What was Conrad thinking when he wrote this novel? It feels
as though he were not fully engaged, as if he were simply going through the
motions of writing. There is nothing here of his best work, which appears to be
either (a) a Western response to colonization, and (b) the response of humans
to moral challenges, that force them to confront themselves. The two factors
often appear together.
But in Victory,
there is none of this. One rather feeble man, Heyst, does a good deed but is
unfairly condemned for it. As a result, he runs away from society to live on an
island by himself (although it turns out that is he not quite by himself – he
has a Chinese servant, Wang). He is confronted by some very Western villains
who are simply cardboard cut-outs of evilness; they don’t convince. He fails to
defend himself or the woman staying with him (who he has rescued from a
difficult situation). That’s it! No
great moral controversy; most of the book is about westerners against westerners.
As a reader, I wasn’t very bothered about any of them.
My complaints about this novel:
1. The
hero is a ditherer. When confronted by a challenge on his island he fails to
take decisive action.
2. The
phrase “motiveless malignity” applies to Heyst’s enemy, Schomberg. He is the
mechanism that leads to the denouement. But nobody would be convinced by his
arguments. Why would a gang of murderers
chase a man for his money when the company he worked for has gone bust, and
there is no indication that has ever had any money?
3. The
novel is written by an omniscient narrator, who takes it in turns to write as
if from the standpoints of individual characters. Some of the narrative is
written as if by the main female character, Lena, a member of a touring band.
That narrative doesn’t ring true. On the basis of this novel, Conrad couldn’t
write as a female character.
4. Where
is the moral choice, the quintessential component of a Conrad novel?
5. Is
there ever any questioning of why Heyst retreated to a desert island? After
all, it’s a strange thing to do (even if it is matched in another Conrad story,
‘The Planter of Malata`, another rather indifferent Conrad tale, which, it
seems was written at the same time as Victory.
6. A
few Shakespearean parallels (Schomberg as Iago, Pedro as Caliban, did not lift
the novel above the commonplace.
7. Is
there any awareness of any humanity in the non-western characters? No, they are
treated as inferior beings. The character of the Chinese servant, Wang, as
described by the narrator, reveals a colonial attitude that does not reflect
well on Conrad. By contrast, Kipling has
a respect for and a genuine interest in other civilizations; on the evidence of
Victory, Conrad has neither.
Incidentally, where is the victory of the title? The novel
ends in disaster for all the major characters. My feeling on completing the
novel was more like relief at having finished it.
No comments:
Post a Comment