s right and what’s wrong. I have the exact same questions as you, and I would also like to know what is the importance of the other characters mentioned at the beginning of the novel, the doctor, the lawyer, etc?