Aphra Behn’s Oroonoko encompasses a story that critiques human nature far more than the widely-upheld notions that it criticizes or satirizes the more fundamental institutions of slavery, colonialism, and British monarchy. While these themes are reflected at points within the text, Behn’s lack of opinion and direct criticism prevents the reader from determining a specific conclusion about the aforementioned establishments. Rather, the reader becomes perplexed in the moral dilemma of exploitation, manipulation, justice, and equality. The equality referred to in this circumstance must be understood on a much more fundamental level than the slave-master relationship, but, in this passage, principally amongst the slaves themselves. Aphra Behn’s recognition of aristocracy and royalist beliefs are transparently transmitted throughout Oroonoko and represent a larger, recurrent theme in the novel. The significance of her belief in this matter is upheld by the transcendent importance of nobility transcending even in the bonds of enslavement. The syntactical and semantical techniques employed in this passage provide the reader with a multi-faceted representation of the human condition in a context irrespective of slavery. Her use of literary devices in conjunction with highly evocative imagery allows the reader to vividly comprehend the character of Oroonoko and his relevance as a character. The reader must remain observant for Aphra Behn’s personal beliefs, which are prevalent in the text, in order to prevent warped interpretation and to hamper any possible royalist inculcation.
Imagery is one of the principle rhetorical devices employed by Behn and her descriptions are consistently poignant and effective. After Imoinda’s impregnation, her feeble temperament is exposed, and she is described to ‘[…] [do] nothing but Sigh and Weep for the Captivity of her Lord, her Self, and the Infant yet Unborn’. This quotation presents an image of childish innocence, and the inability to help oneself. She is utterly defenceless. Prior to Oroonoko’s arrival she lay vulnerable to the whims of her white masters and was saved only by the charm of her demure countenance and maidenly chastity. Now that he has come, and she with child, she believes it will be increasingly difficult to secure freedom. This is also an allusion to Behn’s respect of nobility projected onto the white Colonists who recognize the divinity of these two Africans and do not wish to lose such specimens. Imoinda’s condition strongly contrasts that of her husband, her sorrows were, ‘[…]so many Darts in the Heart of Great Caesar’ (Oroonoko, 51) and prompted him to undertake great measures to attempt their liberty. Oroonoko is shown in a far different light than Imoinda, and Behn employs a simile to describe him ‘[…] like a Great Captain [or] like a Great King’ (Oroonoko, 53). A slave mentioned to have similarity with a king is very unusual and does not provoke an image that represents the bonds of captivity. Behn’s appreciation of his inherent superiority lends itself as sympathising with the notion of divine right.
The word ‘diverted’ (Oroonoko, 51), placed in the first line of the passage, is very conspicuous in this context. Readers must ask themselves how many white masters went to any length to distract his slaves from their condition? Entertainment and adventure was provided for Oroonoko to abate his anxieties of bondage and maintain his enjoyment of life in captivity. This occurs only because of his aristocratic status, seen and respected by the whites in Suriname and serves as another example of royalism imbued within the text.
Oroonoko himself is highly manipulative and is not ashamed to exploit the slaves for his own will, and Behn employs a foray of rhetorical devices to relate this. In his venture to inspire rebellion it is important to note the date of this endeavour on a Sunday, where he does not partake in the debauchery with neither slave nor master – though he could have with either. The word ‘Opportunity’ (Oroonoko, 52), especially capitalised, adds significance and subconsciously notes his opportunistic and exploitative approach to achieving his desires. Oroonoko, ‘[…] pretending out of Goodness to ’em’ (Oroonoko, 52) joins the slaves and provides entertainment, much like his masters have done for him. He does not see himself as one of the common slaves and does not approach them out of kindness nor concern. Rather, he is manipulative, and his designs are to use the slaves to achieve freedom for Imoinda, himself, and his unborn child. In fact, Oroonoko even bears contempt towards the other slaves, evidenced by telling them ‘They suffer’d not like Men who might find a Glory, and Fortitude in Oppression; but like Dogs that lov’d the Whip […] and fawn’d the more they were beaten’ (Oroonoko, 52). He compares them, through use of simile, to animals, a tactic Behn will use again. By telling them so, he strips his fellow slaves of any honour and dignity they have found in self-justification for their fruitless toils and lowers them to a state below human slavery, to animals, abasing them with wretched images of humiliation. As a military leader, Oroonoko is familiar with invigorating his men and preparing them for battle with rallying speeches. He spurns the slaves, shaming them for their pusillanimous cowardice, confirming that their slavery lasts, ‘[…] not for Days, Months, or Years, but for Eternity’ (Oroonoko, 52). The ‘Eternity’ he refers to metaphorically represents the everlasting nature of their enslavement should they do nothing to change their condition. He predicts an historical affiliation with slavery – if they do not break their own bonds, they will pervade history as a broken, captured race.
This passage, mostly reflected by first-person narration, transitions to Oroonoko’s speech in the latter half. Substantively, Behn’s confusing perspective regarding slavery is projected through Oroonoko’s articulation and cannot go unobserved. It is a peculiar justification of slavery from one slave to another. The true matter of conflict is not being enslaved, but the context in which the aforementioned slavery has occurred. He beseeches the others, questioning why they feel they should be enslaved to a foreign people,
“Have they Vanquish’d us nobly in fight? Have they Won us in Honourable battel? And are we, by the chance of War, become their slaves? This wou’d not anger a Noble Heart, this wou’d not animate a Souldiers Soul; no, but we are Bought and Sold like Apes, or Monkeys” (Oroonoko, 52).
This justification of slavery comes from a slaver now enslaved. The reader must not forget Oroonoko’s involvement in the practice in the early chapters of the novel. His emphasis on the word ‘Bought’ (Oroonoko, 52) signifies his disgust with the commerciality of the institution, yet the reader must note that he is at fault for his condition as much as the white slaver is. He saw no evil in capturing men in battle, and enslaving them henceforth; however, this is highly hypocritical as he too partook in the trafficking of slaves for profit. He again compares the slaves to animals, this time to a more developed species: primates, but animals no less. This is perhaps one of the most effective examples of Behn’s personal views permeating the text. In the world she personifies through Oroonoko, enslavement as result of capture in battle, slavery is tolerated and even sanctioned. Although she pens their disheartening struggles and is one of the first authors to depict the realities of slavery, she does not critique or admonish its practice. This provides another example of Aphra Behn’s imperialist perspective. Slavery through capture is a very primitive imperialistic belief, dating to the Mesopotamians. Enslavement via capture was also a very Colonialist ideal and her approval of this mode of slavery, demonstrated by Oroonoko’s speech, serves as a justification of the institution.
While from a removed perspective, Oroonoko’s attempt may appear honourable, a detailed analysis uncovers his moral turpitude. He is not rescuing the slaves, nor rallying them to alleviate their condition. The slaves are merely a vehicle, his means of escape and freedom. From the very beginning his mind is fixed on their exploitation for personal gain. Oroonoko sees a clear difference between himself and the truly enslaved – they are mere animals who have bowed to the power of the white colonists, ‘They had lost the Divine Quality of Men, and were become insensible asses, fit only to bear […]’ (Oroonoko, 52). The difference between the black slaves and Oroonoko need only be explained by the influence of royalism within the text.
Perhaps Behn’s closest attempt at critiquing Colonialism occurs in the criticisms she offers about the Colonists in Oroonoko’s speech. She describes that they have “[…] abandon’d their own Countries for Rapin, Murders, Thefts, and Villanies” (Oroonoko, 52) who are not fit masters of any human beings. This is the first criticism of the white masters she offers in the passage. They are described not as witty, masterful, or cunning, as Oroonoko has been; but as villains who have abandoned their own countries for a plethora of wrongdoing – these are the men in control of other human lives and is some of the only evidence in the text that reflects concern with the type of human being affiliated with Colonialism. Upon closer inspection, however, the description of these men becomes inherently racially charged. Behn is essentially stating that the black slaves are so unsophisticated and cowardly that even they are victim to western European undesirables. Although she criticizes the character of the slavers, she doubly insults the slaves through acknowledgement that they are subjugated unsophisticated criminals.
Despite of the aforementioned, Behn is very effective in characterising the attitudes of the Colonists through metaphor and uses the physical climate of Suriname to aptly portray the men themselves: ‘[…] tis the nature of that Country to Rust and Eat up Iron, or any metals, but Gold and Silver’ (Oroonoko, 52). She cleverly targets the greed and arrogance of the Colonists, noting that, ‘the English had none but rusty Swords […]’ (Oroonoko, 52). Through this, Behn demonstrates the complacency festering amongst the white slavers. They no longer tend to their weapons, but living off the fruits of others’ labour, have grown lazy and greedy. The only metal unaffected by the climate is gold and silver, signifying their sole concern with the acquisition of wealth.
Even in critique of the Colonists, however, Behn enforces her royalist beliefs. Though she disapproves of the colonists, their character, wantonness, and abandonment of country; she does not reprehend the institution of slavery. By failing to denounce it and supporting the claim in Oroonoko’s speech that slavery by capture is honourable, even understandable, she supports its practice. This increasingly establishes her position in favour of monarchical totalitarianism, henceforth justifying enslavement by imperial authority.
Oroonoko has established itself in history as the first novel of its kind – in no other work prior to its publication are the hardships of slavery documented, especially from what is claimed to be a personal account narrated in the first person. Although revolutionary for her period, upon close inspection the reader finds that Aphra Behn does not condemn slavery nor colonisation. In fact, throughout Oroonoko she solidifies her royalist beliefs and asserts the importance of kingship and nobility. She evidences this most sincerely through Oroonoko’s actions, speech and treatment of fellow slaves. He manipulates them and seeks to use them solely to fulfil his designs, he cares not for their well-being, nor is he concerned with their status as slaves. Aphra Behn most effectively critiques the human condition in this passage, although this evaluation must be drawn by the reader as she does not directly flaw Oroonoko for his beliefs. Naturally, what is written will suffer the biases of the author, and it is no surprise that many of Behn’s beliefs have been projected, perhaps subconsciously, onto characters and events within the text. Close reading of this passage provides insight not only into underlying allusions, metaphors, and literary devices that elevate the text, but also to authorial perspective and ideology at the time of its publication.