Conrad vs. Hemingway?

In comparing the works of Conrad and Hemingway we find ourselves dealing with the argument as to whether dynamism or symbolism constitutes the more powerful writing style. Conrad’s Heart of Darkness remains one of the most monumental and inspiring novels of our time, while Hemingway’s short stories are masterpieces reflecting one of the most influential styles in modern fiction. It can successfully be argued that, though the monolithic work is of timeless significance, it is the dynamic work that more enduring in transcending both cultural boundaries and historical definition.

The English student can approach this argument with the logic of grammar. The object of the sentence, though providing the dynamic of its meaning, is dependent on the subject for its comprehensive value. By applying this axiom to composition, we then see that the objective, or symbolic, form of writing conveys a broader vision which the writer can share with his reader. Yet the subjective, or dynamic, portrays the analytical perspective of the author with which the reader develops a more empathic understanding. From the reader’s viewpoint, he will remember the concept of the symbolic work, yet the characters of the dynamic work become acquaintances with which he forms a lasting pseudo-relationship.

Such is the case with Hemingway’s Nick Adams series and Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. Darkness has been the inspiration for Apocalypse Now, one of the greatest cinematic efforts of our century. Yet without this accreditation, we might well find the piece slipping into the same obscurity as its author. Compare this to The Killers, Nick Adams’ claim to filmdom fame, and we see Hemingway eclipsed in that genre though unscathed in literary comparison.

Again we compare the works and their main characters in pursuing this course of debate. Darkness is a symbolic work which finds Marlow sucked inexorably downriver in a symbolic attempt to stare into the abyss and see if the reflection of Kurtz is indeed his own. The Adams series, alternately, follows the life and times of Nick Adams in an attempt by Hemingway to share with us his philosophical viewpoints within Adams’ microcosm. While Kurtz becomes a symbol of the duality of man, Adams remains less of a symbol than a sympathetic figure that we are inclined to consider from a less judgmental standpoint.

In comparing literary backdrops, the terms macrocosm and microcosm cannot be used sparingly. Kurtz and Marlow are both manipulators and manipulated by time and fate to cataclysmic consequence. Adams and his alter ego, Harold Krebs, are factors in an algorithm reduced to common denominators on the chalkboard of life. Conrad takes us to the high places to view his lofty visions, while Hemingway brings us to grade level where we rub elbows with his characters, taste their liquor, share their pain. There are pronounced similarities in the novels by comparison, but it is the altitude at which we view them that sets both novels and novelists apart.

In Indian Camp, Hemingway weaves his tapestry around young Nick's struggle to retain his grip on his innocence. The author focuses on psychological drama as Nick negotiates an excruciating rite of passage. Yet these dynamics are enhanced within Marlow's turmoil at his initial contact with Kurtz's work product along the river. Marlow, as witness, is the vicarious representative of not only the Company, but also of Kurtz' intended, and ultimately society as a whole.

The Doctor and the Doctor's Wife continues to follow Nick's spiritual odyssey in domestic life. He reaches an epiphany during a subliminal conflict between his parents. Hemingway points to Nick's sympathy for his father as proof that the male bonding process will supercede the emotional maternal bond imposed by social more. The conflict moves to a grander scale in Darkness as both Marlow and Kurtz estrange themselves from the female figures in their life. Conrad provides these scenes as incidentals, suggesting such relationships fall casualty to circumstance as men set forth on the road to destiny.

At The End of Something, Nick continues his life journey in dealing with subliminal hypocrisy in human relationships. Although satisfied with the interaction between his girlfriend and himself, there is a spiritual detachment that becomes `the end of something' Nick finds difficult to put a finger on. Kurtz realizes similar detachment, first with his intended, then with the Company, then civilization itself, and finally with reality. Conrad's antihero slips into the world of irrational along his grandiose vision quest, while Hemingway's hero remains well grounded enough to never lose his footing.

The Three-Day Blow relates the aftermath of Nick's breakup, an incident which shows his close pal leading him along the path of their male bonding drive, a recurring theme in Hemingway's work. The author insinuates both arbitrary rejection and co-dependency as Nick allows his pal to drive them both directly across both potholes. Again Hemingway waxes philosophical as Nick avoids commitment in pursuit of personal freedom. Yet again we see Conrad directing Kurtz towards more profound emancipation, seeking the gratification of his ego in lieu of his prior commitments to his intended, his Company, and to civilization itself.

In The Battler, Nick becomes the third party in encountering a weird relationship between derelict wanderers. Here he sees the downside of the male bonding process in a scenario reminiscent of Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men (another realist a style similar to Hemingway's). Though Nick observes and walks away, the vignette not only implies the author's apology for synthetic bonding but may also adopt Conrad's fatalism in intimating that there are men for whom such dies are cast. Perhaps this is the case between Marlow and Kurtz themselves. Although Marlow detests what Kurtz has become, there is enough respect left for the `battler' to decide on extraction rather than to merely leave him at the campfire, with the greasy ham sandwiches of his megalomania to feed his withering carcass.

Soldier's Home is Nick's alter ago, Harold Krebs, experiencing the dislocation of environment. Again the author explores the theme of compromise in the face of self-awareness. Krebs finds himself helplessly watching the congealing complacency of his intimates, failing to find expression for the metamorphosis he has undergone in the trauma of war. This seems to be Conrad's moral of his tale as Marlow confronts Kurtz' intended at long last. Despite his noble intent, words cannot convey the depth of his experience with Kurtz. The authors tend to agree that, even as realists, they recognize that life can often place us in situations where things are best left unsaid. It is inevitably the fool who will allow uncompromising righteousness to link him to the expression of the abominable.

Finally, in Big Two-Hearted River, Nick seeks stability in the river of life, `choking his mind' to stop and smell the roses. He opts to control the swamp in order to explore it, refusing to let the desolation around him deprive him of what he came for. It becomes the quintessence of what Kurtz has done, grabbing the river by the throat and strangling it for all its worth. Both authors are harmonious in their view of men who find an abstract pleasure in overcoming obstacles for the sake of conquest. Again we find Hemingway to be less judgmental, merely providing us with this vignette of Nick's psyche for us to draw our own conclusions. With Kurtz, there is little room for speculation.

Consider that Hemingway, in the intimacy of the subjective, plays upon our proximity in adjusting our vision to a sympathetic light. Conrad, alternately, challenges us with a periphery that overwhelms selectivity; to create a sympathetic Kurtz would require a Miltonian effort of which Conrad proves incapable. Likewise Hemingway places Nick in situations over which he has but reflexive control. Conrad's iconoclasts stand as dei ex machina over a stage crowded by the huddled masses. It is Marlow's prerogative to destroy or create by the power of his narrative just as Kurtz acquires actual power of life and death within the physical realm.
In exploring the characters of Hemingway and Conrad, further insight can be acquired into the philosophies of their respective works.

Hemingway's heroes are loners, predisposed towards independence. They are more comfortable in the natural environment than with people, and this is where they lay the foundation upon which their relationships are built. Nature is a healing medium for their souls. The bonding process with other men is an integral part of this continuous regeneration. Life becomes a matter of choices in which self-reliance is a priority. The virtue of endurance is secondary only to nature itself as regards survival of the spirit. It is a stoic philosophy that Hemingway expresses, and his characters live in a world in which the only alternative is the ennui of oblivion.

Conrad proves equally as stoic at times, though the freedom of choice seems to be a fatalistic compulsion rather than a natural progression. His characters are placed in circumstances in which their choices are of cataclysmic consequence. Yet they seem to embody the magnitude of their choice. Kurtz becomes the epitome of evil by preference rather than design. Marlow is the personification of ambivalence in quietly removing Kurtz before slipping back downriver into the sunset. This ambivalence is seen one last time as Marlow and the shadow of Kurtz' memory cease to darken the doorstep of the intended. By failing to choose, Marlow indeed makes a choice that Conrad only alludes to.

In conclusion, we find that Hemingway's dynamism brings us closer to his characters, making them at once more sympathetic yet less awe-inspiring. Conrad's symbolism provides us with a panoramic view in which his characters become but actors on an enormous stage where judgment only impairs our vision. We will always cherish the memory of the night at Wemedge's cottage along Ten Mile point. Yet the morality play of `the horror' will remain with us long after we forget who Wemedge actually was.