Oroonoko

In Oroonoko, the narrator displays a pleasant view on the natives of Surinam and what Locke would call their state of nature. “Religion would here but destroy that tranquility they possess by ignorance, and laws would but teach them to know offence, of which they have no notion” (10). To the narrator, the people are in a perfect state of no-knowledge and such ignorance is bliss. The narrator, or Behn, has a Lockean sense of state of the natives. Antipodal to the opinion of the natives of Surinam, the narrator has a dim view of the whites and views their contrivances as things that are unjust. In regards to the natives and the way they govern: “They have a native justice, which knows no fraud, and they understand no vice or cunning, but when they are taught by the white men” (10). It is the introduction of outside elements that tarnishes the natives instead of having a positive effect and enlightening them. That is the destruction of the state of nature. I think this is a clever use of juxtaposition in that when Oroonoko is introduced into the novel, he is presented with such grandeur and reverence. As evidence: “The most famous statuary could not form the figure of man more admirably turned from head to foot” (15). He comes from the people who are perfectly peaceful and are without the need of external resources. Oroonoko has all these conquests and victories over the whites, both real and metaphorical. He represents the very best of the natives and what they stand for: self-sufficiency, nature, virtue, honesty, and strength.

Ultimately, even though there is a sense of struggle in Behn’s writing between native and British dominance, and the British seem to win that battle some of the time, in making their societal norms and their education seem greater by the narrator, Oroonoko comes out on higher ground, because he is willing stand up to the hegemony and willing to give up everything; and by association, the natives do, too.