Entry 2: In an academic essay of not less than 700 words, compare how the imperialistic practices of the 18th century are displayed in Robinson Crusoe and Gulliver’s Travels.

     In the 18th century, a period shaped by expanding colonial influence and global exploration, literary works began to mirror the imperial ambitions of European nations. Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe and Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels are two novels from this period that deal with travel and experiences in foreign lands. On one hand, Robinson Crusoe presents a protagonist who claims ownership and control over land and people, showing the typical colonial English man. On the other hand, Gulliver's Travels offers a more critical view that questions the values behind such domination when the protagonist, an English conqueror who justifies violence for the sake of civilization, encounters different voyages acting as an embodiment of Western colonialism. This essay presents a critical analysis comparing how Robinson Crusoe and Gulliver's Travels reflect the European imperialistic approach of the 18th century.

      In Robinson Crusoe, the imperialistic approach is highlighted through Robinson Crusoe's relationship with Xury, reflecting the economic and colonial mindset of the British Englishmen during that age. He treats Xury, the Moorish boy, as a slave while he himself is a slave to the Moorish pirates. Crusoe embodies the colonial mindset back then when he sells his loyal servant, Xury, for a small sum of money to a Portuguese captain. It underscores Crusoe's inherent capitalistic drive to define his self-identity. His connections with others revolve around the intrinsic value of commodities. Although Crusoe shows regret about selling him, as he "had done wrong in parting with my boy Xury" (Defoe 48), it does not indicate his guilty conscience. Rather, he requires more manpower in his plantation in Brazil. Daniel Defoe ironically criticizes the materialism of the colonizers back then and how they sought economic expansion and slave labor. He characterizes Crusoe as a white imperialist who exploits his loyal companion, Xury, to achieve his desires. Defoe critiques the harsh colonial practices of Britain during that age through being portrayed in Crusoe's character as both a slave and a slave trader.

      Crusoe represents the typical European colonizer in the 18th century through the relationship between him and Friday. He treats Friday as an uncivilized savage who has to be thankful for being saved by Crusoe. Defoe characterizes Crusoe and Friday as the colonizer and the colonized. At first, Crusoe names Friday and teaches him his language to help communicate with him. However, he only teaches him the necessary words like "Master" to prevent any possibility of protesting against Crusoe in the future. This highlights how Crusoe acts superior to him and reflects his imperialistic features, imposing his culture and language on Friday, ignoring his identity. Moreover, Crusoe creates a deep impression on Friday's mind by giving his superstitious beliefs about Jesus Christ and instructing him in religious knowledge. Crusoe considers Friday as a "poor savage" who has to "bring him to the true knowledge of religion and of the Christian Doctrine." (Defoe 223). Furthermore, Defoe deals with imperialism by portraying an English adventurer who gradually becomes a master over the island and any person on the island as a "servant" to him. He considers Friday as his property and gives himself the right to practice not physical force but an invisible power on the colonized, leading them to adopt the colonizer's language, culture, and religion. Defoe criticizes the imperialistic approach of England during that age, highlighting the hidden strategies used between Crusoe and Friday.

     Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels strongly contrasts the seemingly sincere imperialistic undertones of Robinson Crusoe by harshly mocking European expansion. Swift exposes the inherent absurdity of the practices Lemuel Gulliver encounters in the imaginary lands he travels to. In Lilliput, Lemuel Gulliver's immense power is both desired and feared by the inhabitants, whose trivial disputes and readiness for war reflect the political animosities driving European imperial ambitions. Gulliver's superior position, as he is capable of affecting their affairs, underscores the power disparities inherent in colonial interactions. Although Gulliver refuses to enslave people in Blefuscu, as he "plainly protested that I would never be an instrument of bringing a free and brave people into slavery" (Swift 48), this act of virtue is ironic, as Gulliver himself is a European who comes from a society that actively engages in the enslavement of other nations, a truth of his homeland that he appears too naive to recognize. Swift criticizes the imperialistic approach in the 18th century, highlighting Gulliver's protest against his "Imperial Majesty." Moreover, the war between Lilliput and Blefuscu is an allegory of that between England and France. Swift employs the way of cracking eggs as a satire of the trivial reasons behind the bloody, unnecessary European wars.

      Jonathan Swift criticizes the imperialistic European mindset in Gulliver's Travels by presenting Gulliver as an imperial explorer and colonizer and criticizing the corruption and meanness of the English government. Through his voyage to Brobdingnag, Gulliver experiences changes in perspectives to tackle the moral bankruptcy and ideological contradictions of European imperialism. He becomes powerless after being dominant and superior in Lilliput, which underscores a reversal of roles. However, his imperial mindset reflects the unjustified pride of the Englishman during that age. During Gulliver's argument with the Brobdingnagian king, Swift prefers direct word choice in "Murders, Massacres, Revolutions" (Swift 133) to anger the reader, highlighting the British violent and exploitative ambitions under the guise of civilization. Swift employs irony in the king's response to Gulliver's description of the British violent and colonial policies. Gulliver puts the fault on the king for being narrow-minded rather than focusing on the bloodshed resulting from the imperialistic attitudes of his country. The king presents a more enlightened, peaceful worldwide perspective, criticizing the European pursuit of power and conquest, and he describes the English people as "the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth (Swift 134). It addresses the ethical problems inherent in the imperial expansion and critiques the dehumanization of the colonizer towards the colonized.

     In conclusion, imperialism during the 18th century significantly influenced literature, reflecting the cultural and political tensions of that age. Both Daniel Defoe and Jonathan Swift reflect the imperial mindset in their works, portraying the colonizer-colonized relationship. Robinson Crusoe and Gulliver's Travels reflect economic, mental, and physical aspects of imperialistic practices during that age.

--------------------------------------

References:

Defoe, Daniel. Robinson Crusoe, Edited with an introduction by Prof. R. Awad, Cairo: The Anglo Egyptian Bookshop.

Swift, Jonathan. Gulliver's Travels, With an introduction by Dr. Mona Abousenna, Cairo: The Anglo Egyptian Bookshop.