Under Conrad’s Eyes: The Novel as Criticism by Michael John DiSanto (review)

Conrad was an avid reader, and over the last few years much has been written on the author’s borrowing and reworking of ideas and narrative techniques from key preceding literary precursors, not least Homer, Shakespeare, French nineteenth-century literary figures (Maupassant, Anatole France, and Flaubert), and Russian writers (Dostoevsky and Turgenev in particular). In this well-researched and finely argued book, Michael John DiSanto builds upon and extends this critical practice of setting Conrad’s writing within the Western aesthetic and intellectual literary tradition he adeptly tapped and adapted for his artistic and ideological purposes. He reads Conrad in the light of Dickens, George Eliot, and Carlyle and closely explores his complex, ambivalent connections with these nineteenth-century writers. DiSanto’s choice of interpreting Conrad’s writing with reference to these key literary figures is a judicious critical approach that expands our understanding of Conrad’s aesthetics and thought. As it provides us with convincing evidence of Conrad’s immersion in and revaluation of the art and ideas of his nineteenth-century predecessors, this substantial, dense book also clearly fills a gap in Conrad scholarship. More specifically, the book’s thorough engagement with issues of knowledge, sympathy and pity, self-preservation and self-destruction, the work ethic, heroism, and hero worship highlights the extent to which Conrad drew most of his ideas from the Victorian literary and intellectual period – a practice which downplays the persistent categorization of Conrad’s aesthetic sensibility as modernist.

Taken as a whole, Under Conrad’s Eyes is a deft, meticulous, intellectual undertaking, which should highly benefit students and stir debate among Conrad scholars. Individually, however, the chapters are uneven in both insight and accessibility, some being noticeably more original and reader-friendly than others. For instance, the last chapter, which relates Conrad’s critical engagement with Nietzsche’s thought, may, in this respect, prove difficult for many readers. In chapter 2, on the other hand, which deals with the connections between The Secret Agent and Bleak House, much of the discussion is trodden ground. While this chapter’s overall argument may be useful for advanced Conrad students, it is likely to leave the seasoned scholar’s thirst unquenched. Some aspects of the examination of Conrad and Dostoevsky in chapter 4 may as well prove too common for several Conrad researchers. Chapter 3, addressing Conrad and Eliot, is compelling and abounds with fresh insights into the prominent issues of isolation and sympathy central to both works. Chapter 5 – devoted to Lord Jim as a novel ‘rewrit[ing] Darwin’s and Nietzsche’s arguments about the instincts for self-preservation and self-destruction,’ sacrifice, suicide, and victimhood – is compelling and convincingly argued. Nevertheless, the most engaging part of this book is chapter 1 where DiSanto addresses the work ethic in Heart of Darkness, which he examines in the light of Carlyle. As he subjects to deep critical scrutiny and ambivalently reassesses Carlyle’s work ethics, he reveals its limits and dangers. This outstanding chapter should inspire numerous Conrad readers and stimulate debate on this fundamental, recurrent issue. The notable quality of the chapter on the work ethic in Heart of Darkness, the forceful insights provided in the chapter on Lord Jim, and the numerous persuasive interpretations scattered throughout this study make Under Conrad’s Eyes a valuable addition to Conrad studies.