Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract:
The paper explores some of the rewrites of ‘Robinson Crusoe’, with particular emphasis
on J.M. Coetzee’s ‘Foe’, trying to identify the ways that the rewrite reconstructs the
character, the novel and its enduring legacy. The ‘otherness’ quality of the new text and
its ‘writing back’ effect contribute to a refreshing of perspective on this now classic
narrative. ‘Foe’ both challenges and redefines Defoe’s text while being altogether a new
narrative.
Key words: rewrite, opposition, story-telling
’We therefore have five parts in all: the loss of the daughter: the quest for the
daughter in Brazil; abandonment of the quest, and the adventure of the island; assumption
of the quest by the daughter; and reunion of the daughter with her mother. It is thus that
we make up a book: loss, then quest, then recovery; beginning, then middle, then
end.’(117)
But Susan is not an easy contender. When she first sees Foe she introduces
herself:’ I am a figure of fortune, Mr. Foe. I am the good fortune we are always
hoping for.’(48) And she is right in a historical way since her story has made him
eternal and stirs controversies and appreciation to this day.
She further explains her wish that the episode of the island be the central
if not unique part of the narrative by the fact that she has gone through a
pernicious loss of substance with the loss of the island. Tedious and hopeless as
her stay on the island was, she wishes that the narrative reassures her that the
whole range of events and feelings she experienced there are genuine. Writing this
book would recuperate her identity for her. ’Return to me the substance I have
lost, Mr. Foe’. (51) Nay, it will liberate her as she feels suspended until the story
is written.
A weird shift of persona is perceived at this moment. With Foe living in
hiding from the bailiffs and his house left uninhabited, like Crusoe’s island, Susan
and her childlike companion, Friday, move in. She gradually takes possession of
the house, just as Crusoe took of the island. She feels that a transfer of substance
between Foe and herself is under way and she will sit at Foe’s writing desk, with
his quill in her hand, acting like a ghostwriter. She continues to tell her story in
the letters she sends to Foe but eventually hands over to herself. She draws a plan
for the book describing her exploits and conforming to the truth of her experience.
She will fill in pages and toss them in the box where he keeps his manuscripts or
will simply throw them out of the window to whomever they may concern.
But she already feels the pressure of the ‘strange circumstances’ Foe is
talking about, the pressure of adding thrilling elements that should spice up the
book (the quest of her lost daughter, guns and cannibals). She complains ‘There
was too little desire in Crusoe and Friday: too little desire to escape, too little
desire for a new life.’(88) She resents the lack of the acts of heart and of courage
in the linear discourse of her narrative.
When she later finds Foe’s hiding place and resumes her pressure on him
to write the book for her she confesses she conceives of herself as his Muse, a
goddess who visits writers over the night and ‘begets’ stories upon them. Their
subsequent intercourse is the telling proof that books, like children, need a true
kernel of desire to be conceived and born into the world.
The plot is further complicated by the appearance of a stalking girl who
claims to bear the same name as Susan Barton and be her lost child. But Susan is
no more convinced than the readers about the substantiality of the girl: is she sent
by Foe, or is she one of his characters, or is she the outer projection of Susan’s
wishes? Susan takes her out of town and there she tries to convince the girl about
her incorporeality. She tells her she is a figment of Foe’s imagination or literary
skill, a father-born daughter. The girl’s desire to impose motherhood on Susan is
the reflection of her frustration, a literary induced feeling. ‘The pain you feel is
the pain of lack, not the pain of loss.’(91)
But the girl will reappear at the final reunion in Foe’s small retreat, telling
her story and bringing a nanny that does not belong to Susan Barton’s
acknowledged story. They may be part of another plot, they may have changed
literary direction and intersected with Susan’s story.
The ending of the book is surreal. Susan is no longer the avid story-teller
who gracefully told her story of story-telling. Another ‘I’ narrator who speaks
exactly her words splashes into the water just as she did, but instead of heading to
the sands of Crusoe’s island, dives into the abyss where ‘it’ finds a submerged
cabin with the bodies of Susan Barton and the captain floating inside. Friday is
there as well, a true companion to the end, and through his open mouth a stream
gushes out that spreads into the water and the air. The sound of unspoken grief
that cannot find a voice even in fiction.
The novel brings forth the motif of salvation only in connection to telling.
Or narrative writing. The genuine struggle in Foe is Susan’s with Foe over the
question of mow much fiction is to be brought into a narrative to make it
marketable. Both agent and author, Crusoe and Foe, are decrepit, almost helpless
men who live under the terror of their circumstances: Crusoe fears he might be
saved and brought home and Foe resists by all means, legal and illegal, the reality
that overcomes him. They are both exposed to the vicissitudes of being old males
in a world of masculine power. Their only chance to be saved is literature. And, of
course, the woman.
‘”Better without the woman”. Yet where would you be without the woman?
Would Crusoe have come to you of his own accord? Could you have made up Crusoe and
Friday and the island with its fleas and apes and lizards? I think not. Many strengths you
have, but invention is not one of them.’(72)