In part two Marlow talks more about Kurtz and his plans in the Congo
To me part two was a lot more interesting. I liked the details that were provided.
I felt that I was more drawn to part two than part one. I think there was a definite feeling of better understanding with what was going on in the book. I think that the detailing in part two was needed for me as a reader to fell like I was there with Marlow and Kurtz’s in the Congo.
I still wish that there was more insight on who Kurtz’s really is, what he is all about. I mean if he is not that important why is he such a mystery. This part was way better to grasp and a lot more enjoyable. I just wish that Kurtz character was better reveled.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that when Conrad uses all of the details it gives you a strong feeling like you are there in the scene but at the same time I would rather see more talking between the characters. This way we can try and figure out the background of the characters.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you and Michael that Joseph Conrad uses a lot of details and images to my scene more descriptive. But I do agree with Michael that I want to see more involve with character like conversation. Sometimes it is very mysterious and confuess.
ReplyDeleteI too would have liked there to be more conversation between characters. Conrad does a good job and making you feel like you are there but its annoying after awhile.
ReplyDelete