Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.28 AVERAGE
3.28 AVERAGE
Who gets to tell which stories, and how? And what happens to those stories that remain unheard?
'We deplore the barbarism of whoever maimed him, yet have we, his later masters, not reason to be secretly grateful? For as long as he is dumb we can tell ourselves his desires are dark to us, and continue to use him as we wish.'
'We deplore the barbarism of whoever maimed him, yet have we, his later masters, not reason to be secretly grateful? For as long as he is dumb we can tell ourselves his desires are dark to us, and continue to use him as we wish.'
The only reason I gave this book 2 stars instead of 1 is because after I finished I read summaries and analyses of it (because I wanted to understand why the fuck I was forced to read this for class), and I do have to say the whole 'silenced' thing and taking back narrative idea is brilliant (khem khem historical silences by Trouillot is my bias). But the way it's executed is just... no
If the author wanted to take back the narrative for the marginalized/oppressed (aka Friday), why then infantilize him throughout the WHOLE book? The way the MC was describing Friday was disturbing at the least, and we are just supposed to forgive her for that because she recognized his innate need for freedom? (aka the bare minimum). I am just going to leave this here:
"Hitherto I had given to Friday's life as little thought as I would have a dog's or any other dumb beast's - less, indeed, for I had a horror of his mutilated state which made me shut him from my mind, and flinch away when he came near me."
Yeah... The 'mutilated' state was him not having a tongue.
Then there is incest. Like I get it, you see a look-alike of your missing daughter. You kiss her because some people in some cultures do that. You could have stopped here and it would have been fine-ish. WHY did you have to continue to compare this kiss to one of the lover's?? YUCK.
The writing is outright bad. There is no hook, writing style changes in between chapters based on the author's wim, it is not enjoyable, and the ending is confusing as fuck but not in a good way.
"I understand, that is to say, why a man will choose to be a slaveowner. Do you think less of me for this confession?"
Yes, girl. Yes, I do.
If the author wanted to take back the narrative for the marginalized/oppressed (aka Friday), why then infantilize him throughout the WHOLE book? The way the MC was describing Friday was disturbing at the least, and we are just supposed to forgive her for that because she recognized his innate need for freedom? (aka the bare minimum). I am just going to leave this here:
"Hitherto I had given to Friday's life as little thought as I would have a dog's or any other dumb beast's - less, indeed, for I had a horror of his mutilated state which made me shut him from my mind, and flinch away when he came near me."
Yeah... The 'mutilated' state was him not having a tongue.
Then there is incest. Like I get it, you see a look-alike of your missing daughter. You kiss her because some people in some cultures do that. You could have stopped here and it would have been fine-ish. WHY did you have to continue to compare this kiss to one of the lover's?? YUCK.
The writing is outright bad. There is no hook, writing style changes in between chapters based on the author's wim, it is not enjoyable, and the ending is confusing as fuck but not in a good way.
"I understand, that is to say, why a man will choose to be a slaveowner. Do you think less of me for this confession?"
Yes, girl. Yes, I do.
adventurous
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Susan Barton please shut the fuck up challenge you’re so fucking annoying. Justice for Friday. Fuck you Robinson Crusoe. I read this for my A Level coursework and I hated every second of it. It is stupid and it makes no sense. Fuck you Robinson Crusoe you racist freakshow.
reflective
slow-paced
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I had never read anything by J.M. Coetzee and he was recommended to me, so when I saw this second-hand, I picked it up. Foe is a retelling of Robinson Crusoe (Defoe means 'the foe') but from the perspective of a woman castaway who joins them on the island (who was not in the original). The original Robinson Crusoe is a slave trader (he was shipwrecked whilst on his way to Africa to buy slaves) and Foe is very much a commentary on that, with Friday's tongue cut out, making him unable to tell his story.
Foe is a commentary on a book written in 1719 (and set 50 years previously). What about our perspective looking back on a book written in 1989 (35 years ago)? The woman is given a voice, but she is not really presented as Crusoe's equal (but maybe he thought that would be unrealistic)? The evil of slavery is clear, and all the stuff about cannibalism from the original exposed as a myth, but still Friday has dull eyes and sits in a corner (or is that meant to be a result of being enslaved)? It is difficult to know what to make of it, but that of course is good, it encourages the reader to think, and that is of course rather the point of literature.
Whilst reading this book, I was reminded of James by Percival Everett (https://app.thestorygraph.com/reviews/ac84db99-5bec-4a8d-b459-c028367ebcc0) in which the story of Huckelberry Finn is retold from the perspective of Jim, the runaway slave. Perhaps if Coetzee was retelling Robinson Crusoe today, he would take the perspective of Friday.
Foe is a commentary on a book written in 1719 (and set 50 years previously). What about our perspective looking back on a book written in 1989 (35 years ago)? The woman is given a voice, but she is not really presented as Crusoe's equal (but maybe he thought that would be unrealistic)? The evil of slavery is clear, and all the stuff about cannibalism from the original exposed as a myth, but still Friday has dull eyes and sits in a corner (or is that meant to be a result of being enslaved)? It is difficult to know what to make of it, but that of course is good, it encourages the reader to think, and that is of course rather the point of literature.
Whilst reading this book, I was reminded of James by Percival Everett (https://app.thestorygraph.com/reviews/ac84db99-5bec-4a8d-b459-c028367ebcc0) in which the story of Huckelberry Finn is retold from the perspective of Jim, the runaway slave. Perhaps if Coetzee was retelling Robinson Crusoe today, he would take the perspective of Friday.
challenging
dark
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Je suis assez déçu par ma lecture. Je n'ai pas compris l'intérêt de cette histoire, elle m'est totalement passée à côté. J'ai trouvé l'écriture trop perturbante, confondant narration et dialogues (ou plutôt monologues interposés car personne ne s'écoute...), plutôt désagréable. C'est dommage car l'idée de l'histoire me plaisait bien, j'aurais pu l'apprécier dans d'autres conditions.