Daniel defoe s robinson crusoe and jane austen s

Essay Topic: Robinson Crusoe,

Paper type: Literature,

Words: 1589 | Published: 01.08.20 | Views: 473 | Download now

Novels, Land, Character, Connections

Excerpt from Article:

Daniel Defoe’s Brown Crusoe and Jane Austen’s Mansfield Area actually discuss a number of styles relating to the centrality of land in the formation of eighteenth and nineteenth hundred years conceptions of rural virtue, politics, and property. Crusoe’s South American island could hardly be farther from the staid environs of Mansfield Playground, but the same tension between rural advantage and life interests spreads throughout both testimonies, particularly when it comes to Crusoe’s wanderlust and Edmund’s relationship with Mary. Equally Crusoe and Edmund are lured by seeming adventure and enjoyment of the world outside the house their countryside homes, nevertheless ultimately realize that the pledges offered by our planet are unmoored from any genuine ethical or honest system; by different instances Crusoe discovers himself the two slave and slaver, in support of begins to build a moral compass after his shipwreck pushes him to relate to the land in many ways he offers previously hardly ever considered. Likewise, Edmund’s desire for Mary relies largely on her worldly mother nature, and it is only after seeing her response to Henry and Maria’s scandal that Edmund acknowledges both Mary’s amoral figure and the supposed virtue that stems from a true connection to a certain place. Both characters happen to be essentially penalized for their involvement in a world outside of the ideological range of their childhood, and this treatment eventually triggers them to turn down from their personal interests in the service of religious, patriarchal expert. By evaluating Crusoe and Edmund’s continuous education about the connection between virtue and an admiration of property, one is able to see how this connection signifies a key element in the perpetuation of old-fashioned, repressive Christian and patriarchal notions of ethics and morality.

In both Robinson Crusoe and Mansfield Playground, the function of land in relation to virtue is expressed through the repeated reiteration of a moral dichotomy. In the case of Robinson Crusoe, this dichotomy usually takes the form of the tension between sea and the land, with Crusoe favoring the sea coming from a young era (Defoe 2). That the marine represents a lack of virtue is demonstrated in the beginning due to the fact that in many ways, Crusoe’s persona is similar to the “prodigal son” in the Bible. Just like the prodigal boy, Crusoe is too ashamed to go back home after his first shipwreck, and so this individual decides to come back once more to the sea (Defoe 12). When he does, he explains his decision by saying, “the same nasty influence that carried myself first from my father’s house, that hurried me personally into the crazy and indigested notion of raising my fortune, shown the most unfortunate of all businesses to my own view, ” clearly informing the reader that in this history, the sea represents the even worse choice (Defoe 12). This kind of notion is usually repeated through the entire story, mainly because each time Crusoe sets out to ocean he is hit with a more serious fate.

The dichotomy in Mansfield Playground is evenly clear, with all the amoral excitement of the sea and the virtuous consistency of the land substituted by the interpersonal differences between urban and rural lifestyle, as embodied by the characters of Jane and Holly Crawford. That Mary and Henry are meant to serve as the avatars of this difference becomes clear whenever they first reach Mansfield plus the central issue is whether or perhaps not the city will be interesting enough to “satisfy the habits of [people] who had been mostly used to London” (Austen 41). Throughout the new, Mary comes to represent to Edmund those promise that the sea presents to Crusoe, and in both equally cases, this promise is definitely portrayed in direct competitors to the expected moral brilliance of the familial homeland. In both novels, then, the moral disagreement revolves around a dichotomy between your larger, expansive world plus the individualized, glorified space of land itself, which features as a sort of metaphorical representation of the sophisticated of suggestions that constitute the patriarchy, Christian, capitalist hegemony that permeates the two novels.

Although dichotomy is somewhat more basic in Robinson Crusoe, because it is practically between the area and the marine, the dichotomies in both equally novels matter themselves with the same set of oppositional beliefs or specifications. Although there certainly are a number of reasons for this likeness, the most central one is the fact that equally novels, nevertheless separated simply by some provisional, provisory distance, were produced within the context of a highly-regulated, patriarchal Christian hegemony. Crusoe’s similarity to the Biblical prodigal boy is only a single symptom of the novel’s Christian core, and although faith plays a less overt role in Mansfield Playground, the social conventions the characters comply with (or break) are deeply rooted in Christian ideology. Similarly, that the is a particularly patriarchal ideology is proved explicitly in Robinson Crusoe and implicitly in Mansfield Park. It is necessary to point out and critique both Christian and patriarchal facets of the morality that is valorized in the novels, because when they purport to demonstrate some inherent top quality in land ownership that generates advantage, in reality they are really merely perpetuating a created ideology that really has very little influence about human pleasure. Put another way, the books, like ideology itself, pretends to describe a target facet of experience while actually doing their finest to reinforce and perpetuate a subjective presentation of reality based entirely on the belief in a magical, all-powerful fatherly figure.

In Johnson Crusoe, the characterization of land as the site of virtue and social acceptability is personified by Crusoe’s father, who also foreshadows his son’s fortune in his alert that “if [Crusoe] did take this silly step [of likely to sea], God would not bless [him], and [he] would have amusement hereafter to reflect upon having neglected his [father’s] counsel, once there might be non-e to assist in [his] recovery” (Defoe 4). When Crusoe is choosing whether or not to return home after his first shipwreck, this individual thinks of his daddy, because his father symbolizes the idealized connection to residence and area that Crusoe flees. This is exactly why the success of Crusoe’s plantation in Brazil is usually not enough to sever his desire for the ocean; land by itself is inadequate to generate the kind of virtue well-regarded by the novel, because that virtue finally stems from the bond between area ownership and patriarchy. Appreciating this fact allows someone to better appreciate how Robinson Crusoe functions because an “economic ‘myth'” geared towards perpetuating the idea that “the enhancement of the man condition” comes from “hard job, saving, purchase, innovation and technical modify, ” providing those actions are performed within the circumstance of a patriarchal, Christianized form of capitalism (Mathias 17, 20). It is only once Crusoe dedicates himself to Christianity, capitalist production, and patriarchal specialist is this individual allowed to come back to a comfortable lifestyle, free from the wild, verdant, almost feminized difficulties embodied by lifestyle on the island.

Similarly, the special event of countryside life a part of Mansfield Park is dependent upon a sort of patriarchal capitalism, because this rural life is simply made possible through the patronage of a male brain of the family, as girls were effectively unable to individual or control land. The consistency and moral fortitude that comes with rural life and land control is intrinsically tied to a picture of the patriarch as steady and morally upstanding, such that the story implicitly will serve to perpetuate the sexist standards of its sociable milieu. That is why one are not able to read Mansfield Park as being a kind of proto-feminist text; though with Mary Crawford Austen helps create an image “of wealthy women whose actions are appealing instead of distasteful, ” and thus advises the possibility of a socially acceptable mode of feminine monetary empowerment, this image is complicated by implicit argument that prosperous women “need to find a method to recognize and acknowledge the universality of these kinds of self-interested impulses while at the same time picturing psychological and social components that will keep them in check” (Michie 6). In other words, in Mansfield Park, just men can unproblematically control wealth, and because “the relatives represents the land, and the land the family, inches patriarchal advantage dictates that the “good” heroes are people who give all their lives to both the patriarchy and its property (such since Edmund and Fanny).

Bearing this at heart, one can begin to understand how both equally Crusoe and Edmund’s final return to their idealized homes is a representational reassertion of Christian patriarchy following their very own flirtations with alternative ideologies. Crusoe finally returns to England, provides his planting, and resigns himself towards the traditional, patriarchal role his father initially imagined intended for him:

What might be referred to as the upper station of low life, which he had located, by long experience, was your best condition in the world, one of the most suited to human being happiness, certainly not exposed to the miseries, issues, the labor and sufferings of the mechanic part of mankind, and not uncomfortable with the satisfaction, luxury, ambition, and be jealous of of the upper part of human beings. (Defoe 3)

Though Crusoe retires a relatively wealthy gentleman, he only does so after practically three decades of hardship.

Related posts

Save your time and get your research paper!

Get My Essay