Take a photo of a barcode or cover
2.84 AVERAGE
2.84 AVERAGE
Two and a half stars, but only because of the notes at the end of my edition. Those were very good, they included a love poem by Aphra Behn that was erotic in the best sense of the term, and an illuminating discussion on whether Oroonoko is historical or not. The highlight was an account by a slave trader, who said that color is only skin deep but still despised African culture, and who justified his decision not to cut the legs off of slaves to keep them from drowning themselves, they believing that the spirits of amputees would not return back to Africa upon death. It is surprisingly humane, but still shows how nasty the slave trade was, if cutting off legs to set an example was a valid tactic for at least some slavers.
The maintext, however, was weak. The titular hero was a perfectly clichéd noble savage who didn't need Christ to be a better person than anyone else, and yes, the book goes to some lengths to show that. The fights were dynamic, the action sometimes inspiring, but the characterization weak and the romance fell flat. There's also an assisted suicide and it's portrayed sympathetically, and as if that wasn't repulsive enough, the killed is Oroonokos own wife and she is pregnant with his child at the time.
The maintext, however, was weak. The titular hero was a perfectly clichéd noble savage who didn't need Christ to be a better person than anyone else, and yes, the book goes to some lengths to show that. The fights were dynamic, the action sometimes inspiring, but the characterization weak and the romance fell flat. There's also an assisted suicide and it's portrayed sympathetically, and as if that wasn't repulsive enough, the killed is Oroonokos own wife and she is pregnant with his child at the time.
Aphra Behn came for colonialism and the discriminatory racial, religious, and gender-based structures that supported it and she did not leave it a leg to stand on
I think this book needs to be considered within its racist historical context, otherwise you’ll judge it on a modern standard and lexicon [which naturally is a thoroughly acceptable thing to do when considering the text or warning people not to read it now as it’s potentially triggering].
It definitely is within the confines of the “west is best” empire-centric era of writing. Where European beauty ideals were valued over all else (which sadly is currently still the case in some arenas). It shows that this beauty standard and it’s associated structural oppression has reigned for hundreds of years.
It skirts around the deplorable conditions of slavery imposed by the west. At its core it does feel an anti-slavery book. But the discourse appears to be on a purely economic or “royal” basis, that princes should not be enslaved. In that regard, it is not really anti-slavery at all - especially given the prince (and his grandfather) themselves were complicit in selling those who they defeated in war/ their enemies to slavers.
It also reads quite anti Dutch.
At its soul this is a tragedy, and quite a well written one. It’s punchy and with its short length can be read in a few hours.
The important historical context of this book, and as I see, the only use of this prose being widely available or sold as a classic is:
1) it illustrates racism in the 17th Century. It provides a depiction of slavery from the perspective of a slave, surely must be one of the first of such stories to be published (albeit the character is an African royal, and it should be noted that slaves were denied the right or opportunity to publish their own stories in their own voices)
2) it is one of the earliest examples of a novel (this is up for debate as to whether it is a novel or some other literary form).
3) one of the earliest published pieces of prose by a female.
4) I think there is something to be said for the authors morality imposed onto the royal characters. This may have been criticising or providing commentary of Britain’s own royals of the time - as it was near the era of parliamentary unrest.
I’m not certain it’s one of the greats and it certainly provides the reader with a lot to sit and reflect on for hours and hours beyond the few spent reading the book.
It definitely is within the confines of the “west is best” empire-centric era of writing. Where European beauty ideals were valued over all else (which sadly is currently still the case in some arenas). It shows that this beauty standard and it’s associated structural oppression has reigned for hundreds of years.
It skirts around the deplorable conditions of slavery imposed by the west. At its core it does feel an anti-slavery book. But the discourse appears to be on a purely economic or “royal” basis, that princes should not be enslaved. In that regard, it is not really anti-slavery at all - especially given the prince (and his grandfather) themselves were complicit in selling those who they defeated in war/ their enemies to slavers.
It also reads quite anti Dutch.
At its soul this is a tragedy, and quite a well written one. It’s punchy and with its short length can be read in a few hours.
The important historical context of this book, and as I see, the only use of this prose being widely available or sold as a classic is:
1) it illustrates racism in the 17th Century. It provides a depiction of slavery from the perspective of a slave, surely must be one of the first of such stories to be published (albeit the character is an African royal, and it should be noted that slaves were denied the right or opportunity to publish their own stories in their own voices)
2) it is one of the earliest examples of a novel (this is up for debate as to whether it is a novel or some other literary form).
3) one of the earliest published pieces of prose by a female.
4) I think there is something to be said for the authors morality imposed onto the royal characters. This may have been criticising or providing commentary of Britain’s own royals of the time - as it was near the era of parliamentary unrest.
I’m not certain it’s one of the greats and it certainly provides the reader with a lot to sit and reflect on for hours and hours beyond the few spent reading the book.
I read this book in one sitting, which is probably more of a testament to its brevity than anything else. That being said, I don’t hate the novel, and it’s certainly easy and quick to get through. It’s better than I imagined a 17th century novel dealing with slavery to be, and the prose can be beautiful in places. That is, if you can past how troubling the narratives and descriptions are to a modern reader. I prefer this as an interesting slice of history than a good book in its own right.
dark
emotional
informative
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Cannot wait to hear what my university literature class has to say about this. What a wild 100 pages.
Strange ending, overall a thought provoking piece on the contemporary beliefs about slavery. Challenging and upsetting at times, but I'd say worth a read.
adventurous
dark
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
dark
emotional
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Its difficult to give this book a star rating. This was assigned to me for a college course that is focused on early British literature. At first, I appreciated the opportunity to read something from a female author and an early example of a traditional novel. However, as the story went on, the content became more and more gruesome, and my enthusiasm for the text vanished.
The story is a very graphic depiction of an enslaved person's life on a plantation in the 1680s. And you get a cross section of everything that comes with that. The last third is especially difficult to get through. From a purely academic perspective, it's a good representation of early white supremacy, colonialism, slavery, the slave trade, racism, bigotry, misogyny, etc. And all within just sixty pages.
Don't read this book if you don't have to.
The story is a very graphic depiction of an enslaved person's life on a plantation in the 1680s. And you get a cross section of everything that comes with that. The last third is especially difficult to get through. From a purely academic perspective, it's a good representation of early white supremacy, colonialism, slavery, the slave trade, racism, bigotry, misogyny, etc. And all within just sixty pages.
Don't read this book if you don't have to.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Body horror, Domestic abuse, Emotional abuse, Genocide, Gore, Hate crime, Misogyny, Pedophilia, Physical abuse, Racial slurs, Racism, Rape, Sexual assault, Sexual violence, Slavery, Suicidal thoughts, Suicide, Torture, Violence, Xenophobia, Blood, Trafficking, Grief, Medical trauma, Suicide attempt, Murder, Pregnancy, Fire/Fire injury, Colonisation, Injury/Injury detail, Classism