(no subject)
Well, I finally finished my paper . . .kinda. I need to think of a way to end it and "leave you thinking." Any suggestions?
Edit: Boy oh boy do I hate Microsoft Word.
The Use of Literature as a Social Commentary as Seen in Aphra Behn’s Oroonoko and Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness (Title)
Throughout history there have been many pieces of literature that convey a message about the time in which they were written. In many cases, this message is negative. There have been pieces that denounce oppressive governments, express distaste for an unjust war, and some speak out against religious authority. Along with these pieces there have been many that put a spot light on common social practices. These social practices, widespread though they may be, are not necessarily "right." When society is a witness to these types of practices, it can almost be expected that there will be those who feel strongly opposed to them. Sometimes these people will boldly decry these practices in public. However, many choose not to speak out against them on a soap box in the town square. Some denounce these practices by writing. Many times when they do this it is done, to some degree, discreetly. They will not come out and say that they disagree with what is going on. Instead, they will use characters and the stories of these characters to get their message across. Slavery and the general loss of human rights of African peoples (especially at the hand of Christians) are subjects that have been written about in this way for many centuries. Aphra Behn, a woman who lived during the 17th century, wrote a piece that indirectly denounced the enslavement of Africans. Move forward in history to the 20th century and another writer who shed light on the mistreatment of Africans will be seen. Joseph Conrad used Heart of Darkness to express his beliefs about the treatment of indigenous people in Africa. These two writers wrote these stories as social commentaries in order to show their disagreement with what was going on during their respective times.
Not much can be conclusively said about Aphra Behn’s childhood. However, it is known that she spent a brief amount of time (two months) in Surinam. It is very likely that the time she spent in Surinam influenced the writing of one of her last works (Bedford Anthology, 88). Oroonoko, which was published in 1688, recounts the story of an African prince by the name of Oroonoko. In her essay, "The White Mistress and the Black Slave: Aprha Behn, Racism and the Beginnings of Novelistic Discourse," Ruth Nestvold says, "She never criticizes slavery directly, but the perspective of the victimized hero promotes a critique of slavery nonetheless." This character is Oroonoko. Behn definitely does a spectacular job of using Oroonoko to make her argument by presenting him as an admirable larger than life character and showing his destruction at the hands of Europeans. The narrator of the story gives a rather detailed description of Oroonoko’s physical and personal characteristics. She makes him out to be almost more than human, "Besides, he was adorned with a native beauty so transcending all those of his gloomy race, that he struck an awe and reverence, even in those that knew not his quality; as he did in me, who beheld him with surprise and wonder . . ." (Behn, 98). This description might cause the reader to think that Behn is racist. Despite the possibility, she makes a very persuasive argument on behalf of Africans.
The narrator goes on to describe him:
. . .and ‘twas amazing to imagine where it was he learned so much humanity; or, to give his accomplishments a juster name, where ‘twas he got that real greatness of soul, those refined notions of true honour, that absolute generosity, and that softness that was capable of the highest passions of love and gallantry . . .(Behn, 98)
After giving the reader these descriptions which make Oroonoko seem attractive, she gives this final bit of information:
His nose was rising and Roman, instead of African and flat. His mouth, the finest shaped that could be seen; far from those great turned lips, which ware so natural to the rest of the Negroes. The whole proportion and air of his face so noble, and exactly formed that, bating his colour, there could be nothing in nature more beautiful, agreeable and handsome. (Behn, 99)
This final information about Oroonoko is where the reader can easily see what Behn is doing. She is creating a character that embodies all that is good. A man that is strong, courageous, loyal, loving, and finally who lacks the undesirable (to her readers) physical characteristics of a black man. He represents perfection. This character is the tool that she uses to make her argument. She goes about doing this by putting the fate of Oroonoko in the hands of white men.
Behn presents this man to the reader through the narrator. She builds up his character and makes him endearing to her readers. When the reader has come to the conclusion that this man, Oroonoko, is very deserving of respect and admiration, Behn puts him in a situation that is obviously wrong. Though he is black, the reader does not view him with prejudice (as would most likely be the case with most readers at the time reading about a stereotypical black character). In this way she shows the human side of slavery. It is no longer a simply an accepted practice by people who are ignorant to the facts of the slave trade. Despite the fact that many (probably most) of Behn’s readers are somewhat racist they see that the enslavement of people is more than just a business. It takes away the freedom of people who do not deserve this type of treatment.
Behn continues to use the tool she created in Oroonoko as she shows him being enslaved and brought to the "New World." While he is on the plantation in Surinam, he is more or less allowed to do whatever he wants, but he is still in captivity. For a specimen so great as him, this should not be the case. Whether or not he is forced to work on the plantation like the other enslaved Africans, he is still a slave. He does not have the freedom to live the way he wants to live or where he wants to live. However, this "nice" treatment given to him does not last. When Oroonoko (who is now called Caesar) decides to attempt an escape with a large group of other slaves, the reader sees how the other slaves are treated.
. . . counting up all their toils and sufferings, under such loads, burdens, and drudgeries, as were fitter for beasts than men; senseless brutes, than human souls. He told them it was not for days, months, or years, but for eternity; there was no end to be of their misfortunes. They suffered not like men who might find a glory, and fortitude in oppression, but like dogs that loved the whip and bell, and fawned the more they were beaten. That they had lost the divine quality of men, and were become insensible asses, fit only to bear. Nay worse, an ass, or dog, or horse having done his duty, could lie down in retreat, and rise to work again, and while he did his duty endured not stripes, but men, villainous, senseless men, such as they, toiled on all the tedious week till black Friday, and then, whether they worked or not, whether they were faulty or meriting, they promiscuously, the innocent with the guilty, suffered the infamous whip, the sordid stripes, from their fellow slaves till their blood trickled from the parts of their body, blood whose every drop ought to be revenged with a life of some sort of those tyrants that impose it. "And why," said he, "my dear friends and fellow sufferers, should we be slaves to an unknown people? Have they vanquished us nobly in fight? Have they won us in honourable battle? And are we, by the chance of war, become their slaves? This would not anger a noble heart, this would not animate a soldier’s soul. No, but we are bought and sold like apes, or monkeys, to be the sport of women, fools, and cowards and the support of rogues, runagades, that have abandoned their own countries, for raping, murders, thefts and villainies. (Behn, 130)
This address given by Oroonoko in itself is enough to express Behn’s argument against slavery. If she were not trying to defame the practice of slavery, then why would she write this? There is no other explanation. However, Behn continues to make her argument against slavery through the use of Oroonoko. She concludes her use of Oroonoko by presenting a dramatic death. He falls from his greatness to being treated as a common slave (by owners who deceive him) being whipped and finally being cut to pieces like an animal at the slaughter.
. . .and the executioner came, and first cut off his members, and threw them into the fire. After that, with an ill-favoured knife, they cut his ears, and his nose, and burned them; still he smoked on, as if nothing had touched him. Then they hacked off one of his arms, sand still her bore up, and held his pipe. But at the cutting off the other arm, his head sunk and his pipe dropped, and he gave up the ghost, without a groan, or a reproach. (Behn, 140)
This final scene concludes the story as well as Behn’s argument against slavery through her character Oroonoko.
Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, like Behn’s Oroonoko, was influenced by the author’s personal experiences. According to the Bedford Anthology of World Literature (book 6) Heart of Darkness is based on Conrad’s work in Africa as a steamship captain traveling up the Congo River. Like his main character, Marlow, Conrad was hired by a Belgian trading company and he had to retrieve the body of a trader who died at his post "deep in the interior of Africa" (31). It goes on to say that his "descriptions of the ivory trade and the European presence in Africa are solidly based on historical fact . . . He is clearly appalled by what he finds in Africa: the mistreatment of natives, the venality and hypocrisy of the Europeans, the colossal corruption at the inner station." (33).
Conrad develops his argument differently than Behn. He does not create a character for the reader to sympathize with. He shows the reaction of a character to the treatment of people in Africa. Like the narrator of Oroonoko, Marlow seems to exhibit somewhat of a racist attitude toward the native Africans. However, racism is rooted in ignorance. Upon seeing the way that Europeans exploit the indigenous peoples in this "dark continent" Marlow is moved with compassion. During one of his first encounters with a native African, he gives one a bit of food because the man looks to be starving.
At one point during the novella, Marlow speaks about "very old times" when the Romans had first come to England. He conjectures that when the Romans first came to England that it was a terrible wilderness. He imagines that the men who had come to the island probably did not know what they had gotten themselves into. He surmises that these men, these Romans "growing regrets, the longing to escape, the powerless disgust, the surrender, the hate" (Conrad, 39). Marlow goes on to say of these Romans:
They were no colonists; their administration was merely a squeeze, and nothing more, I suspect. They were conquerors, and for that you want brute force-nothing to boast of, when you have it, since your strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others. They grabbed what they could get for the sake of what was to be got. It was just robbery with violence, aggravated murder on a great scale, and men going at it blind-as is very proper for those who tackle a darkness. The conquest of the earth, which mostly means the taking it away from those who have a different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into it too much. What redeems it is the idea only. An idea at the back of it; not a sentimental pretence but an idea; and an unselfish belief in the idea-something you can set up, and bow down before, and offer a sacrifice to . . . (Conrad, 39)
This passage foreshadows what the reader will come to find as the story progresses. Conrad is drawing a parallel between the ancient Romans who had come to England to the Europeans who had gone to Africa. He shows that there is not really much of a difference in the two groups and their goals and the methods in which they meet these goals in the foreign lands. He downplays any glory that might be associated with the spoils that are won from going to these lands (England for the Romans and Africa for the Europeans). He is very blunt in pointing out their purpose. He is criticizing these Europeans (because this passage is really about the Europeans after all) because they had gone to this place to make it better. They claim that they had gone there to bring civilization and God to these people (the "unselfish belief" and "something you can set up, and bow down before, and offer a sacrifice to") but this is not what happened. The Europeans went to the continent and found "savages" and "enemies." They did nothing to help the Africans. They only helped themselves. This passage is the heart of Conrad’s argument against the occupation of Africa by the Europeans.
Many believed that the Europeans were different from the Romans whose goal was to conquer. They were under the impression that the people who lived in Africa needed to be civilized. They thought that the white man was doing a favor to these people. This could not be further from the truth. Europeans went into the continent of Africa for the same reasons that the Romans sailed to England. This reason was for personal gain. There was resources-including people-there for the taking. It is true that some had ideas of helping the Africans, but after so long in a place that was so different from what they knew, these ideas disappeared. This was the case with Kurtz, the man that Marlow was sent to retrieve. "Still, I was curious to see whether this man [Kurtz], who had come out equipped with moral ideas of some sort, would climb to the top after all and how he would set about his work when there" (Conrad, 59). As the reader continues it is apparent that Kurtz resorts to violence and intimidation to get what he wants. He embodies the perfect company man as far as the Europeans are concerned. His methods are not questioned.
Though Behn and Conrad go about achieving their goal to bring attention to the situation of Africans, they both do it effectively. Both of these pieces of literature have achieved a certain level of acclaim. In doing so they have been successful in getting the message across to their readers. At the times that these pieces were written, most were ignorant of the dealings of Europeans with Africans. During the 17th century when the slave trade was booming, Behn was able to shed light on the practice that was accepted by many with little knowledge of what was actually going on. She showed the human side of the people that most simply looked at as savages. She created a character and spread her anti-slavery message to her readers. Conrad took his personal experiences and showed his readers that there was nothing to be proud of when it came to the European occupation of Africa. He showed that the "savages" were not the Africans, but rather the Europeans who had gone to the continent simply to exploit its people.