Defoe, Tournier, Coetzee and Deconstructive Re-visions of a Myth
3 From Defoe to Foe: Representation and Power in the Colonialist Context
3From Defoe to Foe: Representation and Power in the Colonialist Context
J. M. Coetzee is known for his uncompromising criticism of the ideology of colonialism as well as for the dazzling narrative strategies with which he carries out such critiques. As is the case with Tournier, Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe figures most prominently in Coetzee’s politically conscious career as a novelist. Perceiving the text to be a central allegory for colonialist ideology, Coetzee repeatedly returns to it, as is evident in his essays, in his Nobel acceptance speech and, most importantly, in his novel Foe. Foe, like Tournier’s Friday, is another significant re-vision of Robinson Crusoe in the twentieth century.
According to Derrida’s “Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences,” every repressive structure has a center, which is an organizing principle consisting of a binary opposition that arbitrarily privileges one and excludes the other. The validity of the center decides whether the structure can be taken as a truth or not. The ideological structure in the fictional world of Robinson Crusoe is presented as the binary opposition between Robinson Crusoe/the colonizer/the master and Friday/the colonized/the slave. The mystification of Robinson Crusoe indicates that such an ideological structure has been taken as a truth. Targeting this center or truth, Coetzee initiates a unique deconstructive freeplay through Foe. The first strategy he employs is to present such a freeplay in the form of a novel. By limiting the battleground to that of writing, he...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.