This
is the third and final post in a series on the novel, Oronooko or the Royal Slave by Aphra Behn.
You
can find Part 1 here.
Continuing with the various themes…
Kingship
The importance and nature of kingship is I think the
central theme of the novel. It is around
this that Behn’s vision creates both character and plot. The grand nature of Oronooko, his military
prowess, his commanding presence, his exploits, his moral code, his
intelligence and mien, and his reduction to a slave from which breaks free, if
not in life than in death, shows a man with divine properties. It is his innate, instinctive qualities that
make him for Behn a natural born king. He
is a prince, so genetically he is endowed by Providence. The narrator’s first reaction upon seeing him
is one of encountering the sublime:
[Oronooko] was adorned
with a native beauty so transcending all those of his gloomy race, that he
struck an awe and reverence, even in those that not his quality; as he did in
me, who beheld him with a surprise and wonder, when afterwards he arrived in
our world. (79)
And from his countenance, the narrator intuits:
He came into the room,
and addressed himself to me, and some other women, with the best grace in the
world. He was pretty tall, but of a shape the most exact that can be fancied;
the most famous statuary could not form the figure of a man more admirably
turned from head to foot… The whole proportion and air of his
face was so noble, and exactly formed, that, bating his colour, there could be
nothing in nature more beautiful, agreeable and handsome. There was no one
grace wanting, that bears the standard of true beauty… Nor
did the perfections of his mind come short of those of his person; for his
discourse was admirable upon almost any subject; and whoever had heard him
speak, would have been convinced of their errors, that all fine wit is confined
to the white men, especially to those of Christendom; and would have confessed
that Oroonoko was as capable even of reigning well, and of governing as wisely,
had as great a soul, as politic maxims, and was as sensible of power as any
prince civilized in the most refined schools of humanity and learning, or the
most illustrious courts. (80-81)
What we see here is that Oronooko is naturally
aristocratic, divinely blessed with all the gifts of a great warrior and
philosopher king.
One should note the immediate history of Kingship in
England as Behn, sympathetic to the monarchist, would have seen it. Henry VIII by his succession of wives,
infidelities, and dissolving of the bond with Rome and becoming the head of his
own church was seen as a dissolute King.
It is quite possible that Oronooko’s grandfather, as King of the fictional
African country, with his temper tantrums and concubines, was an allusion to
Henry VIII. England then passed through
a national religious crises and a crises in succession, which culminated in the
installment of Charles I as King.
Charles had a high monarchist view of the Kingship—that is as divine
right—and conflicted terribly with Parliament.
That was the central question of 17th century England, where
do the powers of the King end and what should be the powers of the
parliament. In addition, the English
cultural landscape was still undergoing a crises in religious
constitution. While Catholicism had been
alienated and diminished, a struggle had ensued between the Puritans (named so
because they wished to purify the English Church of Catholicism) and the High
Anglicans who maintained liturgy and many Catholic practices. The conflict between Parliament and the
Monarchy was not on the surface a religious conflict, but religious conflicts
of the day intertwined with the political.
Charles I was a High Anglican, but had married a Catholic. Parliament, led by Oliver Cromwell, was
Puritan. In short, a civil war developed,
Charles I was executed, Cromwell ruled until his death, upon which Charles II,
son of Charles I, restored the monarchy.
Charles II was also High Anglican, but he too had married a Catholic,
and his sympathies may have been with Catholicism even more so than his
father. Charles II died in 1685
(converting to Catholicism on his death bed, by the way), replaced his brother
James II. James II was an outright
Catholic and within three years in 1688, the year Oronooko was written, was
deposed for a Protestant King.
It is within this context that Behn writes of kingship
in Oronooko or The Royal Slave. That is
the full title of the work. Calling
Oronooko “royal” is a loaded word in her historical context. It certainly calls up a political position,
and given Oronooko is a natural, divinely graced king, it is clear that Behn is
supporting the royalist position. If
Oronooko’s grandfather alludes to Henry VIII, Orinooko, as gallant warrior
king, philosopher, and gentleman courtier alludes to Henry V. Undoubtedly, Behn had either read or seen
Shakespeare’s play on the great monarch.
Recall that Henry V is valiant in battle, noble in spirit, and gentle
with Catherine of Valois. Oronooko is an
African Henry V.
Christ-Figure
Behn uses several allusions to either move the plot
and characterize Oronooko within the story.
I have mentioned Achilles and Henry V, and there is also Othello in the
killing of his wife, but the last sections Oronooko clearly becomes a
Christ-figure. When he gathers the
slaves into a group, we see them abandon him, betray, and once captured scourged
by his own fellow slaves.
But they were no sooner
arrived at the place, where all the slaves receive their punishments of
whipping, but they laid hands on Caesar and Tuscan, faint with heat and toil;
and, surprising them, bound them to two several stakes, and whipped them in a
most deplorable and inhumane manner, rending the very flesh from their bones;
especially Caesar, who was not perceived to make any moan, or to alter his
face, only to roll his eyes on the faithless governor, and those he believed
guilty, with fierceness and indignation. And, to complete his rage, he saw
every one of those slaves, who, but a few days before, adored him as something
more than mortal, now had a whip to give him some lashes, while he strove not
to break his fetters, though, if he had, it were impossible. But he pronounced
a woe and revenge from his eyes, that darted fire, that ’twas at once both
awful and terrible to behold. (131)
Oronooko does survive this and once returned to the
safety of Parham plantation, plots his revenge.
The Governor, not satisfied with Oronooko surviving that ordeal, demands
he be handed over from Trefry. One could
see this as a sort of Pilate and the Sanhedrin haggling over Christ’s
fate. Once recovered, Oronooko kills
Imoinda (with her consent) and decides to make a last stand to seek his
vengeance. At this last stand, cornered
and angry, he cuts flesh from his neck and throws it at the band who are after
him. This is the scene where some have
suggested an allusion to the Eucharist:
[Oronooko] held up his
knife in a menacing posture, ‘Look ye, ye faithless crew,’ said he, ‘’ tis not
life I seek, nor am I afraid of dying’, and, at that word, cut a piece of flesh
from his own throat, and threw it at them, ‘yet still I would live if I could,
till I had perfected my revenge. But oh! it cannot be. I feel life gliding from
my eyes and heart, and, if I make not haste, I shall yet fall a victim to the
shameful whip.’ At that, he ripped up his own belly, and took his bowels and
pulled them out, with what strength he could, while some, on their knees
imploring, besought him to hold his hand. (138)
Even this is not the end of incredible Oronooko. He is taken back and surgically patched
together. While recovering, Major
Bannister at the command of the governor forcibly took Oronooko, tied him to a
stake to be burned. Stoically he stood
fixed at the stake.
He had learned to take
tobacco, and when he was assured he should die, he desired they would give him
a pipe in his mouth, ready lighted, which they did, and the executioner came,
and first cut off his members, and threw them into the fire. After that, with
an ill-favoured knife, they cut his ears, and his nose, and burned them; he
still smoked on, as if nothing had touched him. Then they hacked off one of his
arms, and still he bore up, and held his pipe. But at the cutting off the other
arm, his head sunk, and his pipe dropped, and he gave up the ghost, without a
groan, or a reproach. (139-140)
Subsequently his body is quartered and each quarter
sent to a plantation for spectacle.
“Thus died this great man, worthy of a better fate,” concludes Aphra
Behn.
Oronooko stoically smoking a pipe while tied to a
stake, fire smoking around him, and being hacked body part by body part has to
be one of the most incredible images in all of literature. Oronooko
or The Royal Slave may be early for Gothic fiction, but, my Lord, that has
to be among the most imaginative gothic endings I can recall. It’s either brilliant or absurd.
Clearly we can see the rudiments of a Christ passion
narrative in the elements of Oronooko’s demise.
Oroonoko is betrayed, abandoned, scourged, and affixed to a pole until
dead. While there are some intervening
events in the Oronooko narrative that are not in the passion narrative, the
association is clear. But for what
end? Actually that Oronooko is framed as
a Christ-figure makes sense. If the
central theme of the novel is the indignity of enslaving a divinely graced king,
then what better to associate with him with the Kingly Servant of Jesus
Christ? I think Behn in the novel is
upholding the sacred nature of kingship, which reflects on the political crises
in her day.
Behn creates Oronnoko as a natural king, and that
implies a certain divine authority granted to him. Think of it as Christ the King authorizes a
representative on earth. The Church is
Christ's representative on the theological and moral realm; the monarchy is
Christ's representative in the administrative realm. While it not being a sacrament, the
installation of a king did (it may even still) involve a religious ceremony. Kings of England are usually installed by the
Bishop of Canterbury, even under Anglicanism.
I don't know how far back it goes, but Charlemagne had the Pope crown
him as Holy Roman Emperor. This practice
of anointing kings goes back to Kings Saul and David and the other Kings of the
Old Testament. Shakespeare in Richard II dramatizes the sin of
regicide, even when the king is reprehensible.
Behn makes Oronooko out to be a Christ-figure because she sees him as a
divine king. What about the suggestion of the Eucharistic parallel to Oronooko
cutting his flesh off for others that my friend Mary Sue asked me to
evaluate? Frankly I don’t see it. But I could be wrong but let me say why I
could be wrong first and then get to why I don’t think so. The reason I could be wrong—and wrong being
that Behn meant it as a Eucharistic parallel—is that the words ceremony and
sacrifice do run through the novel. What
is the relationship between ceremony and sacrifice in Oronooko’s
experiences? Frankly I can’t piece
anything together. I just don’t see any
ceremonies and what are deemed sacrifices seem like mere deaths. Either I’m missing the importance of ceremony
in the novel, or Behn intended it and didn’t communicate it well or she didn’t
intend it at all.
As to why I don’t think there is a Eucharistic
parallel, there are several reasons.
First, the bare descriptive facts don’t suggest it: “and, at that word,
cut a piece of flesh from his own throat, and threw it at them.” No one eats his flesh. He doesn’t offer it to be eaten. Christ offers His body and blood to His
apostles and believers. Oronooko is
throwing it at the mob that wishes to kill him.
Second, Christ doesn’t cut flesh off His body. He transforms bread and wine into His body
and blood. Even the blood spilled at the
crucifixion, no one drinks it. Oronooko
is physically cutting flesh off his neck in what seems like a moment of
frustration. (And what an odd place to
cut flesh off one’s body.) If Behn is
creating an analogue, it strikes me as a very poor one. Third, the Eucharist is a spiritual union
with Christ and therefore God. Jesus
establishes the theological grounds in the Gospel of John, chapter six. He says:
“I am the bread of
life. Your ancestors ate the manna in
the desert, but they died; this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that
one may eat it and not die. I am the
living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever;
and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.”
The Jews quarreled among
themselves, saying, “How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?”
Jesus said to them,
“Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink
his blood, you do not have life within you.
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will
raise him on the last day. For my flesh
is true food, and my blood is true drink.
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in
him. Just as the living Father sent me
and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will
have life because of me. (John 6; 48-57)
There is no implication that feeding off of Oronooko’s
flesh has any theological or spiritual implications. There is nothing in Oronooko’s act,
physically or spiritually, that would suggest an analogue to the Eucharist.
I may be off here, but I don’t see the differences
between Christians as being an important theme in the novel. Yes, the hypocrisy of Christians is
dramatized, but it’s a general Christianity that is identified. I don’t see anything that would distinguish
between Puritan, High Anglican, or Roman Catholic. I couldn’t find any citation to identify
Behn’s Christian denomination. My guess—pure
speculation—is she’s High Anglican like Charles II, and perhaps she’s
sympathetic to the Catholicism, like the King.
I don’t, however, see any Catholicism in the novel.
It’s also possible, perhaps even likely, that the ending
is not meant to allude to a crucifixion at all.
England had developed a rather barbarous execution technique for the
worst criminals, hanged, drawn, and quartered, going back from Behn’s day at
least four hundred years. Per the Wikipedia entry, the sufferer would be “hanged (almost to the point of
death), emasculated, disembowelled, beheaded, and quartered (chopped into four
pieces).” Oronooko is not hanged and he
only disembowels himself, but he is emasculated, hacked to pieces, and
quartered for spectacle. I think this
cultural meme is on Behn’s mind, though hanged, drawn, and quartered is in
itself a form of crucifixion. The
practice was famously used against hidden Roman Catholics in Elizabethan and
Civil War times. Perhaps some sort of allusion
is meant.
###
Final Goodreads Review:
This fascinating little novel was written in 1688, a
generation before Daniel DeFoe, who is typically considered the first modern
novelist in English, and written by a woman no less. The novel follows Oronooko, an African prince
who is tricked into slavery by so called “Christians.” At its core, the novel is about the nature of
kingship, which was the big political issue of its day, the Restoration period
of English history, but in doing so Aphra Behn creates a narrative of the
indignities of slavery, a social position well ahead of her time. Her woman’s voice and perspective—the tale is
told in the first person of Behn as a character in the story—also gives dignity
to the female characters. The prose is
dated to Behn’s time, but it is good and rhythmic prose, but some may not enjoy
reading that. Partly woman’s amatory
novel, partly heroic action story, and partly slave narrative, the novel
doesn’t always seem to know what it should be, but I do think the story holds
together. The story holds together
because Behn creates an indelibly memorable character in Oroonoko, who at times
recalls Henry V, at times recalls Othello, and other times a
Christ-figure. This novel should be more
widely known than it is, at a minimum for its due placement in the history of
the novel.
I initially gave the novel three stars with a
statement of three and a half stars if I could be more precise. My mind still sees it as three and a half
stars but I give it four stars as I lean to the higher side. On reflection the novel has grown on me.
