Robinson Crusoe   by Daniel Defoe

Dec 27 - 29, 2005.     A Christmas gift from my loving, book-addict Mother.

To clear one thing up first though: it's a Christmas gift from one year ago, (I haven't gotten my Christmas parcel yet for this year.) Well now, It wasn't such a great book that I felt a necessity to read it all in three days. But, it was good, and enjoyable, and I felt that I had the time to read it. So I did. One other aspect that made me read it faster than I normally would have, was the way the book is formed; There are no chapters, breaks, or segments. The first half of the book is nearly divisible, into the separate early adventures, and then into separate days in his journal, (although these do not often have a feeling of completion, and are therefore not obvious ending places.) But after that, it is a continual stream, and when I felt that I had to stop reading, it was a matter of deciding between which two paragraphs to do it.

The book it's self is somewhat old, (being first printed nearly three hundred years ago,) and I don't find any of the... literary devices, which seem to pervade all more recent books. It feels that we've... developed a certain technology to our writing; that certain... forms of writing have been Discovered, and that these are included in most more modern works. (To try to name a few of these things, to illuminate what I mean, there seem to be few books now which don't at some time use the weather, or landscape, to reflect the feelings of the protagonist. Even if not directly, then we see through the thoughts of the protagonist, some of what he feels, through how he looks at the weather.) Has that helped to show what I mean at all? One way or another though, the writing style seems old to me. BUT, not bad. It was still interesting. (If not psychologically revealing, or intellectually stimulating, or poetically pleasing.) It was certainly well written.

Hmmm... I can't think of much more to say, (generally.) But, there were two bookmarks that I left in the book, as I was reading it: marking the two ideas therein which I found... in agreement with some of my own thoughts. The first was this: "All our discontents about what we want appeared to me to spring from the want of thankfulness for what we have." It is not such a profound thought, but I found it to be well expressed, (more so in it's relation to the text, than it is here,) and to have a truth to it.

Well, I think about it now, and find it's not a complete answer though; it's a Part of our unhappiness with what we have, but not the whole source of it. I don't have an answer though, about what else causes our discontent. I only recognize the symptom: We (of the employed, western world,) never quite feel satisfaction with our jobs, our income, and our lives. And then, we never seem to be quite sure how to enjoy our selves; getting high-tech, costly equipment? Going to films? Nights on the town? It seems to me that such experiences rarely bring as much pleasure as we feel they ought to.

Anyhow, the second thing that struck me as interesting, was when Robinson Crusoe(a good, English Protestant,) has befriended a "savage Native," and proceeds to give him an education in his True Religion. Crusoe finds it very easy to express the concept of God, (The One creator, and Father of all time and all things,) and finds that the native already has such concepts, and only needs specific (Christian) details added to it. Crusoe thinks that the principle of God must indeed be common to every group and tribe and village the world over. But, he then finds it exasperatingly difficult to convince the native of the existence of the Devil. It seems that this concept was entirely foreign, and unthinkable to the native.

This reminded me much of something I think I once learned from my Mother: namely, that she finds the Old Testament to be nice, (in it's way,) and a work with... a good message. And then, that mention of the Devil, only comes in the New Testament.I can see this as a darkening. And not part of the original message meant to be conveyed by the Bible. And, (in some ways,) a fabrication.

This is a bit of a wild thought that just came to me, but... could it be a useful, or a least interesting one? Could a comparison be made, between the current situation of the USA, and the situation of the church, (Back in whatever time the New Testament was added)? I think of this, because the response to the two situations could be the same: To bring Paranoia and Fear to the people. Because, to Terrify them so much, and then claim to be the one, and only possible safety, is to have a great, unbeatable control over them. (And the second half of that is what has been missing in my thoughts; I always thought that to have one's population living in fear was to have one's population in control. But now I see why: because besides being able to rid one's self of all enemies, by declaring them Enemies of the People, you can have the unthinking loyalty of those People, by declaring yourself the One true Guard, which can stop the Fearful Things.)

SO... I'd be rather curious to know: was the Devil officially added into the Bible at a time when the Church's power was being threatened? But enough with that odd thought.

There was a fairly strong Religious tone throughout the book, but this is understandable, considering the period in which it was written, (When the church still had very great sway in the lives of men and countries.) It annoyed me slightly, when it took a true Preaching Tone, and went on about how it wis Crusoe's Duty to bring the light of Faith to the poor unbelievers. But, this wasn't that often.

I am able to appreciate something else which was said though, now that I think of the time in which it was written: Crusoe has thoughts about killing all the Cannibal Savages that he can, seeing that they are not True believers, and have lives filled, to the greatest extent, with Sin. Surprisingly though, (I thought,) was that he eventually decides against this, because... of rather liberal feelings, with nearly a hint of Religious Acceptance of Others. I mean, that he thinks that as God made the world, he also made these people. And let them grow, and develop as they are. And will punish them for their sins only when, and as, He sees fit. So, Crusoe decides it is not his place to punish them, but to let nature, (God's will,) take it's due course.

To me, this sounded wonderfully like "Live and let Live," even if it was seen through a glass which coloured all the natives did Sin. I feel, (Especially at that time, hundreds of years ago,) that there were many too many people "meddling with the fates of others." (And taking it upon their Human, Mistakable selves, to carry out what they felt the will of God was.)

The end of the book, was a bit odd. But that also left the feeling of having a Tale, and not a story. I try to clarify my meaning: It seems less like a story, which is imagined, then constructed, with beginning, middle, and clear End. It felt more like the life of a man: where a number of things happen, and then less things happen, and then the time runs out, and there's some things half-happened, and others waiting to happen. But there's not time, or empty pages to tell of them.

And I seem to have written rather a lot, for a book that I found Decent, but not something astounding that I see myself reading again, (At least not in the next ten years.)