Heart of Darkness: The Call of the Wild

In “Heart of Darkness,” Marlow's narrative weaves Kurtz's character with an air of overwhelming power and profound futility, mirroring the inherent contradictions in his life. Kurtz, whose very name signifies brevity, was a towering figure who achieved remarkable success in the ivory trade. Paradoxes seem to pervade every aspect of Kurtz's existence. To truly understand Kurtz, one must delve into the heart of this arcane character and confront the question: what did Kurtz belong to?

Marlow reflects that everything belonged to Kurtz, “but that was a trifle. The thing was to know what he belonged to” (44). Kurtz belonged to the wilderness as intimately as a child belonged to a mother. Conrad portrays the wilderness as an ominous and powerful force that broods over the “inscrutable purpose” of Europeans’ “fantastic invasion” (20, 56). It is intriguing, then, to explore the wilderness’ effects on Kurtz, who often “wandered alone, far in the depths of the forest” (51). The parent-child relationship between the wilderness and Kurtz can be examined through the personification of the wilderness, the transformations in Kurtz’s identity, his dependence on the wild, and the role of the wilderness in shaping Kurtz's sense of belonging.

The wilderness is not merely a setting but personified as a character. Conrad portrays the wilderness as a protective figure that “spoiled and pampered” Kurtz (44). He establishes a sense of intimacy and familiarity between Kurtz and the wild. One of the first impressions of Kurtz’s appearance – his bald head – reflects this intimacy: “The wilderness had patted him on the head” (44). The imagery of patting on the head –a sign of affection and fondness, even playfulness, typically shared with close ones – suggests a physical closeness between the wilderness and Kurtz. The wilderness, through its “playful paw-strokes… had caressed” Kurtz (37). Conrad even goes to length to state that it “loved him, embraced him” (44). The word choices of “caressed,” “loved,” and “embraced” evoke a sense of intimacy and reciprocity, reinforcing the wilderness as a nurturing figure that influences Kurtz’s development. By personifying the wilderness, Conrad imbues it with agency. Agency to the wilderness implies that it possesses a certain degree of autonomy and power to shape Kurtz’s character and decisions. The actions of “patting him on the head,” “caress,” “love,” and  “embrace” all highlight the deliberate influence of the wild in a manner akin to a guiding mother.

The wilderness’s active role in molding Kurtz’s identity reshaped Kurtz’s desires and ambitions. In the wild, the persona of the “original Kurtz” fades, giving rise to a new Kurtz. Kurtz’s repetitive solitary wanderings amidst the jungles imprint upon him the wild’s essence, merging his being with its untamed spirit. The wilderness is capable of a formidable influence as it holds “no restraint, no faith, and no fear” (62). Raw human nature is laid bare with no societal norms and constraints, providing an oasis for rebirth. Kurtz, “hollow at the core,” was influenced significantly (53). The original Kurtz was an agent of enlightenment sent to civilize the native Africans by the International Society for the Suppression of Savage Customs.  However, as Kurtz ventured deeper into the heart of the wilderness, the wild “consumes [...] his soul”. Kurtz surrendered to his primal instincts, shedding the veneer of civilization and embracing the untamed wilderness within himself. As he embraces “savage rituals,” Kurtz gradually becomes one with the wild (52-53). In other words, the new Kurtz had developed a dependence on the wild,  allowing the wilderness to take him and “seal his soul to its own” (44).

As Kurtz’s psychological transformation unfolded, it was mirrored in his physical sicknesses. When Marlow encountered Kurtz in the wilderness, Kurtz was a shadow of his former self, emaciated and ravaged by illness. While Conrad portrays the wilderness as the opposite of civilization, it was not a source of darkness for Kurtz; instead, it was a source of strength. Kurtz had always been a part and a product of the wild. The “original Kurtz” was a creation of Europe, which Marlow described as forests of “utter savagery.” Unlike the fog-shrouded wilds of Europe, the clarity of Africa's wilderness provided a space for Kurtz to learn things about himself “which he did not know” (53, 56). In Africa, the wilderness suited Kurtz’s longing for “space to breathe in and to push on” (50).  Despite battling two illnesses in the wild, Kurtz managed to survive and continued his explorations of the forest. It is within the wilderness that Kurtz’s ailing body found resilience. As soon as Kurtz left the wilderness that he belonged to, he died. To Kurtz, the wilderness assumed the role of a protective mother and shielded him from the perils of the outside world. The wilderness became a symbolic womb that nurtured Kurtz’s spiritual and physical well-being until his eventual demise. Kurtz’s ability to survive and thrive within the depths of the wild underscores their mutual acceptance of each other and affirms the wilderness’s role as a sanctuary.

The relationship between Kurtz and the wilderness unfolds as a compelling exploration of identity, influence, and belonging. While Kurtz attempted to shape the wild through Europe’s “fantastic invasion,” the wilderness ultimately changed him. Through his psychological and physical transformations in the wilderness, it becomes apparent that Kurtz's true belonging lies in his reliance on the wilderness—a bond parallel to a child's embrace of its mother. Conrad’s portrayal of the wilderness as an affectionate and protective figure further demonstrates a connection akin to that of parent and child. This parent-child relationship serves as a lens to examine the inseparable bond between men and nature.