Marlow’s Gaze in Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad: Between Light and Shadows

In Lord Jim Marlow functions not only as a narrator who spins the yarn about the morally problematic case of the young sailor, but also as an interpreter who struggles to register impressions as faithfully as possible thus translating the visual into the discursive. Marlow’s double function establis...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Sokołowska Katarzyna
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sciendo 2019-03-01
Series:Studia Anglica Posnaniensia
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.2478/stap-2019-0010
id doaj-647bdcefea894507a333ceb174a113b6
record_format Article
spelling doaj-647bdcefea894507a333ceb174a113b62021-09-05T14:02:04ZengSciendoStudia Anglica Posnaniensia0081-62722082-51022019-03-0154119921810.2478/stap-2019-0010stap-2019-0010Marlow’s Gaze in Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad: Between Light and ShadowsSokołowska Katarzyna0Department of British and American Studies, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin (UMCS), pl. Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej 4A, 20–031Lublin, PolandIn Lord Jim Marlow functions not only as a narrator who spins the yarn about the morally problematic case of the young sailor, but also as an interpreter who struggles to register impressions as faithfully as possible thus translating the visual into the discursive. Marlow’s double function establishes the novel as a text about the search to understand and to acquire reliable knowledge about Jim and his dilemma. Levin’s distinction of the two styles of vision, the assertoric gaze and the aletheic gaze, offers a neat conceptualization for Marlow’s visual practices which affect his interpretation of Jim. Levin defines the assertoric gaze as a fixed stare which involves the hegemony of a single standpoint, whereas the aletheic gaze, decentred and subversive, cherishes ambiguity and tends to roam about to accommodate multiple points of view. Levin relates this distinction to the two concepts of truth that Heidegger examines in his critique of the metaphysics of presence: truth as proposition, correspondence, or correctness and truth as aletheia or unconcealment as well as the two types of discourse, the hermeneutical discourse of poetizing and the discourse of statements. If Plato and Descartes defined truth and knowledge in terms of a total visibility, Heidegger insists that the path to truth involves confronting shadows and recognizing that they are necessary for the disclosure of being. Within this philosophical framework it is possible to reassess both Marlow’s failure to form an unequivocal explanation of Jim and his growing epistemological scepticism as a departure from the correspondence theory of truth. The encounter with Jim brings Marlow to interrogate his own strategies of grasping the truth and subverts the focus on light as its visual equivalent.https://doi.org/10.2478/stap-2019-0010joseph conradheideggergazeocularcentrismaletheia
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sokołowska Katarzyna
spellingShingle Sokołowska Katarzyna
Marlow’s Gaze in Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad: Between Light and Shadows
Studia Anglica Posnaniensia
joseph conrad
heidegger
gaze
ocularcentrism
aletheia
author_facet Sokołowska Katarzyna
author_sort Sokołowska Katarzyna
title Marlow’s Gaze in Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad: Between Light and Shadows
title_short Marlow’s Gaze in Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad: Between Light and Shadows
title_full Marlow’s Gaze in Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad: Between Light and Shadows
title_fullStr Marlow’s Gaze in Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad: Between Light and Shadows
title_full_unstemmed Marlow’s Gaze in Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad: Between Light and Shadows
title_sort marlow’s gaze in lord jim by joseph conrad: between light and shadows
publisher Sciendo
series Studia Anglica Posnaniensia
issn 0081-6272
2082-5102
publishDate 2019-03-01
description In Lord Jim Marlow functions not only as a narrator who spins the yarn about the morally problematic case of the young sailor, but also as an interpreter who struggles to register impressions as faithfully as possible thus translating the visual into the discursive. Marlow’s double function establishes the novel as a text about the search to understand and to acquire reliable knowledge about Jim and his dilemma. Levin’s distinction of the two styles of vision, the assertoric gaze and the aletheic gaze, offers a neat conceptualization for Marlow’s visual practices which affect his interpretation of Jim. Levin defines the assertoric gaze as a fixed stare which involves the hegemony of a single standpoint, whereas the aletheic gaze, decentred and subversive, cherishes ambiguity and tends to roam about to accommodate multiple points of view. Levin relates this distinction to the two concepts of truth that Heidegger examines in his critique of the metaphysics of presence: truth as proposition, correspondence, or correctness and truth as aletheia or unconcealment as well as the two types of discourse, the hermeneutical discourse of poetizing and the discourse of statements. If Plato and Descartes defined truth and knowledge in terms of a total visibility, Heidegger insists that the path to truth involves confronting shadows and recognizing that they are necessary for the disclosure of being. Within this philosophical framework it is possible to reassess both Marlow’s failure to form an unequivocal explanation of Jim and his growing epistemological scepticism as a departure from the correspondence theory of truth. The encounter with Jim brings Marlow to interrogate his own strategies of grasping the truth and subverts the focus on light as its visual equivalent.
topic joseph conrad
heidegger
gaze
ocularcentrism
aletheia
url https://doi.org/10.2478/stap-2019-0010
work_keys_str_mv AT sokołowskakatarzyna marlowsgazeinlordjimbyjosephconradbetweenlightandshadows
_version_ 1717809124523114496