It is evident that the idea of honour was very important for Conrad as a person and stands at the heart of ethical problems that he raised in his books. Some of his contemporaries, such as Wells, noted this fact with an ironical shrug; others, such as Cunninghame Graham, with admiration. But even though the fact itself has been registered by many critics, the function and implications of the idea as present in Conrad's work remain by and large unanalysed. When Conrad deals with honour in its simple form, as in ‘The Duel’, Chance, or The Rescue, there is little chance for misinterpretation. But whenever the problems raised become more intricate and a deeper comprehension of the whole ethos of which honour forms the centre is required, confusion arises, for instance in interpretations of the final part of Lord Jim, or of the predicament of Nostromo.

Many critics simply fail to identify the moral and literary tradition to which Conrad belongs, and persist in interpreting him in the terms of, and as within, the conventions of middle-class nineteenth-century prose. And if one does not know the history and logic of the concept of honour, one certainly cannot appreciate what was new in Conrad's handling of it. Some of his greatest admirers, like Faulkner or Camus, seem to have seen it quite well, but we are unable to comprehend their links with Conrad as long as we do not place the connection in a historical perspective.