As a 'castaway-novel,' is Crusoe anti-society (like Rousseau's Emile (where the natural brings out the good and builds) or,  pro-civilization (like a Hobbesian Lord of the Flies where the natural brings out the bad and destroys)? In other words, to take the above further, is Crusoe an "Enlightenment" book? Cite dialogue and events in the book to support your views.

       As you consider this, keep WESTERN Civ in mind -- click here for characteristics. The relationships between Western Civ characteristics and how the book exhibits those characteristics would itself be a very interesting question to pursue....)

In all these explorations around Crusoe's Island and World, keep in mind the all characters, Crusoe along with the others you meet. They may be 'bit parts' like the Baron in Candide, but can be equally important.

         How does the book explore and present human nature? Does the deserted-island theme center around a utopian (El dorado) concept? Or a metaphor for humanity's 'civilizing' influence on the world? Or pure escapism? Or.... what?

         Another take on Crusoe: Does it present/promote the 'Yeoman' concept? This concept, so part-&-parcel to English development, then American (also connected with the Enlightenment in many ways) is worth considering. What the Yeoman ideal holds is the backbone of industrialism as well as (and related to) European dominance.

       “O drug!” said I aloud, “what art thou good for? Thou art not worth to me, no, not the taking off of the ground; one of those knives is worth all this heap; I have no manner of use for thee; e’en remain where thou art and go to the bottom as a creature whose life is not worth saving.” However, upon second thoughts, I took it away. . . . ---So what is the difference between knife and money? Is this religious tension of mammon?

       Ch 29 -- I might well say now indeed, that the latter end of Job was better than the beginning. It is impossible to express here the flutterings of my very heart when I looked over these letters, and especially when I found all my wealth about me; for as the Brazil ships come all in fleets, the same ships which brought my letters brought my goods. . . . --- how so like Job?

One 'helpful' SparkNotes view on Xury:

Xury -  A nonwhite (Arab or black) slave boy only briefly introduced during the period of Crusoe’s enslavement in Sallee. When Crusoe escapes with two other slaves in a boat, he forces one to swim to shore but keeps Xury on board, showing a certain trust toward the boy. Xury never betrays that trust. Nevertheless, when the Portuguese captain eventually picks them up, Crusoe sells Xury to the captain. Does Xury’s sale shows us the racist double standards Crusoe is sometimes accused of?

Is this right and fair as a critique, inquiry and explanation?

How has Crusoe changed from the beginning of the novel to the end? What has not changed and what meaning do you see in that?

        How does Defoe's Crusoe address the questions, issues and critiques of colonialism?  Using specific examples from the book (many, dv), would you argue that Defoe is promoting "Olde School" English Colonialism in a clearly positive way? Or not? Or does the book present an ambiguous and/or uncertain answer to this question? Please luxuriate in your creative use of the book, specific and to-the-point evidence, and clearly state conclusions, even IF you support the ambiguous conclusion. Clear ambiguity, please!

Explain the (enormous?) significance of this scene: why is it so significant?

Consider Crusoe's reaction(s) to seeing a footprint: why did he do all things, feel all the feelings etc described?

Pic at left: American Pioneer? Defoe wrote this before the myth of the American Frontiersman hit the newsstands and carnivals, and certainly before the intellectuals got ahold of it, as Ian Watt did (p.288ff). HOW does this idea hold water? (relate myth-elements of early modern western civ to specific references in the story of Crusoe.)

Friday's Rescue

A New Colony grows through warfare

         We've heard long and sincerely the ills of the European colonial movement: racism, cultural homicide due to ethnocentric ism, Eurocentric, abuses of human rights, slavery, oppression of the 'inferior' peoples, religious bigotry, conquest, greed, hostility, social hierarchy with colonials below the level of pond scum, master-sahib control-freak, gender prejudice, abuse of workers, lack of justice, persecution, exploitative destruction of resources, etc.

        The book, Robinson Crusoe, appeared just as Britain was entering the height of its colonial movement. Given the book's popularity, both in its influence and its reflective character of English ideals, it suggests a different picture of colonialism.

       Argue either/both sides of the above controversy by showing HOW various scenes, dialogue, descriptions, settings, developments, conclusions, characters etc of the book support and/or deny the bleak, although politically-correct, picture of European colonialism.

       Another way to look at the above question is to examine how Voltaire's Candide deals with European culture in its involvement overseas versus how Defoe deals with it. Assuming Defoe constructed a model of European ideals and practices, and assuming that Voltaire had a different set of ideals and views on colonial practices, contrast the two by using specific scenes, dialogue, descriptions, settings, developments, conclusions, characters etc of the two books.