本文伊始重新考量阿切貝將康拉德視為「徹頭徹尾的種族主義者」的著名批評。文章之初檢視阿切貝此一演講的脈絡，並透過閱讀阿切貝引用的兩位批評家──古拉與李維斯──來分析「康拉德」在當時所指為何。本文特別藉由仔細檢視古拉為新美國文庫出版的《黑暗之心》流行版本所撰寫的緒言，探究在阿切貝的批評介入前，這部作品在美國如何為人所閱讀，並將之與加耐特早先發表的評論相較。這樣的比較顯示古拉的心理學讀法袪除了這部小說中的非洲特色，並抹去了讀者原先閱讀這部作品時所涵概的主題的獨特性及政治性。本文接著仔細檢視阿切貝對《黑暗之心》的指控，並提供另類的閱讀，特別注重康拉德的敘事策略，他與帝國主義論述的交鋒，以及作品中不同語言的階序。文章繼而考量康拉德另一篇非洲故事〈進步的哨所〉，以支持《黑暗之心》的主角馬洛有別於作家康拉德的讀法，原因在於〈進步的哨所〉呈現了一個非馬洛式的「非洲意象」，讓我們更清楚看出馬洛觀看非洲的視角。本文進一步參照康拉德早期的馬來小說，將對他的非洲故事之讀法置於這個脈絡裡，文末並思考《諾斯楚摩》這部長篇小說與全球化的關係。

This essay begins with a reconsideration of Chinua Achebe’s famous criticism of Conrad as a “thoroughgoing racist.” It starts by examining the context of Achebe’s lecture and analysing what “Conrad” meant at that time as a critical construction through a reading of the two critics Achebe cites—Albert J. Guerard and F. R. Leavis. It explores, in particular, how “Heart of Darkness” was read in the United States before Achebe’s intervention by a close examination of Guerard’s Introduction to the popular edition of “Heart of Darkness” published by The New American Library, and it compares this with the reading provided by Edward Garnett in his early review. The comparison shows how Guerard’s psychological approach to the novella de- Africanises the novel and wipes out the topical specificity and the politics which were part of the novel’s original reception. It then examines in detail Achebe’s charges against “Heart of Darkness” and offers an alternative reading of the novella, paying particular attention to Conrad’s narrative strategies, his engagement with imperialist discourse, and the hierarchy of languages in the work. It then considers Conrad’s other African story “An Outpost of Progress” to support the reading of Marlow as distanced from Conrad: since “An Outpost of Progress” presents a non-Marlovian “image of Africa,” it allows us to see Marlow’s perspective on Africa more clearly. The essay then contextualises the reading of Conrad’s African fiction by reference to his earlier Malay fiction, and finally considers Nostromo in relation to globalisation.