A Postcolonial Interpretation Of The Continuity And Subversion Of Foe On Robinson Crusoe

On Oct.2,2003, South African writer J.M. Coetzee was declared the winner of NobelPrize. J.M. Coetzee is one of the best white writers in contemporary South Africa. His writingstyle always changes and each of his books brings almost entirely different impressions toreaders. So he is often classified as a postmodernist writer.Coetzee’s novel Foe was written in1986, which is considered as a rewrite of RobinsonCrusoe. Robinson Crusoe is a realistic novel written by British writer Daniel Defoe in18thcentury. Robinson Crusoe has been viewed as a model for realistic novel by critics, throughglorifying the success through struggle of the white male Crusoe to promote colonialism, ithad handed down as the official version of the true story of a desert island. Coetzee’s Foe isPostcolonial reading of Robinson Crusoe. From the perspective of a female character, Susan,Foe revives the female voice of the oppressed, and gives her the freedom to argue andcompete with Crusoe and fight for speech powers for Friday.In this paper, I adapt the theory of self and other, from the continuation of the binarypattern and the subversion of right to interpretate Robinson Crusoe. In the traditional Westernmode of thought, the world is divided into a series of binary oppositions, for example, I/he,whites/blacks, man/woman, which often appear in the text of colonialism. Westerncolonists are often described as rational, higher subjectivity of self; the colonized isconsidered irrational, barbaric, and does not have the subjectivity of others. No matter inRobinson Crusoe or Foe, there is the opposition of the colonizer and the colonized. InRobinson Crusoe, Crusoe is a superior colonist, Friday, his father and the black slaves, eventhe women who does not have their names are colonized. In Foe, Susan instead of Crusoecolonizes Friday.The Colonial Discourse is another important concept in the study of post-colonial theory.In Foe, the introduction of Susan on the one hand, it is the continuation of the colonist; on theother hand, it subverts the subordinate position of women in a patriarchal society, and women actively fight for their own rights. In Robinson Crusoe, the colonist Crusoe firmly grasps theright and controls the right to speak, Friday is in aphasia state; their history can only bespoken by Crusoe. In Fu, Crusoe loses the fighting spirit of the bourgeoisie; Susan hasmastered the right to speak. Although she is a woman, she still is the representative of thecolonizer; gender change does not result in the loss of discourse rights. This reflects thecontinuation of the colonial ruling. At the same time, in a traditional patriarchal society, awoman is subordinate; they are all decided by the men. But in Foe, Susan has gained powerdiscourse, even the history of Crusoe is told by her, later, during the process of competing forwriting right with the writer Foe, the status of the female character is completely different, sheis no longer silent, she fights for her own writing which overturns the traditional subordinateposition of women, and overturns the insignificant position the women Robinson Crusoe.Through the postcolonial analysis of Foe, the image of the colonizers is still existed,Friday is still the colonized. The appearance of Susan subverts the traditional status of women,which contributes to the rewrite of Robinson Crusoe. The paper will focus on continuationand subversion to complete the postcolonial interpretation of Foe.