Which is no mean feat, considering that its author, Joseph Conrad, was born Józef Teodor Konrad Korzeniowski in Poland, and that English was his third language (after Polish and French). Writing was also his second career, after a lengthy one as a seaman, rising from ordinary seaman to mate to Master from 1878 to 1886. In the process, he taught himself English, changed his name, and embarked on a long-sought career as a writer.
Peter Kuper grew up in Cleveland, Ohio -- which is also my own home town -- and that of graphic-memoir giant Harvey Pekar. Through Pekar, Kuper met the even more infamous Robert Crumb, who helped him put out some of his earliest comics in exchange for some rare jazz records. Like Stanley Zuckerberg, Kuper attended the Pratt Institute, then went off on a series of travels around the world, all of which he graphically documented, before returning to New York, where he's continued to work as a comic artist and illustrator. In addition to Heart of Darkness, he's adapted a number of Franz Kafka stories, as well as illustrating a Spanish translation of Alice in Wonderland, Alicia en el País de las Maravillas.
His choice to tackle Heart of Darkness resonates here in 2020 -- why now? Why, some may ask, given the broad critique of the novel's racism by leading African writers such as Chinua Achebe, should such a book be chosen for adaptation today? Kuper himself addresses this in his "Art of Darkness" introductory essay. His approach, by his own account, was twofold: first to ensure that his representations of natives of West Africa were accurate, he conducted photo research in the archives; he also studied and worked to avoid stereotypical features or dress. Secondly, also whenever he could, he "flipped the perspective," focusing not on how Marlow and the white employees of the company saw the natives, but on how the natives saw the white people.
I'm not sure that either of these strategies completely succeeds. One strange effect is that the African figures in these pages appear, as it were, more realistic, while the images of white characters are made more cartoonish. At the same time, I think there are moments when he does succeed in opening up other dimensions of Conrad's narrative, and giving us pause over scenes that the original novel glossed over. So read the book -- be sure to read both introductory essays -- and see what you think, both about whether Kuper has succeeded in his effort to 'flip the script,' and also about the story and images as a whole. Post your thoughts here, referencing specific scenes when possible (you'll note that the book doesn't have page numbers).
Peter Kuper grew up in Cleveland, Ohio -- which is also my own home town -- and that of graphic-memoir giant Harvey Pekar. Through Pekar, Kuper met the even more infamous Robert Crumb, who helped him put out some of his earliest comics in exchange for some rare jazz records. Like Stanley Zuckerberg, Kuper attended the Pratt Institute, then went off on a series of travels around the world, all of which he graphically documented, before returning to New York, where he's continued to work as a comic artist and illustrator. In addition to Heart of Darkness, he's adapted a number of Franz Kafka stories, as well as illustrating a Spanish translation of Alice in Wonderland, Alicia en el País de las Maravillas.
His choice to tackle Heart of Darkness resonates here in 2020 -- why now? Why, some may ask, given the broad critique of the novel's racism by leading African writers such as Chinua Achebe, should such a book be chosen for adaptation today? Kuper himself addresses this in his "Art of Darkness" introductory essay. His approach, by his own account, was twofold: first to ensure that his representations of natives of West Africa were accurate, he conducted photo research in the archives; he also studied and worked to avoid stereotypical features or dress. Secondly, also whenever he could, he "flipped the perspective," focusing not on how Marlow and the white employees of the company saw the natives, but on how the natives saw the white people.
I'm not sure that either of these strategies completely succeeds. One strange effect is that the African figures in these pages appear, as it were, more realistic, while the images of white characters are made more cartoonish. At the same time, I think there are moments when he does succeed in opening up other dimensions of Conrad's narrative, and giving us pause over scenes that the original novel glossed over. So read the book -- be sure to read both introductory essays -- and see what you think, both about whether Kuper has succeeded in his effort to 'flip the script,' and also about the story and images as a whole. Post your thoughts here, referencing specific scenes when possible (you'll note that the book doesn't have page numbers).
First of all I got to say that the illustrations in this book are amazing, so much detail in each frame. I did't think I would like the black and white but I actually enjoyed it very much.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion the "flipped perspective" was only accomplished very few times. Most of the time, it was very clear how the whites saw the natives as "brutes" and treated them as slaves, using them to get ivory and leaving them to starve. Not only the perspective of the Company employees, but the other whites in the story like the Doctor that examined Marlow before leaving to Africa, when he measures Marlow's cranium and then says: "interesting to see the mental changes of people who travel there". Or when his aunt calls the African (I suppose), "ignorants". But the perspective of how the natives saw the white people is very vague to me. I could only understand that the natives saw the white as their masters. Perhaps, the lack of dialogue coming from the natives and among themselves made it much more difficult to understand what they were thinking in some situations where the illustrator shows their facial expressions up close.
In regard of the African's representations I noticed that in chapter I, pretty much all of the natives looked the same. All black men looked the same. It was only from chapter II on that I noticed the differentiation among the natives. Upon a quick search on Google for "West African natives" images, I would say the representations of the natives in the book seem very accurate to me. I really enjoyed the native women that appear after Mr. Kurtz was brought into Marlow's ship.
The illustrations throughout this graphic novel are incredible. Although they are all done in black and white it almost looks like water paint and each frame contains so much detail. I enjoyed reading it because it was easy to follow and the transitions were smooth, yet there were still some things left for interpretation. The transition of words to images were powerful throughout. I did notice the white men were drawn much more cartoon like while the natives were drawn more realistically and sketched. It seems the author is trying to humanize the natives and give perspectives about their points of view throughout instead of just the white men. For example when it shows the natives reaction to getting their weekly pay, 3 pieces of brass wire. The content itself was tough to digest and it was brutal the way the natives were treated and slaved. A particular scene in part II that stood out to me was when a white man expressing his sorrow when one of his slaves was murdered, he said they shared a bond and he would steer for him and help with everything and that he was going to miss him. When his body was thrown over board the novel describes the other natives contemplating eating him and looking at him as their next meal which shows the harsh reality of their starvation and desperation.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was reading Heart of Darkness, I felt like Kuper succeeded in his goal of portraying the Congolese as human beings with emotions, thoughts, and concerns instead of just using them as “backgound” like he suggests in his introductory essay “Art of Darkness”. Although I have not read the book in its original form, based on the criticisms discussed in Jasnoff’s foreword it sounds like Kuper did a much better job at this than Conrad did. However, I think Kuper failed to completely “flip the script” of the story. A few frames certainly accomplished this goal of his, particularly the pages depicting the abuses suffered by the Congolese who were forced to work on constructing railroad tracks in the jungle and the page from part 1 that showed the Africans being killed by colonialists and roman conquerors in the same frame to illustrate that the people in Africa have endured endless suffering throughout history. But overall, Kuper’s Heart of Darkness adaptation is still a story told primarily through the eyes of white colonialists.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the story. I thought the plot was interesting and depicted well by Kuper. Aesthetically I thought the illustratons were good, especially the 2-page picture that showed Kurtz’s face on one side and what appears to be a tribal mask on the other. I wasn't a huge fan of the black & white/grey-scale coloring used but it didn't significantly impact my enjoyment of the novel.
While reading the Heart of Darkness, it was interesting to see Kuper attempt to switch the point of view to that of the natives. Personally, I don't believe he fully succeeded, although it is an improvement. I can see how many may think this novel is racist, as the African Americans are depicted more as symbols of slavery than actual people. It is interesting to see the illustrations throughout the novel change from being very detailed in some areas to being cartoon like in others. It seems as though it is an effort by the author to show the reader what he wants them to focus on in that point of the story. The idea of Europe civilizing Africa seemed to have failed as in the end, all of the indigenous people are slaves. The one character that seems to remain unproblematic is Marlow, who serves as the intermediary between Kurtz and the Company, as well as a guide for the reader. The scenes at the end of the novel resonated with me, as many people in Kurtz life such as his cousin, a journalist, a politician and his fiancee all seem to have opinions of him that differ from Marlow's. It is interesting to see how one individual can come across so differently to many, being as controversial as he is throughout the story. Overall, I enjoyed the story and seeing the ideas of the author come to life through the illustrations.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Kuper was successful in flipping the narrative and was effective in undermining Conrad and the racist narrative he wrote. I believe that Kuper took every opportunity he could to depict the African’s perspective. This was effective in an attempt to undo Conrad and his vague and inaccurate depiction of these individuals. I also believe that Kuper’s illustrations were very effective in depicting a more accurate scenery. One major theme that continued to be present in Conrad’s novel was how the jungle and setting was dark and blank. Kuper did an excellent job of filling the page with animals, visuals and nature that depicted a more accurate landscape. I believe that this was important because not only were the African people impacted by Conrad’s work, but their land and home was attacked as well. In my opinion Kuper was effective because he did not retell the story, he worked to diminish Conrad and his message.-Lisbeth Spitzschuh
ReplyDeleteI do believe Kuper was somewhat successful in flipping the point of view.
ReplyDeleteAs I was reading the novel, I didn't see anything come off as racist. I reread the story again after reading Kuper's essay. Reading it with that in the back of my mind, I was able to pick out some racism, but without knowing that the original story had a different view. I think Kuper did a good job masking the view.
I noticed the story more as how Marlow and the white employees saw the natives. reading it a second time, I tried to see it as the natives telling the story- but I had a hard time seeing it that way.
I think that it was a good job masking the racism, but not telling in the native's point of view.
Kuper did an amazing job illustrating the novel with such beautiful detail making it easy to follow what was going on in the story.
After reading Peter Kuper’s version of “Heart of Darkness” by Joseph Conrad I can say that I agree with the people who said that the artwork itself is really interesting. He put in a lot of work to illustrate what is happening in each page especially with the facial expressions coming from both groups. In my opinion I think that Kuper in some degree managed to “flip the script”. We saw how the natives were beaten and even left to die because the whites did not provide sufficient care for them. They were not fed at all and we can tell by their appearances how the natives were still pushing no matter what. In part I, it shows how there was a fire accident and one of the native’s was accused of it so he “got what he deserved” but we can see how Marlow was shocked by the outcome of it. One phrase that stood out to me was “There restrain still amazes me. It’s easier to face perdition of one’s soul than prolonged hunger.” (part II). The fact that the natives were so strong and had to deal with so much is surprising because others would have just given up easily and would have rather gotten killed than continue with the suffering and maltreatment. Kuper’s work demonstrates Conrad’s perspective while also presenting some of the problems that the natives faced. I think this story is a really good reading for future generations so they can get a basic idea of how it was back then. The world is slowly becoming an interconnected place where countries are facing new problems every day that require many changes in laws and policies so looking back at this part in history can help make some of those changes much easier.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the heart of darkness I definitely saw the difference between how the white pilgrims were perceived compared to the "savages and brutes " of the story. The pilgrims were definitely more cartoonish in their features compared to the crew who in my own understanding really expressed their problems, hunger and sadness. I think the book is more so geared toward the main character's perspective on the journey to find kurts more so than what it was like for the natives in the book. Although there definitely where scenes where you had seen how the pilgrims were viewed in their eyes and how they felt, an example would be when the whites were eating there provisions out of their cans and the natives were left to starve. So in a way he did flip the script on showing the natives emotions through their facial expressions. One image that really struck me was the image where the crew were going to find Kurts and the page is split in two parts where one page is them traveling in the daylight and the jungle around them is light and full of animals and the next page is completely different. The second page is filled with darkness and sorrow filled images of the natives and their stories in the area of the jungle. To me the images of the natives represent them trying to defend themselves and there jungle but the boat of the white men passing by with no problem shows the power the white foreigners have over them. It shows how frightened they are to act on what they want to. One aspect that I was confused on however was the image of the native woman coming up to the boat twice and crying. I was confused because of the image that showed Kurts looking at her, I didn't know if I should have thought of it as a forbidden romance because she cried and he said he couldn't look at the jungle anymore or if it was relief from her and anger from him that he wasn't able to conquer her and the ivory of her people.
ReplyDeleteBritney Raposo
The illustrations in Kuper’s version were very distinct. The color contrast of these illustrations between the white men and natives were clear and quickly noticeable. For instance, the white men were more cartoonish and white while the natives were darker and sketched out. With that, it was easy to follow along with the drawings and dialogue. However, I felt as though Kuper didn’t entirely fulfill flipping the perspective portion. For the majority of this novel, it was dialogue-heavy for the whites but I didn’t see any from the natives. Sure, there were a lot of facial expressions and action-oriented parts that either depicted fear, confusion, anger, or tiredness and so on. I felt as though I need more like in the first section of the book you’ll see the droopy eyes, hunched backs of the natives in which emphasizes the cruel treatments the natives went through. I can interpret what they are feeling but I really wouldn’t know from a first-person view. If Kuper fulfilled flipping the perspective by including verbal expressions from the natives it would be helpful. Overall, I liked the illustrations but this adaptation was solely from a white colonist view.
ReplyDelete-Kimberly Dy
First of all, I believe that the work done by Peter Kuper was incredible. The way he adapted the original novel into his graphic comic version was majestic. I personally did not know the potential of adaptation through the comics, but this was an excellent example.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, After reading Heart of Darkness I believe that Kuper succeeds in the way of representing how was the life of the natives from West Africa according to the original novel, his work makes you believe that you are living the story in real life. In my opinion, this comic looks more like an original work than an adaptation. However, I can not say that Kuper succeeded in "flipped the perspective" because even though he omitted some racists dialog from the original novel, the essence of the novel is based in the European imperialism in Africa, and how the natives see the white men as "superior deity."
Even in the report of Mr. Kurtz, he was argumentatively kind of racist, for example: "He began with the argument that "we white must necessarily appear to the savages in the nature of supernatural being", and many other racist dialogs. So I would say that Peter Kuper accomplished his goals in a way, but not at a hundred percent.
-Luis Cespedes
I have to admit, after having read Peter Kuper's adaptation of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, I feel a sense of conflict. I have seen that my fellow classmates have enjoyed the illustrations of the graphic novel, whereas I myself was not extremely impressed. However, I did find the choice to use monochromatic colors for the entire graphic novel to be very interesting, as we often refer to morality as being a black and white scale and this graphic novel certainly depicts the white, black, and gray areas of what we perceive as the moral code.
ReplyDeleteAs for whether or not Peter Kuper succeeded in flipping the script, I feel that Kuper- although he clearly tried very hard- failed. In his attempt to “flip the script”, Kuper tries to display and describe the native people of Africa and how they feel about the white employees versus how the white employees dehumanize the natives. Quite honestly, when a story’s narrator is represented by someone who is white/someone who is not a part of the culture/race of the country they are visiting within the story, then we never truly see the story through the lense of the people who are a part of the actual culture/race being described. We only see what the narrator sees and are privy only to the bias of the narrator. I felt that there was no true flipping of the script because we heard little from the native people of Africa. Because Kuper has tried to adapt the original story to suit another narrator without actually changing said narrator, the story loses some of its luster. The dialogue and narration become almost toneless and monotonous in a sense, and without the illustrated depictions of what is going on, the reader may find themselves unable to comprehend how they should feel. It still seemed as if the graphic novel was about how the white employees felt about the natives, and about ivory, because it gave a voice to the white employees rather than give a voice to the natives. Overall, I am not sure I am truly impressed by this adaptation. It feels lacking… in something. I understand that it is difficult when trying to adapt problematic literature in a way that makes things less problematic and more applicable to the human world, and that Kuper had a lot on his plate when creating this adaptation, but I still feel like there needed to be more of what Kuper promised. The change in perspective was hardly a change at all. I must agree, the white employees come off as cartoonish and while it interesting to finally see native peoples being painted in a more realistic and respectful light, I think I would have liked the story more if we'd seen both the natives of Africa and the white employees as realistic people, since Heart of Darkness reflects real parts of Conrad's life.
After reading The heart of darkness it was clear to see how amazing the artwork in the graphic novel was. i also really loved how the illustration was only done in black and white. I think that gave the novel an edge and contributed towards the story line. I think the natives were portrayed in a way to be viewed by colonists. They were sought out to be monsters and the colonists were portrayed as lazy and greedy. It was interesting to understand the concept of travailing in unknown places but also made the reader look at the racism by the colonists. I do agree that flipping the point of view was a success by Kuper. He made the reader see each side but also exaggerated on what the natives had to go through and how horrible that was. They also were being taken advantage of for their ivory and thats why they tried to defend themselves so much. It reminds me of native Americans when colonists came to the U.S. and decided to take over and discriminate against these indigenous peoples. Its sad to say the value held in these people was little to none by the colonists perspective. I also really enjoyed seeing some of the very detailed work and illistartons in the book. The most interesting page to me is when Kurtz was on his death bed and we saw his last words. I think this was especially striking because of how powerful the image struct me. I think the author did an amazing job when creating that image because of the power it holds. It was the highlight of this book in my opinion and shed light on the importance of the character. It also showed the importance of Kurtz and his relationship with the natives and their land. It was an essential component in the story. I overall really enjoyed reading this book because of the many great components of the story line and illustration
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Peter Kuper’s version of “Heart of Darkness” by Joseph Conrad I do not feel that this adaption succeeded in “flipping the script” to the degree where the readers know exactly how the natives feel. Kuper did express the drawings in a way that depicted the natives as worn down, starved, and mistreated group of people while the white men were seen quite opposite in all virtues. He also did a great job with the monochrome scenes and details of the characters with whites being cartoonish and the natives having a realistic look to them which I think conveys to the readers the message of how these people were treated so poorly and many of their tragic fates were all because their complexion is slightly darker and noses are slightly flatter, like Marlow said. I was confused by the fact that Kurtz was said to be some prodigy in a way and that even the natives loved him although he still held racist beliefs and wrote in his book “exterminate all the brutes”. He also wrote in his book that white men must manipulate the natives by approaching them as the whites were supernatural in order for the natives to be conquered. So my confusion lies with why did the natives adore him and take care of him even though he sentenced “brutes” to death and felt that his race was superior. The native women at the end did not give me any insight to her feelings because I felt that she didn’t want Kurtz to be taken away but I do not know exactly why. I feel that Kuper could have given the natives more dialogue instead of only depicting their suffering, death, and the injustice brought to them by the white Europeans and other white men.
ReplyDelete-Sadie Patterson
Instead of reading the adaptation of Heart of Darkness by Peter Kuper, I accidentally read an adaptation of Heart of Darkness by David Zane Mairowitz. This adaptation was published in 2010, nine years before the publication of Kuper's adaptation. In this adaptation all of the panels are in different shades of gray. I didn't notice any difference in the illustrations of the people, or any cartoonish drawing as Dr. Potter mentioned could be found in Kuper's adaptation. The one big pattern I noticed in Mairowitz's adaptation is that sometimes panels would be sketched in immense detail, white other (and most often the larger of the panels) would be drawn with blotches and appear very grainy. I wonder if he did this to show that the people and the close up shots were the most important, and when he showed a wider scene or a panel of a location, he meant for it to look more out of focus and less important to the reader.
ReplyDelete-Catherine Comfort
DeleteAfter reading Peter Kuper's adaptation of Joseph Conrad's I found myself conflicted about how I felt about the graphic novel. I do love that he had chose to have the novel be in black and white. I think it represents the different time period and also how solemn the environment is and the death surrounding the colonists. The colonists are represented in this graphic novel as we have always seen them in King Leopolds II's reign of torture, very greedy and doing whatever they must in the name of money. I do think that the "Heart of Darkness" depicted how each others views about the other groups accurately. The colonists depicted the natives as "savages" and "cannibals" which were the exact words written in journals and diaries of colonists going all the way to the 1700s. However, I was a little disappointed this graphic novel didn't show more of a relationship or more of a viewpoint from the natives. It is clear that the natives must help the colonists because if they won't there will be drastic consequences, but we don't hear much on their side. It is more about the travel to meet Mr. Kurtz which I honestly didn't particularly care for. I don't think Kuper succeeded in '"flipping the script." To succeed, I believe we would have to hear from all sides on the experience in the Congo.
ReplyDelete-Kaitlin Patterson
After reading Peter Kupers adaptation of Joseph Conrads, I first admired how it was in black and white and contained so many detailed drawings. I feel as it represented the setting they were in , and it could of been the reasoning behind it being in black and white. However I noticed some drawings were more detailed than others throughout, but it gave the novel a creative and unique side and made you think about if it was to express emotions more or less on the characters.I do agree that flipping the point of view was successed by Kuper. He made the reader see each side but also somewhat exaggerated on what the natives had to go through and how horrible that was for them.
ReplyDelete- Karissa Santos
As an individual who is very intrigued by moving stories, I was very impressed with how Peter Kuper was able to transform the Heart of Darkness into a graphic novel. Majority of tales such as this seem like they would be impossible to recreate, but the author expressed aspects of the story with much more structure and imagery. I also noticed the use of the bold use of black and white as well as small details like the wave-like frames to define one of Marlow's thoughts or memories. Kuper adapts Marlow and gives him the persona that the author sees through his own eyes. The images and the way the story of the natives was told allows the reader to feel how each of the characters do, including the African natives. Although I have never read the original version of Heart of Darkness, I enjoyed reading the graphic novel and hopefully now have an accurate understanding of the story.
ReplyDelete-Molly Kosma
Upon reading Heart Of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, I had internal conflicting thoughts regarding Peter Kuper’s adaptation of it. While the graphics were depicted well in terms of the details within each frame (monochromatic scenes as well as the detail of the whites imitating more of a cartoon and the Africans being well drawn )and the black and white print to add to the edgy tone of the cultural setting at that time, I thought the underlying message of him “flipping the script” was not as well executed as it could have been. Personally, I believe that the story was still told from an outsider’s perspective “the white man” who was looking into the lives of the natives in Africa. I pose a question: without truly adapting one’s culture for a duration of time or having immense dialogue with the natives who live there, can you truly speak of what they are feeling of an opposing race that you are apart of without any bias? For me, it is very difficult to and was not truly depicted in Kuper’s adaptation of Heart of Conrad. I agree with some of my fellow peers when they mentioned that they the adaptation was more of how Kuper focused on describing the natives of Africa and how they felt about white employees instead of collecting/ talking with more natives about how they felt directly OR how the whites were minimizing the Africans. Maybe it is because of my background that I interpret Kuper’s adaptation differently, but to me he did no more than what is typically portrayed by white perspective looking in.
ReplyDelete-- Lisa Agyare
One of the first things I noticed while reading Heart of Darkness was the drawings. On the very first page when they are introducing the characters the pictures are really clear and looks as if they're almost fine tuned. I noticed as the story takes us through Marlow's journey the pictures looked a lot different, more scribbles and lighter in color. This made it easier to show the reader what time period of Marlow we were looking at, but Kuper could have been trying to show a deeper meaning as well.
ReplyDeleteA specific scene that I thought was interesting was in the beginning of Act II when they are sailing towards Kurtz and one side of the book it was light outside with the forest in the background but on the other side it was dark outside and the forest was drawn out of faces of the natives.
Im not sure if Kuper was completely successful in flipping the script, but he definitely gave it a bit of a different perspective. He did succeed is showing how harsh the conditions were for the Natives.
According to what I have heard so far, it appears to me that Conrad has failed to flip the script as he attempted to do. He spoke in a way as a low seaman but not as of the natives perspective, at least not as well done. This could be due to his being trilingual. I will complete the reading and try to respond again afterwards.
ReplyDelete-leighasia
You could tell that kuper wanted so bad to “flip the script” and not be offensive but in reality it just got more and more offensive as I kept reading. While there were many different faces of the white person, all of the African American people had looked the same. I feel like at first I was confused as to what I was reading. I thought I was reading about slavery, as I kept going it struck me that that’s what it was. It was a worse version of how the Caucasians had more control over the African Americans at one point. I believe that slavery was a type of brain wash due to the simple fact that there were so many African Americans; at one point a scientist had said that Caucasian scientists had began to make pills and started drugging foods to kill off more African Americans. I think Kurtz's sidekick was a sign of brainwashing, this man started believing that he was less he wasn’t needed in the world but listening to Kurtz’s gave him hope of being better. During the slavery time period, working for the Caucasian was giving the black life hope for freedom.
ReplyDeleteDue to the fact that there were so many black lives, I believe they could fight for their freedom and reach out more and help the white people to understand. It is said that white people are more hard headed and less understanding when it comes to a race that isn’t there own; which would scare someone of color back then. Kuper, I feel, expresses that there are people out there that see black lives as more. He shows that there are people out there that care and want to help. In the story I also feel like Kurtz’s was the help that Marlow went looking for to find peace or grey area in the negative racism. I think that's why it was so critical for him to find Kurtz’s.
-Destiny Austin
After reading Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, it was very noticeable that racism was going to hold a huge part of the plot to this story. In just the first thirty pages there were already comments against the natives that came off as rude and ignorant. Kurtz had a lot to say about the natives stating that the company should "get rid of the brutes". As far as flipping the script goes, i believe Kuper did not follow through with his original plan. He allowed the reader to see his opinions and ideas on his journey and experiences in the Congo. I am a firm believer in the idea that there are three sides to every story; one persons side, another persons side, and then the truth. At the top of this blog post it says he "flipped the perspective," focusing not on how Marlow and the white employees of the company saw the natives, but how the natives saw the white people". In my opinion, the natives were not given the ability to say their sides, making the reader have no other choice but to believe it went down exactly how it was written.
ReplyDeleteFor some reason the version i ordered came in as a chapter book and i was not able to see the images that the book contained.
This adaptation of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness by Peter Kuper is undoubtedly why these topics are being discussed in 2020. Racism, stereotypes, and degradation, along with our own beliefs insecurities, and morals are in a constant state of conflict. By human nature, change is very discerning, uncomfortable and difficult to adapt to. I'm not quite sure if I was the only one to notice this, but the scenes / panels of Marlow and his narration, displayed much more current, classic, and higher level comic illustrations. Panels that displayed Marlow's narration were very detailed, but not so bold in color, much more hazy, and reminded me of older styles of comics. These two very distinct, and very different styles of drawing exemplified to me, black and white thinking versus the gray area that many tend to overlook. In some ways Kuper did display a feeling of remorse throughout this adaptation, “flipping the script,” per say, might not be as accurate. I do not believe Kuper actually flipped the script, he did however show a more remorseful side, and empathetic person, but who could not truly do anything to stop the atrocities at hand. This version shows the struggle between going with the crowd, and going against the crowd. The prevalence of this inner struggle is an ongoing battle in 2020, in today's society not many can, or chose to go against the crowd, in fear of rejection. In today's society the majority still struggle with their own inner turmoil, regrets, decisions, and moral dilemmas. In numerous panels throughout the three parts, the reader clearly sees Marlows facial expressions in horror and disbelief, yet still does nothing to stop, interfere, or reject the barbaric, heinous acts committed. This adaptation clearly highlights the abundance of white men in power; driven from greed, gluttony, and down-right selfishness, but does show that there are good/great humans, but sometimes those innate ethical dilemmas become non-existent as time numbs our spirits. The panels that displayed Marlow's ethical dilemma, his personal inner turmoil, shows humans are innately good, but Mr. Kurtz however, was too far on the “dark side” of the spectrum. A typical display of good versus evil. By the end of the part III Mr. Kurtz, on his deathbed, exemplifies the epitome of letting authority and power take over, eventually it is inevitable for ‘our souls to go mad,” if we allow it.
ReplyDelete-Amanda Musumeci
After reading Heart of Darkness I could see how the author attempted to flip the perspectives. However, I do not think he fully succeeded at this. The scene where Marlow arrives to Kurtz station and the man who approached the boat when they got there was depicted as very cartoon like and wearing long sleeves and pants and a scarf while the natives were wearing minimal to no clothing. I think this was to show how badly the Englishmen stuck out on this island and that the natives viewed them as foolish in a way. I do think with depicting himself and the other white men as cartoonish and foolish was a good attempt at flipping the perspective but I do not think it is a genuine depiction of how the natives felt. Kuper made it seem like the white men were scared and vulnerable coming onto this foreign island at Kurtz's station, but does not show how fearful the natives probably were as their homeland was being invaded by strange men with numerous guns and other weapons. I think Kuper could have done a better job with a more genuine and realistic perspective.
ReplyDelete-Naomi Rivard