Because

I. Because answers the questions Why? and How?

Because is a subordinating conjunction; it is used to introduce a dependent clause (Allen; Lunsford). More particularly, because tends to introduce adverbial dependent clauses that answer the question why? When because answers the question why, it relates directly to the original statement, as in I came [why did you come?] because I wanted to see you (Allen).

Non-because adverbial clauses may answer questions like where? when? to what degree? and in what manner? Of course, these questions are not usually explicitly stated in the sentence. Dependent clauses that begin with that, which, who, and whom are not adverbial clauses (Siegel).

Because sometimes behaves a bit like the coordinating conjunction for (see Section IV-B). In this role, it may introduce a dependent clause by answering the question how? For example, I know he committed suicide,[how did you know that he committed suicide?] because his wife told me (Allen). Notice that you could probably swap a for for the because and still be fine.

II. Because at the beginning

Mrs. Harrison and your other junior high teachers were wrong. Prepositions fit fine at the end of sentences, because makes a swell first word (Allen; The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition), and there is one space after a period, not two. It’s also acceptable to use because after an introductory it’s, that’s, that is, etc: It’s because these socialist values are apparently being incorporated into the party doctrine that many fascists are changing their political allegiance (Allen). It’s not a great sentence, but it follows the rules.

By the way, the reason that Mrs. Harrison decried the use of because at the beginning of a sentence may have been that she wanted you to avoid separating a main clause and a subordinate clause into two separate sentences (e.g., I don’t want to go to work. Because I’d rather sleep) (Louisa). See the end of section IV.

Mrs. Harrison may have been thwarting the unholy communion of because and a noun clause (i.e., any clause or part of a sentence that stands in place of a noun(Bowles)). Grammarians argue that because should only introduce adverbial clauses (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition), and naïve students may be tempted to write sentences like: Because the man is guilty (,) does not mean that he should be executed (Bowles), Because we don’t explicitly ask these questions doesn’t mean they aren’t answered (Allen), or Just because he thinks it a good idea doesn’t mean it’s a good idea (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition). This form is fine for colloquial speech, but in addition to breaking some obscure rule of grammar, this kind of construction is impractical: it uncomfortably delays the main clause (Allen). Therefore, in formal writing do not use a clause beginning with because as the subject of the sentence (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition).

III. Commas

Note the position of the commas in the section I examples. A comma should rarely be used when because answers the question why? It may be appropriate to precede a sentence-ending why?/because-clause with a comma if (a) the reason that follows the because is parenthetical (Siegel), (b) the writer is engineering an artificial or dialectical pause between the main statement and the reason, or (c) because is joined with of to form some kind of mutant prepositional phrase (this is probably wrong). I made those last two up. Here’s an example of a parenthetical (or prepositional phrase?) because: He’d have to watch his step…not to make a hash of things, because of over-anxiety. Notice that if you read the sentence aloud, it is natural to pause before “because of over-anxiety” (Allen), thus the comma.

Another instance when a comma may precede because is when it is used to answer the question how? For instance, in the last example of section I, the comma helps readers understand that because is not answering the question “Why did he commit suicide?”

And what about when because begins the sentence? There seems to be a nearly universal trend toward separating sentence-beginning adverbial clauses (especially ones that begin with because) from independent clauses with a comma (Rozakis; Siegel). However, occasionally you stumble across sentences like this: Because of the deterioration of the sugar in the blood it was decided, after consultation, to carry out an exchange blood transfusion (Allen). Notice there’s no comma. I suspect that the lack of a comma may be the author’s attempt to avoid a clunky comma party (Elisabetta).

Commas may also be necessary in sentences where the initial statement is negative. Please see Section VI for more information.

IV. Confusion with other words

A. Because versus As and Since

Because introduces a direct reason: I was sleeping because I was tired. (Notice that there’s no comma—it’s answering the question why?) In contrast, causal since (which has been a part of the English language since before Chaucer wrote in the fourteenth century) is useful as a slightly milder way of expressing causation than because. That is, since is appropriate when the first event in a sequence leads logically to the second event but was not its direct cause (Goldstein; The Chicago Manual of Style). The usage for as appears to be the same as since: As/Since I was tired, I was sleeping (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition; Dictionary.Com Unabridged (V 1.0.1). Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary)—that is, it reads more like: Because I was tired, I happened to be sleeping.

As should be avoided when it could be construed to mean while.

Bad: She couldn’t answer her page as she was examining a critically ill patient.

Less bad: She couldn’t answer her page, as she was examining a critically ill patient.

Good: She couldn’t answer her page because she was examining a critically ill patient (Iverson et al.).

Since should be avoided when it could be construed to mean from the time of or from the time that (Goldstein; Iverson et al.; The Chicago Manual of Style; Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association).

Bad: She had not been able to answer her page since she was in the clinic.

Good: She had not been able to answer her page because she was in the clinic (Iverson et al.).

All three terms (because, as, and since) can be used at the beginning of a sentence. However, when these words are used to start a sentence, as/since tend to emphasize the main statement whereas because emphasizes the reason (Allen). See Section II.

B. Because versus For

Because and for may be interchangeable. However, it’s helpful to understand which attributes of because are the most amplified by for. In the sentence I know he committed suicide, for/because his wife told me, for/because answer the question How? (Allen). In this sentence, I was sleeping, for I was tired, for introduces the reason, proof, or justification like an afterthought or a parenthetical statement (Dictionary.Com Unabridged (V 1.0.1). Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary). (Notice that there’s a comma in both examples; for is a subordinate conjunction (i.e., for, or, so, nor, and, yet, but), so the comma preceding the reason is essential.

C. Because versus Inasmuch as

This phrase implies concession; the main statement is true in view of the circumstances introduced by this conjunction: Inasmuch as I was tired, it seemed best to sleep (Dictionary.Com Unabridged (V 1.0.1). Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary). Inasmuch as is a rather formal and awkward expression—avoid it! It means “to the extent that,” “in so far as,” or more simply, “in view of the fact that,” and “since.” The preferred style is two words, not four (Allen).

D. Because (of) versus Due to

Use due to when the main statement or effect is (1) stated as a noun and (2) appears before the verb be. Use because when the main statement or effect is stated as a phrase (Allen; The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition; Iverson et al.; Lunsford).

For example, due to is preferred in this sentence: His paranoia was due to the marshmallow candies that he was eating. The due to needs a noun or pronoun as its antecedent and, in this case, that noun is his paranoia. But because of is preferred in this sentence: The turtle-man was sweating profusely because of the shell on his back (Lunsford).

Other examples of due to:

Pay Caesar what is due to Caesar, and pay God what is due to God.

Incorrect speed is generally due to a word idler wheel.

It was due to start at four o’clock.

Part of her happiness, her unaltered sense of her own superiority, was due to…(Allen).

This can get confusing:

There was a delay due to bad weather – it’s an inverted version of The delay was due to bad weather, so it’s fine. However, if you change the sentence a bit more—The train was delayed due to bad weather—you’re in trouble. The due is no longer grammatically attached and is therefore unacceptable (Allen).

E. Because (of) versus Due to the fact that

Due to the fact that is long, confusing, and a grammatical mess. Therefore, always consider because (of) before using this awkward phrase.

That this slippage is so slight is due to the fact that because the other staff have worked a great deal of extra time.

*In cases where there is a strong link between due and an antecedent noun, due to the fact that may be preferred: The success of the tampon is partly due to the fact that it is hidden (Allen).

V. The reason is … because

Avoid this construction; it is redundant (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition; Allen). The definition of because is “for the reason that” (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition), so the sentence The reason for this was because I was the coolest man in the world literally means The reason for this was for the reason that I was really redundant (Allen). Another reason to avoid the reason/because construction is that because can only introduce adverbial clauses and that reason is requires completion by a noun clause (see last paragraph of Section II) (Bowles). Writers should also avoid the phrase the reason why. In both cases the sentences can easily be rewritten using that instead of because (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition).

VI. Because and negatives

The last tricky characteristic of because is its use in negative sentences. For instance, what does this sentence mean: I do not eat chicken because of the feathers? Given the content of the sentence, we might assume that the speaker chooses not to eat chicken and that the reason he or she avoids chicken is because of poultry feathers. After all, who would want to eat feathers? However, without a comma between chicken and because, the sentence technically means something entirely different; the current sentence should technically be interpreted to mean I do eat chicken but I don’t eat it because of the feathers.

If it’s a negative statement with a valid reason for that negative statement, use a comma:

I do not eat chicken [negative statement], and the reason is the feathers [valid reason]

I do not eat chicken, because of the feathers. Notice the pause between chicken and because.

If it’s a positive statement with an invalid reason for that positive statement, don’t use a comma: I do not eat chicken [positive statement], but the reason that I eat it is not feathers [invalid reason]. I do not eat chicken because of the feathers. Notice that there’s no pause in this version; in fact, it almost sounds like there should be more to the sentence like I do not eat chicken because of the feathers, I eat it because of the tasty strips of beak.

Again, the context will often make the meaning clear (e.g., this sentence technically requires a comma but still meets Fowler’s approval even without a comma: Many people do not attend church because they are bored by ritualistic services), but a comma certainly helps oust ambiguity: The toy is not for every customer, because it does require some patience.

VII. Other subordinating conjunctions (see Lunsford)

VIII. Other compound prepositions (see Lunsford)

IX. References

Allen, Robert, ed. Pocket Fowler's Modern English Usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004.

Bowles, Richard. "Don't Use "Because" To Start a Noun Clause". November 30, 2006 2006. <http://richardbowles.tripod.com/gmat/sc/sc_type6.htm>.

The Chicago Manual of Style. 15th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.

Dictionary.Com Unabridged (V 1.0.1). Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary. Random House, Inc, 2006.

Elisabetta. "Beginning Sentences With "Because" ". Ed. Andrew David, 2006.

Goldstein, Norm, ed. The Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law. Cambridge: Perseus Publishing, 2000.

Iverson, Cheryl, et al., eds. American Medical Association Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1998.

Louisa. "Beginning Sentences With "Because"." Ed. Andrew David, 2006.

Lunsford, Andrewa A. The Everday Writer. Second ed. Boston: Bedford, 2001.

Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2001.

Rozakis, Laurie E. The Complete Idiot's Guide to Grammar and Style Penguin Group, 2003.

Siegel, Kevin A. "Writing: Commas, Commas, Commas." I Came, I Saw, I Learned... IconLogic, 2006. Vol. 2006.

in limbo over purgatory

Fire licks their shins as they struggle upward. Haunting images of their past sins heckle them as they climb. Finally, just as the pain reaches intolerability, a man in a shimmering white robe offers a helping hand and carries the relieved figures through the pearly gates of Heaven. That’s how I imagined it anyway, but David Brown’s article, No Heaven Without Purgatory, presents a Purgatory coinciding with both logic and basic Christian doctrine. The article intelligently blueprints the necessity of Purgatory in Christian theology, surprisingly extracting my view of Purgatory from the imagination and delivering it into the realm of possibility.

As he begins his article, Brown identifies two competing models of Purgatory. According to Brown, the popular notion of Purgatory today is as “a second chance for those of whom it might be argued…had no proper opportunities in this life” (447). However, rather than supporting this catch-all conception of Purgatory, Brown defends the “traditional” view of Purgatory. In this view there are two essential characteristics to Purgatory. First, Purgatory is a “place of moral preparation (not trial) for those whose lives and decisions had already destined them for Heaven” (447). Using a three-pronged set of arguments, Brown spends most of the article supporting this view. Then he finishes No Heaven Without Purgatory by describing the second attribute of Purgatory: the intense pain of self recognition that is in some manner a necessary atonement for our moral mistakes.

Brown begins with the “temporal argument” which offers a comparison between our moral character at death and our moral character in Heaven. Brown asserts that at death we are fallen, bearing the inescapable mark of human sinfulness. Conversely, in Heaven, by its very definition, we will be perfect. Since both premises seem solid, they pose an interesting dilemma; either we immediately jump from one moral state to another or there is period of transformation between the two states. Delving into the nature of our human state, Brown claims that as humans we exist through a process of continual change. Under such circumstances, we must experience a process like Purgatory following death, for an instantaneous shift from sin to perfection would defy our very humanness (447-450).

Next, using the “argument from identity,” Brown builds connections between our sense of self and the necessary existence of Purgatory. He suggests that our sense of self is founded primarily on our past. Thus, in the event of an instant transformation following death, Brown contends that while we would retain our past memories, we would find them fully incompatible with the perfection in which we then rest. In other words, our heavenly self would experience an inconceivable lack of connection with the sin of its previous self. Thus, according to Brown, an intermediary state like Purgatory would be necessary to sustain our sense of connection, without which we would fundamentally cease to be human (451-452).

The final characteristic that Brown ascribes as important to our humanness in the issue of Purgatory is our free will. Similar to our class discussions of evil, Brown explains that “morally and psychologically, respect for persons is thus held to take precedence over an objectively right decision” (453). Therefore, Brown entitles this argument the “argument from self-acceptance,” declaring that for us to enter heaven we must accept God’s divine grace. However, Brown argues that if we are suddenly whisked from death to heaven’s door, there is no opportunity to make such a decision (453-454).

Finally, Brown brings the article to a close by explaining the nature of the pain inherent in Purgatory. He draws a careful distinction between pain as a punishment and pain as a cleansing device. Christ already paid the punishment. In this system of Purgatory, pain functions internally as we come to acknowledge our sins and how we could have avoided hurting others. Our only penalty in Brown’s system of Purgatory is that of self-recognition

Overall, Brown’s vision of Purgatory is very compelling, yet it is not flawless. Throughout No Heaven Without Purgatory, he raises numerous objections which he later solves. Nonetheless, after reading the article, I stumbled upon two additional objections that Brown did not seem to address. I will begin by applying an objection to the “temporal argument.” According to this argument, we must undergo a process of change following death. However, the assumption that this process of change must be Purgatory seems to be false. The doctrine Purgatory springs from ideas concerning Heaven and Hell. These ideas originate in the Bible, but there is no mention of Purgatory. Instead the Bible speaks of a “final judgment.” During this event, God will judge mankind and Jesus Christ will defend us. Similar to an earthly court case, the “final judgment” will be both more than sufficient to clear our name and produce the necessary inner cleansing. This objection also stands its ground under the “argument from identity.” Postulating an event like the “final judgment” preserves our sense of identity with our earthly life. Through the event of our judgment, continuity between our earthly life and our life in heaven is maintained.

At first, this objection seems to offer a plausible counter-example to Purgatory. It seems to overcome the pitfalls of previous objections cited in the text. Both the objections raised in the text to the “temporal argument” insisted upon an abrupt shift between death and Heaven. However, the “final judgment” reaffirms the necessity of growth and change to our humanness. It is during this trial that we are confronted with our deeds and subsequently forgiven. Furthermore, because the “final judgment” is an alternative to Purgatory rather than an abrupt means of moving from death to Heaven, it also preserves our connectedness as discussed in the “argument from identity.” Nonetheless, the “final judgment” objection is not invincible. Although it appears to offer the inner change necessary to convert one from sin to purity, the case for inner change is more explicit in the traditional view of Purgatory, which by its definition entails an inner purgation of sorts. The “final judgment” objection also falls into trouble because of its close similarity to Purgatory; both are temporal states in which one is forced to undergo self-recognition prior to reaching Heaven. Therefore the two events could be misconstrued as identical. However, by returning to Brown’s definition of “traditional” Purgatory, we discover that unlike the “final judgment” Purgatory is not a trial.

Another brief challenge to the “argument from identity” which is not mentioned in the text is an objection to the notion that we “can identify ourselves only through continuity with our past” (451). The following objection also contradicts Brown’s claim that without an intermediate “stage between earth and heaven, the resurrected individual could have no reasonable grounds for believing himself to be the same person” as his earthly self (451). On the contrary, it seems that as earthly humans one means of personal identification is via our personality. Therefore, if there was an abrupt discontinuity between our state of purity in Heaven and our memories of sin, we would still share a significant link between our new selves and past selves. I believe this is an important oversight on the part of Brown and a noteworthy objection. Brown must either dismiss such an objection as false or modify his position. To reject the fact that personality is a fundamental trait of human beings seems to contradict both psychological research and common sense. Thus, it seems that Brown would be forced to change his position to one stating that “the resurrected individual would have insufficient grounds for believing himself the same person as” his earthly self. Unfortunately for Brown, the term “insufficient” is more of an opinion than an absolute and therefore it is less evident that an intermediate state is necessary.

Ultimately, despite these objections, Brown’s theory of Purgatory still seems to stand strong. Though the “final judgment” may offer a reasonable alternative to the traditional view of Purgatory, it does not seem to cast the idea of Purgatory into the graveyard of false doctrines. In fact, it may be possible for the two views to exist in harmony. Likewise, although my second objection may weaken the “argument from identity” it leaves Brown’s remaining arguments unscathed. In conclusion, I found Brown’s support for the necessary existence of a “place of moral preparation” through intense pain and self-recognition to be more than sufficient to warrant shifting my view of Purgatory from fantasy to possibility.

the road.cormac mccarthy

i intend to write a paragraph blurb on this book for image update. at that time i'll replace this quote. until then, i encourage you to go read it.

the 17 point scale endorses a no vote on initiative 91 (i-91) rough draft

what is i-91? well, i-91 demands that the city receive fair value in any lease deals with for-profit sports organizations.

before i explain why this initiative is electoral garbage, let me offer two less relevant bits of insight. first, please recognize that i'm a political squirrel. in other words, the political corner of my brain is small and rather undeveloped. moreover, i spend most of my time running around looking for peanuts, so i don't nurture what little understanding that i may have--don't expect a flawless, bullet-proof argument. second, despite my political naivete, i feel that most of the propaganda against i-91 takes the wrong approach. arguments against i-91 tend to stress the fact that a yes vote is a big blow to local area sports. although this is true, i think it's a shame that i-91 rebuttals don't do more to appeal to non-sports fans. yes, a no vote is essentially an angry kick in colletive seattle sonic groin, but if you're a sports fan, i presume that you're already voting no on this initiative. thus, it makes more sense to begin by addressing the issue asportically.

who's supporting this initiative? citizens for more important things. i have to hand it to them: the bankrollers for this initiative have given themselves a clever title (but their website is messy and irritating; i felt like they were trying to sell me something. blechh!). cfmit was founded by nick licata (my least favorite city councilmember. earlier this year, president licata was quoted as saying that the sonics had "close to zero" cultural value in the city of seattle) and is currently led by chris van dyk, who, incidentally, isn't even a seattle resident. cfmit has noble aims. they hope that by slaying professional sports, money will be diverted to education and social services.

i-91 is EVIL!!!

hi, i'm i-91, well, not really, but if i were, you shouldn't vote for me. i'm evil!!!

b12.the reverend.james perry walker

i will have a paragraph blurb posted about this on image's website. soon, and very soon.

done. follow this link.

the crying of lot 49 / thomas pynchon

i hope to say more about this book on my normal blog, but for now here's my quick first impression:

i wish that there was a market for re-edited, even partially rewritten, books. i know this is awfully hubristic sounding, but i feel like i could have significantly improved this book. i really liked it's crazy, interwoven themes. i really liked how tp has moments where his odd images suddenly coalesce in bright lights of clarity and are so well put. but i think that the work is dated. i doubt thatt ehre are many readers today that would pick up the crying and relate with o, the other characters, or even much of the plot. for this book to be meaningful, i think that we must have some connection with the narrator. unfortunately her bewildering sexathon in the beginning of the book spoils that for me. and i don't think thtat i'm just speaking as a moral conservative. there really is very little that connects o and i. consequently, there is nothing sane to keep me anchored to the book itself...

i wonder what happens after the book ends.

if you just linked here from my rated items, you're probably accustomed to finding actual non-andrew sites at the end of the link. well, here you go::

http://www.themodernword.com/pynchon/pynchon_lot49.html

annotations for heart of darkness

without my edition of the book (it's green; has a balding, bearded guy and some jungle on the cover; and starts with the secret sharer) these comments may not make much sense. oh, well.

65

“sea and the sky were welded together without a joint…”

name of where they are: Gravesend

Captain is like a god

66

“Marlowe sat cross-legged right aft, leaning against the mizzenmast. He had sunken cheeks, a yellow complexion, a straight back, an ascetic aspect, and, with his arms dropped, the palms outwards, resembled an idol”

Bhudda plus three crosses…JC

“serenity became less brilliant but more profound”

“Reach Rested unRuffled…”

glorification of the past (ed: is it really glorification? Probably quite the opposite in retrospect)

67

“the dreams of men, the seed of commonwealths, the germs o empires.”

All light, except the town…

“and this also,” said Marlow suddenly, “has been one of the dark places of the earth.”

This?

Marlowe not like this (ed: the narrator claims that Marlowe not the typical seamen but is instead a wanderer…)

Sea=sameness=simplicity

68

first storyteller vs. marlowe

“a casual stroll or a casual spree on shore suffices to unfold for him the secret of a whole continent, and generally he finds the secret not worth knowing”

how marlowe believes you find TRUTH (ed: Marlowe believes that something’s meaning isn’t inherent but found from outside) how to interpret it, it’s a murky process

TIME

Eng was like the Congo

69

Q: is Marlowe talking about English history or his own experience?

“darkness”

“and in some inland post feel the SAVAGERY, the utter SAVAGERY, had closed around him—all that MYSTERIOUS life of the wilderness that stirs in the forest, in the jungles, in the hearts of WILD men”

“fascination of the abomination…the powerless disgust, the surrender, the hate.”

Another Buddha pose

“men going at it blind—as is very proper for those who tackle a darkness.”

Marlowe: conquering (the darkness?) is also a black deed.

70

“one of Marlowe’s inconclusive experences.”

LIGHT

“it seemed somehow to throw a kind of LIGHT on everything about me…no, not very clear. And yet it seemed to throw a kind of LIGHT”

71

hee hee: “well, we won’t talk about that.”

“…but could not shake the idea. The snake had charmed me.” Mystery/charm vs. darkness

“I had an aunt, a dear enthusiastic soul.” Nate asks, “a cheerleader?”

72

senseless death and terror

73

“…a dead silence, grass sprouting between the stones…” compare to dead captain.

Danger=fascinating “I was going into the yellow. DEAD in the centre. And the river was there—fascinating—deadly—like a snake.”

74

“a white-haired secretary…beckoned me into the SANCTUARY.”

“and there was something OMINOUS in the atmosphere…I don’t know—something NOT QUITE RIGHT;”

“The swift and indifferent placidity of that look troubled me.”

(ed: compare these europeans at the beginning to something later in the text…)

-big section marked

75

“..though the house was as still as a house in A CITY OF DEAD…”

foreboding

Dr.’s theory of insanity

76

Stay CALM

“Something like an EMISSARY OF LIGHT, something like a lower sort of APOSTLE.”

Sexist?

77

“Watching a coast as it slips by the ship is like thing about an enigma. There it is before you—smiling, frowning, inviting, grand, mean, insipid, or savage, and always mute with an air of whispering, ‘Come and find out.’”

78

ABSURD! (ed: referring to the shelling of blank countryside)

79

sounds fun! (ed: referring to “the general sense of vague and oppresive wonder grew upon me. It was like a weary PILGRIMAGE amongst hints for nightmares)

something gets in yer’ head (ed: referring to a suicide)

80

“The thing looked as DEAD as the carcass of some animal. I came upon more pieces of DECAYING machinery…”

“They passed me within six inches, without a glance, with that complete, DEATHLIKE indifference of unhappy savages.” I can’t believe I’m reading this for fun—must need my daily dose of death and decay.

81

“After all, I also was a part of the great cause of these high and just proceedings.” Presence=participation.

“…sort of life I had blundered into. I’ve seen the devil of violence, and the devil of greed, and the devil of hot desire; but, by all the stars! These were strong, lusty, red-eyed devils, that swayed and drove men—men, I tell you.” (ed: racist or actually condemning westerners…or both?)

okay, this is a sane and moral man’s reaction (ed: uh-oh, that was from my initial reading…perhaps I missed the racist tones on the first reading…uh-oh)

hee hee: “I avoided a vast artificial hole somebody had been digging on the slope, the purpose of which I found it impossible to divine. It wasn’t a quarry or a sandpit, anyhow. It was just a hole. It might have been conneted with the philanthropic desire of giving the criminals something to do. I don’t know.” (ed: he’s sarcastic, right? So racist?)

“Inferno” = opposite

82

DEATH = disease, freedom…

“…a kind of blind, white flicker in the depths of the orbs, which DIED OUT SLOWLY.” Parallel to true death (ed: should I be interested in the WHITE flicker…?)

“…he kept up his appearance. That’s backbone.”

84

“Mr. Kurtz…he is a very remarkable person.”

86

“I felt I was becoming scientifically interesting.”

87

“Everybody had behaved splendidly! Splendidly!”

!

something faintly mysterious (re: manager)

88

“He was great by this little thing that it was impossible to tell what could control such a man.”

Hmmmmmmm….(re: “he sealed the utterance with that smile of his, as thought it had been a door opening into a darkness he had in his keeping.”)

89

“I flung out of his hut…”

“They wandered here and there with their absurd long staves in their hands, like a lot of FAITHLESS PILGRIMS BEWITCHED inside a rotten fence.”

“…waiting patiently for the passing away of this fantastic invasion.” Could be either…

what are staves?

90

it is both powerful, profound, and ALIVE…as opposed to the dead man.

91

he he: “anyway, it could not be found there and as it was not liely to be sent from Europe, it did not appear clear to me what he was WAITING for.”

Mixed up: “but very soon I became awfully curious to see what he would find out from me.”

92

a Kurtz wanna’ be

93

thus 2 candles go dark “he blew the candle out suddenly”

“…this papier-mache Mephistopheles, and it seemed to me that if I tried I could poke my forefinger through him, and would find nothing inside but a little loose dirt, maybe”

95

“It seems to me I am trying to tell you a dream—making a vain attempt, because no relation of a dream can convey the dream-sensation, that commingling of absurdity, surprise, and bewilderment in a tremor of struggling revolt, that notion of being captured by the incredible which is of the very essence of dreams….”

Wow! The narrative breaks!

Narrator talks: “I listened, I listened on the watch for the sentence, for the word, that would give me the clue to the FAINT UNEASINESS inspired by this narrative that seemed to SHAPE ITSELF WITHOUT HUMAN LIPS in the heavy night-air of the river.”

96

rivets. STEVE!

97

the meaning in work

98

ooh, someone’s having fun!: “I tried a jig. We capered on the iron deck.”

END OF PART I

PART II

100

even language grows absurd: “ ‘Make rain and fine weather—one man—the council—by the nose’—bits of absurd sentences that got the better of my drowsiness…”

plotting, talk of kurtz

101

“Anything—anything can be done in this country…The danger is in Europe…” but

“Each station should be like a beacon on the road towards better things, a centre for trade of course, but also for humanizing, improving, instructing.” –someone else talking. The role to be ‘good’

102

at news of donkey deaths: “They, no doubt, like the rest of US, found what they deserved.”

“Going up that river was like travelling back to the earliest beginnings of the world, when vegetation rioted on the earth and the big trees were kings. An empty stream, a great silence, an impenetrable forest....

103

inner reality vs. exterior reality

“I felt often its mysterious stillness watching me at MY MONKEY TRICKS, just as it watches you fellows…”

104

good cannibals eat hippo meat

 “Phoo! I can sniff it now…”

“Sometimes we came upon a station close by the bank…and the white men rushing out…with great gestures of joy and surprise and welcome, seemed very strange—had the appearance of being HELD THERE CAPTIVE BY A SPELL. The word ivory would ring in the air for a while—and on we went again into the silence…”

105

“We penetrated deeper and deeper into the heart of darkness.”

“We were cut off from the comprehension of our surroundings…”

“…this suspicion of their not being inhuman. It would come slowly to one. They howled and leaped, and spun, and made horrid faces; but what thrilled you was just the thought of their HUMANITY—like yours—the THOUGHT OF YOUR REMOTE KINSHIP WITH THIS WILD AND PASSIONATE UPROAR. UGLY.”

Racist?! Yes, but grappling with it?

106

be TRUE. At least the natives are TRUE.

“The mind of man is capable of anything…”

107

uh-oh

108

“the simple old sailor, with his talk of chains and purchases made me forget the junge and the pilgrims in a delicious sensation of having come upon something unmistakably REAL.”

Cipher? (even the boat is dieing.)

109

“What did it matter what any one knew or ignored? What did it matter who was manager? One gets sometimes such a flash of insight. The essentials of this ffair lay deep under the surface, beyond my reach, and beyond my power of meddling.”

110

scary

“The rest of the world was nowhere, as far as our eyes and ears were concerned. Just nowhere.”

111

how unfair to the cannibals!

Steve

112

“One can’t live with one’s finger everlastingly on one’s pulse.”

113

all this in a seemingly frightening ordeal (re: the attack)

RESTRAINT

114

the boat brings grief

115

crazy creative descriptions—[?]

116

! the quiet attacks !

117

“ ‘Keep quiet!’ I said in a fury.”

119

“…his ability to talk, his WORDS—the gift of expression, the bewildering, the illuminating, the most exalted and the most contemptible, the pulsating stream of LIGHT, or the deceitful flow from the HEART OF AN IMPENETRABLE DARKNESS.” (ed: yet we only hear kurtz speak less than twenty words or so in total)

120

“I couldn’t have felt more of lonely desolation”

shoe comment

its like a disembodied voice of the wilderness

121

first reference to the girl.

“The thing was to know what he belonged to, how many powers of DARKNESS CLAIMED HIM FOR THEIR OWN.”

A dark, intoxicating affinity with it all

122

you’re either stupid, heavenly, or prey to the darkness….hmmmm don’t even know you’re tangling with darkness. How do you “breathe dead hippo, so to speak, and not be contaminated?”

123

‘whites like gods to savages’ K becomes suject of rites, who’s transforming who? Irony.

“ ‘Exterminate all the brutes!’ ” yikes

124

“Whatever he was, HE WAS NOT COMMON.”

“He had NO RESTRAINT, NO RESTRAINT—just like Kurtz—a tree swayed by the wind.

125

“I had made up my mind that if my late helmsman was to be eaten, the fishes alone should have him.” (ed: Marlowe not so racist?)

126

“It’s all right,’ yelled back the other, as CHEERFUL as you please. ‘…I am glad.’ ”

127

“He seemed to be trying to make up for lots of SILENCE…(re: Kurtz) you don’t talk with that man—you listen to him.”

128

Hey, maybe this is a novel about being alone; maybe its travel essay!

Something becomes clear…maybe its NOT all absurd: “ ‘this man has enlarged my mind.’ ”

END OF PART II

PART III

129

“The glamour of youth enveloped his parti-coloured rags, his destitution, his loneliness, the essential DESOLATION of his futile wanderings. For months…his life hadn’t been worth a day’s purchase; and there he was GALLANTLY<>

See 69. This (desolation) which marlowe is fascinated by.

“…as though he had absconded from a troupe of mimes…” funny image

“If the absolutely pure, uncalculating, unpractical spirit of adventure had ever ruled a human being, it ruled this bepatched youth.” Pure adventure. (ed: and problems!). At first you think, ‘I like this guy.’ (ed: But) Kurtz = dangerous: “I must say that to me it (ed: his devotion to Kurtz) appeared about the most dangerous thing in every way he had come upon so far.”

(ed: notice its not nature, its not the natives, its Kurtz that marlowe paints as dangerous.)

130

rapturous conversation

“…never before, did this land, this river, this jungle, the very arch of this blazing sky, appear to me so HOPELESS and so DARK, so IMPENETRABLE to human thought…”

they penetrate physically but not mentally—(ed: remind me,) who’re the brutes?

“ ‘Ah, it was worth waiting for!—sometimes.’ ” dude, tell me the ‘nottimes.’

“ ‘To speak plainly, he RAIDED the country,’ I said.” (ed: notice how close raid is to aid…so close yet sooo different.)

131

“they had never seen anything like it—and VERY TERRIBLE. He could be VERY TERRIBLE.”

Kurtz addicted; he can’t leave.

“desolate”

132

Yikes! (re: heads on posts)

133

“the manager said afterwards that mr. Kurtz’s methods had RUINED THE DISTRICT.” Thinking in terms of money or life or labor…?

“…had taken on him a terrible vengeance for the fantastic INVASION.”

“It echoed loudly within him because he was HOLLOW at the core…” (ed: an actual ellipse!)

tells of Kurtz being fascinated by his own darkness.

134

?he’s pulled by two forces: logic and conscience as he once knew it…and the blackness that has become kurtz.

CRAWLING into excuses.

“his voice lost itself in the CALM of the EVENING.” Vs. the westerner(s)

135

“I resented bitterly the ABSURD danger of our situation, as if to be at the mercy of that atrocious phantom had been a dishonoring necessity."

(absurd?) You said it. He does a good job putting words together that don’t normally belong together (ie, dishonoring necessity)

“…I saw the thin arm extended commandlingly, the lower jaw moving, the eyes of that appartition shining darkly far in its bony head that nodded with grotesque jerks.”

Random thought: I just saw a picture of the statue of N. Korea’s dead king. This reminds me of it.

“It was as though an animated image of death carved out of old ivory had been shaking its hand with menaces at a motionless crowd…” You become what you crave.

Conrad connects metaphors: the forest breathes, Conrad breathes…they’re connected.

136

kurtz “I am glad.”

Then leave, return, woman.

137

“passionate soul” woman has power.

138

Kurtz rambles. Who’s he talking to. GREED.

“ ‘No method at all,’ ”

Ahhhh…(marlowe saying “nevertheless I think mr. Kurtz is a remarkable man….Ah! but it was something to have at least a choice of NIGHTMARES.” Tell me, please, exactly what nightmare you chose.

139

“And for a moment it seemed to me as if I also were buried in a vast grave full of unspeakable secrets.” So tell the story and be resurrected? Oh. The secret sharer (wink)

“Mr. Kurtz’s REPUTATION.”

WOWZERS! : “Mr k’s reputation is safe with me.’ I did not know how truly I spoke.” (ed: and we don’t know how truly you spoke until the very END. Hmmmm…)

140

on the way to becoming another danny. Marlowe has more shoes.

he’s affected by kurtz but NOT the wilderness?

That dude (the clownish character) is cooler than kurtz (but just as misdirected)

I’m about to go see the 2 Towers at the cinerama. Is it fair to compare morodor with marlowe’s view of the congo?

141

he uses adjectives a lot…I wonder what dr. reinsma would think…

“the moral shock I received” ESCAPE?

Imminent onslaught = comfort? : “…the possibility of a sudden onslaught and massacre, or something of the kind…was positively welcome and composing. It pacified me…”

“it was WRITTEN I should be loyal to the NIGHTMARE OF MY CHOICE….the peculiar BLACKNESS of that experience.

“ ‘he can’t walk—he is crawling on all-fours—I’ve got him.’ ” Kurtz becomes an animal. Now who’s crawling?

142

“in that profound tone”

143

LOST

“he could not have been more IRRETRIEVABLY lost than he was….the ofundations of our intimacy were being laid—to endure—to endure—even to the end—and beyond.” Lasting

RACISM

“I tried to break the spell”

“He had kicked himself loose of the earth.”

He escaped—is this bad?

Kurtz’s dislodged self from reality YET marlowe describes reality as absurd too.

144

why such intensity to do anything?

A. being alone forces you to look soulward B. what’d he find? Nothing.

“But his soul was mad.”

Tension, tension, deadpan conclusion.

The boat: “splashing, thumping, fierce river-DEMON beating the water with its terrible tail and BREATHING black smoke…” who’s the demon?

“,,,strings of amazing words that resembled no sounds of human language…” except that’s what they were.

145

“…as if the words had been torn out of him by a supernatural power.” ?

“only the BARBAROUS an dsuperb woman…” racist

“and then that IMBECILE crowd…started their little fun, and I could see nothing more for smoke.” Evil!

A break in the text…why?

“the brown current ran swiftly out of the heart of darkness…” Kurtz=river?

146

I don’t think I quite understand the depths of what’s happening.

“…it had penetrated fourght for the possession of that soul satiated with primitive emotions, avid of lying fame, of sham distinction, of all the appearances of success and power.” Love and hate.

To marlowe, the role of the west: “this grimy fragment of another world, the forerunner of change, of conquest, of trade, of massacres, of blessings.”

Kurtz is battling with the wild: “ ‘oh, but I will wring your heart yet!’ he cried at the invisible wilderness.”

147

kurtz: “live rightly, die, die…” (author’s ellipse). Did he/does he think he did this?

“his was an impenetrable darkness.” M spends time with him but doesn’t know what he sees. You can penetrate the congo, but not kurtz.

“I saw on that IVORY face…sombre pride, of ruthless power, of crave terror—of an intense and hopeless despair.” Is this experienceing life’s emotions to the fullest and greatest extreme? You scrape all the pretense of humanity away and only horror remains?

“The horror! The horror!”

an epiphany BUT epiphanies are associated with light, NOT darkness.

148

“I blew the candle out…” DEATH. End of epiphany. And then k’s dead.

“the most you can hope from it is some knowledge of yourself—that comes too late—a crop of unextinguishable regrets.” Point of life=to gain knowledge of yourself. To realize your regrets.but marlowe says he got near death and had no epipanies. Thus k’s greatness (to m)

149

see the big pic.

“piercing enough to penetrate all the hearts that beat in the darkness…”

“I remember mistily”

now, snap, he’s back in europe. “…to dream their insignificant and silly dreams. They trespassed upon my thougts. The were intruders whose knowledge of life was to me an irritating pretene, because I felt so sure they could not possibly know the things I knew.” Because he’s set a part now.

150

“…from laughing in their faces so full of stupid importantce.” Again, the europeans.

“it was my imagination that wanted osothing.

151

“he was a universal genuis…”

“…he had the faith. He could get himself to believe anything—anything.”

“…and took himself off with this PLUNDER.” Europe even raids the coffers of their own dead.

152

“…no manipulation of light and pose could have conveyed the delicate shade of TRUTHFULNESS upon those features.”

HAUNTING

153

“he wanted no more than justice—no more than justice.”

“…she seemed as htough she would remember and mourn FOREVER.”

“…fair hair…an ashy halo from which the dark eyes looked out at me.”

154

“her tone of despairing regret, the summing up whisper of his eternal condemnation.”

“Intimacy grows quickly out there…I knew him as well as it is possible for one man to know another.”

“He was a remarkable man…”

155

“she talked as thirty men drink.”

Her “he drew men towards him by what was best in them.” I don’t know about that.

“…the whisper of a voice speaking from beyond the threshold of an eternal darkness.”

Faith is illusion is dark.

156

her “men looked up to him—his GOODNESS shone in every act…” !!!

maybe I’ll get this the third time around

157

she would have been just like the natives

“ ‘ the last word he pronounced was—your name.’ ” !!!!

see 66

“the heavens do not fall for such a trifle. Would they have fallen, I wonder, if I had rendered k that justice which was his due…but I couldn’t I could not tell her. It would have been too dark—too dark altogether.” The narrator forsakes darkness; the truth can be a weapon of the darkness (ed: really? Hmmm…)

158

“…and the tranquil waterway leading to the uttermost ends of the earth…seemed to lead into the heart of an immense darkness.”

THE END

Initial ideas:

Travel novel?

Kurtz

Rag dude.