Conrad and Masculinity
Conrad and Masculinity
Conrad and Masculinity
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Masculinity</strong>, ‘Woman’ <strong>and</strong> Truth 141<br />
oppression as a possessed object. As in ‘Heart of Darkness’, confessing<br />
to a woman is a tempting but terrifying possibility. The woman is held<br />
to represent a ‘sacred’ or metaphysical truth <strong>and</strong> to protect this role as<br />
living embodiment of an ‘ultimate’ truth she must be denied knowledge<br />
of mundane truths, of men’s truths. Here, though, it is not the<br />
potentially sympathetic figure of Marlow who seeks to enforce such<br />
protection, but the corrupt <strong>and</strong> grotesque Verloc. Male critics (or<br />
readers) are unlikely to ‘identify the imaginative autobiography of<br />
their masculinity’ with that of Verloc, as Straus argues they do with<br />
that of Marlow (EI, 130).<br />
In Under Western Eyes as in ‘Heart of Darkness’ we find an idealized<br />
figure of a beautiful young woman, from whom the truth of a male<br />
crime must be kept. However, in this case the concealment becomes<br />
unbearable to the man who knows of that crime. The result is the<br />
novel’s climactic double confession, to Natalia Haldin <strong>and</strong> to the<br />
assembled Russian revolutionaries. It is the latter confession which, in<br />
literal <strong>and</strong> realistic terms, leads to the deafening <strong>and</strong> crippling of<br />
Razumov. Nevertheless, symbolically this punishment, leading to his<br />
anticipated early death, seems to confirm the taboo established in<br />
‘Heart of Darkness’ on the passing of male secrets to a woman. The<br />
parallel with ‘Heart of Darkness’ is evident when, for example, Natalia<br />
expresses the hope of learning from Razumov some of her brother’s<br />
last words (137), just as the Intended asks Marlow for Kurtz’s last<br />
words, <strong>and</strong> also when the language-teacher describes Natalia as ‘a<br />
frank <strong>and</strong> generous creature, having the noblest—well—illusions’<br />
(192). The crime that Razumov confesses is his own, not that of<br />
another, <strong>and</strong> we know what that crime was: the betrayal of Natalia’s<br />
brother to torture <strong>and</strong> execution at the h<strong>and</strong>s of the Russian state. It<br />
is not a question, as with Kurtz <strong>and</strong> Marlow, of some unspeakable<br />
transgression with sexual overtones. Or is it? Razumov has something<br />
worse to confess (he feels) even than his betrayal of Victor Haldin to<br />
the authorities:<br />
Listen—now comes the true confession. The other was nothing. To<br />
save me, your trustful eyes had to entice my thought to the very<br />
edge of the blackest treachery ... Victor Haldin had stolen the truth<br />
of my life from me, who had nothing else in the world, <strong>and</strong> he<br />
boasted of living on through you on this earth where I had no place<br />
to lay my head. She will marry some day, he had said—<strong>and</strong> your<br />
eyes were trustful. And do you know what I said to myself? I shall<br />
steal his sister’s soul from her ... If you could have looked then into