1. Introduction
(1) Conrad in his 'colonial fictions' did not presume to speak for the colonial peoples nor dis he adress them, and this aloofness is registered in portraits of iconic fiqures posed against archetypal landscapes, it also spared his writing the excess of that sentimentality joined with paternalistic reproof which was a characteristic feature of the nineteenth-century colonial novel.
- what is verifiable is that he was popularly regarded as a writer of romances in faraway places and stirring tales of adventure at sea, and that the subversive implications of fictions which disturbed even as they consoled were not apparent to contemporary reviewers, just as the projection of an idealistic impulse to imperialism seems to have escaped the anti-imperialist R. B. Cunninghame Graham who read the works as unequivocal assaults on colonialism.
(2) Critics and commentators who, out of deference for 'genius' and 'greatness', mute the strident resonances of an author's reprehensible social stances and intellectually irresponsible attitudes on the grounds that to discuss these critically is to take unfair advantage of a contemporary sensibility, make the assumption that all writers are shackled prisoners of dominant modes of thought.
[작가들 역시도 시대의 한계 속에 갇혀 있을 따름이라는 것. 이 견해를 어떻게 넘어설 수 있을 것인가? 하는 문제]
- Not only does such an approach obscure the texts' dimension as 'free intellectual or spiritual porduction', but it suppresses articulations that are integral to the fictions' decentered and internally inconsistent ideological structure.
(2) Although Conrad was cool about Kipling, disliked Buchan and thought Haggard's tales horrible, his own fictions with their racial stereotypes, ingratiating generalities on alien customs and the native mind, and their tendency to attach moral valuations to cultural particularities, do have affinities with writing he despised.
[콘래드 역시도 당대의 담론에서 자유롭지 못하다는 것을 보여주는 말.]
(3) Scholors may differ on defining the source and content of Conrad's double vision, but the consensus is that he is the arties of ambivalence and the divided mind.
- Where Conrad's writings break with the received perceptions of the other hemisphere as either a metaphysical landscape and/or the incarnation of those desires excluded and repressed by civilisation, is in the dramatisations of the antagonism between western modes and foreign precepts as conflics of authentics alternatives, and although these invariably issue as victories for the West in the porcess fundamental questions are asked of European premises and opposing codes are given space to register their claims.
(4) Both disenchanted scrutiny of the flaws to imperialist ways of seeing
and comrplicity in its perceptions are manifest in the contradictory constellations of meaning produced by the fictions' chiaroscuro of light and dark.
[콘래드의 이중적인 면모. 사이드에게서 볼 수 있는. 하지만 콘래드에 대한 비판의 어조가 더욱 강하게 느껴진다.]
5) When the actions of modern imperialism broughts the white world into organized confrontations with the other continents, the existing accretions of dark and black were thickened and extended to establish an equivalence between 'primitive', 'barbaric' or 'savage' societies and moral perversity, and by inference between black people living amidst, jungle forest and wilderness and a condition of aboriginal depravity.
- In Conrad's fictions the dark tropics emanate poisonous influences, decay and death; the sombre, primeval forests whisper of inexplicable desires, the gloomy impenetrable jungles of uncivilised life.
[이 부분에 대해서도 좀 더 생각을 잘 해보아야 한다. [어둠]의 자연이 이런 모습으로 그려진 측면이 있다는 것은 분명하지만, [진보]에서도 그러한가?]
- If Conrad does use white and light as the signs of truth, integrity, knowledge, decency and reason, he also annuls these associations when the conspicuous objects of imperialist desire, the gold of Almayer, the ivory of HD and the silver of Nos, serve as emblems of avarice and agents of corruption.
[베니타 패리의 글은 읽는데 힘이 많이 들지만 좀 반복해서 읽을 필요가 있다. 제대로 이해하려고 노력해야 한다.]
6) To bring political criticism to Conrad's writings is not to isolate the 'sociologically significant' aspects of the novels, nor to initiate a survey of their historical authenticity, realistic features or tendentious design, and indeed the primary concern of such analysis is to understand the relationships between literature and history at the level of a work;s formal, literary structures.
[정치적 비평의 정당화]
7) If . . . literature is approached as an autonomous practice producting specifically fictional representations of what has through other means been constructed as history, then criticism can elucidate the texts' eccentric perceptions of the epistemological premises, ethical axioms and social goals proposed by the dominant ideology, and this study will attempt to discuss how the interlocution of narrative discourses in a set of Conrad's fictions transforms, subverts and rescues the established norms, values and myths of imperialist civilisation.
- For within Conrad's writings the animations of received ideas, beliefs and apprehensions that act to ratify the status quo engender a protest against the authorised sources as these are dislocated and distorted to make the normal appear strange, to reveal the fixed as mutable and expose the absolute as relative.
-