Is Not Disagreeing Agreeing? Aphra Behn's Unbiased Treatment of Slavery in Oroonoko

In Warren Chernaik article “Captains and Slaves: Aphra Behn and the Rhetoric of Republicanism Criticism,” the author points out, through a Post Colonial aspect, that it is surprising how little discussion there is in regards to how the text presents slavery.

A Post Colonial criticism of literature, according to Perdue Owl Writing Lab, aims to look at a piece of literature that deals with people who have been or are colonized, and its colonizers.

“Post-colonial theory looks at issues of power, economics, politics, religion, and culture and how these elements work in relation to colonial hegemony.” (Perdue)

The author presents that Behn’s story has been argued to show support of colonization as a whole, which would by default support slavery. Slavery, I feel, is the most severe of the consequences of colonization.

I do agree with the article in that it appears that Behn may take slavery for granted. I base this mostly on the unbiased way in which Behn is able to talk about slavery. The reader learns through, what Behn presents as Oroonoko’s thoughts, that there is an "honorable" way to be enslaved and to obtain slaves. By way of an earning, such as winning or losing a battle, for example are deemed honorable.

Oroonoko is also willing to pay for his debt with slaves to gain his own freedom, so it can be assumed that he also sees this as an acceptable form of slavery. Using the slaves you have acquired as a form of payment and so become rightful property of someone else.

What is unacceptable, Oroonoko argues, is the dehumanizing way in which the colonizers buy and trade slaves and treat them as beasts and not souls. This is the way in which he became enslaved and ends up in Surinam under the new name "Caesar."

It seems that this dual view of under what circumstances slavery exists, acceptable or unacceptable, was common thought among Behn's contemporaries.

Chernaik points out that John Locke also had this dual view of conditions under which slavery occurs, calling the unacceptable situation as  “The unjust conqueror” who forces another human being into captivity.

While I am not attempting to criticize the way people conduct their countries and way of life, I cannot read about the events that occurred to the people enslaved without being moved to tears, yet Aphra Behn can present them so matter of factly. On the one hand, I wonder if it was that she was a very brave woman herself and had experienced many occurrences that had hardened her emotional senses.

According to a biography of Aphra Behn on the website Luminarium, her personal life is not known about, but it is known that she was a spy and had endured time in jail repeatedly. Whatever the case may be, it seems that Behn also accepts slavery as a normal occurrence, or as the article put, took it for granted.

At the beginning of her story, Behn almost presents herself as a journalist, disclaiming that she will report just the facts. She has not added or taken away from the events as they occurred. It is perhaps under the operation of these rigid boundaries that Behn chooses not to persuade the reader in any direction with an emotional response to the difficult subject that is slavery, and so it is ultimately ambiguous whether or not she condoned it or not.  

Blog Post 5

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

It Happens

Read All ABout It! Print Journalism of the 18th Century

The Age of Enlightenment Has Yet to Come