In Francis Galton’s essay, “The Comparative Worth of Different Races”, he basically gives a grading scale to a bunch of different races. He says that “The ablest race…is unquestionably the ancient Greek” (Galton 227). According to Galton, anyone not from that category is on a lower scale, the lowest being Australians. He talks about how most “negroes” are half-witted and that they make stupid mistakes that are childish and simple (Galton, 226). He bases his ideas off of books he’s read that were written by white Americans who portray this idea. He even states that he has no information of the idiocy among “negroes”, but he felt the need to share all of his opinions anyways (Galton 227). The idea that “negroes” are of a lesser worth than white people is supported in the short novel Heart of Darkness, because of many different instances. For one thing, Conrad repeatedly refers to the people of Africa as “savages”. The Webster Dictionary defines a savage as “not domesticated or under human control or lacking the restraints normal to civilized human beings. By Conrad using the term “savages” to describe the African people, he is implying that they are of a lesser worth than himself to say the least. He is implying that they aren’t even human, that they are closer to animals than they would be to his own race.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Galton and Heart of Darkness
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is pretty much what I got from it too - I decided it didn't help me to read it late at night, as it took a couple of times reading through it to get it. :) The grading of the races was so ridiculous! I want to know how he decided to grade them and in the way he did, what was that thought process? And how did the Australians get so far down on the list?! lol
ReplyDeleteGalton's piece is indeed troubling, not only for its content but his terrible source work (and research). Full of fallacies (and falsehoods), no reproducible scientific experiments, and so on -- definitely wouldn't be evaluated as a good source for a research paper, but is a fine source as a piece of "New Historical" literary criticism (which we will talk a little bit about on Tuesday). Would have liked to see a longer/deeper treatment of the topic, and closer ties to actual text in Heart of Darkness though.
ReplyDelete