The man, who seemed to have the heaven as his final destination, burns like being condemned to the hell, metaphorically. By reading the explanation of Hughes about Orpheus, one can understand that neither Conrad’s Kurtz nor his Marlow became Orpheus. Kurtz because he was overwhelmed by his journey back and down, Marlow because he drew back from completing the journey ( Hughes 112). Dr. Lyle Smith, the instructor of this course, explains that Hughes is wrong about Marlow – he comes back an integrated person with a negative vision of humanity, a vision approximate to irony. Kurtz is the reembodiment of Lycurgus and Pentheus, Marlow reincarnates Perseus, the acceptor. The story he tells us is, in a sense, the equivalent of the temple Perseus dedicated to the power of Dyonisos (Hughes 60). Kurtz had something to say, and said it by a different way, like demonstrating inferiority as a hero, as Frye identifies (Folk and Smith 865). His journey is spatial and temporal as well as psychic (to the roots of his own unconscious) the consort of Kurtz becomes the goal of Marlow’s inner search. He lies to Kurtz‘s intended about him.
It seems that Gawain or Marlow, Lord Bercilak and Kurtz, Lady Bercilak and the intended of Kurtz, come to a certain approach of identities. After all, it’s possible to understand that there’s no evidence of romance except that Lady Bercilak tries to seduce Sir Gawain. The heroes, Marlow and Gawain can return, after challenging the dangerous adventure they’ve been introduced.
Another example of hoe difficult is to accommodate a pattern is “Araby”. Its narrative, characters, and imagery are radically displaced to accommodate the