COLONIZING ‘THE OTHER’: ROBINSON CRUSOE AND FOE
Socially the term ‘the other’ is mostly supposed to be used by the imperialist countries. They are at ‘the centre’ and the countries out of this centre are regarded as ‘the other’. It is clear that the concept of ‘the other’ has been derived from the ethnocentric approach of the colonization, and it...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | DE EN FR TR |
| Publicado: |
Fırat University
2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/ac77a436591947daaec365aa894ad7f6 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Socially the term ‘the other’ is mostly supposed to be used by the imperialist countries. They are at ‘the centre’ and the countries out of this centre are regarded as ‘the other’. It is clear that the concept of ‘the other’ has been derived from the ethnocentric approach of the colonization, and it has been the central topic of post-colonial literature to reflect back to ‘the centre’. Defoe’s Crusoe, representing British Imperialism, has a dream of making the unknown settlements of the world a part of his kingdom. As for his slave Friday; he represents colonized people, the symbol of unquestioning obedience, whose uncivilized life is used as an excuse. However, J. M. Coetzee’s Foe (1987) discusses the other side of the medal, and tries to uncover the untold story of Crusoe and his slave Friday. Here, we come across with a post-colonial story of Friday, hidden under his muteness, where Crusoe becomes ‘the other’ and Friday’s story the central point. In this article it is aimed to compare the stories in Robinson Crusoe (2000) and Foe (1987), and considering the dark sides of both plots, the implied stories will be discussed from different perspectives. |
|---|