Foe

I’m not really sure how I felt about Foe. Most of the books that we’ve read this year have left a definitive mark in my mind, but I felt rather “eh” about this one. It was definitely interesting and intriguing, but nothing really mindblowing.

I did, however, love the idea of the corruption of truth via media. Obviously, in the day and age where this story takes place, media was mostly in the form of text, but the message still rings true. The complete shift from the truth of Sarah Barton’s story to this great, heroic tale show the importance of the almighty dollar, and how we truly are willing to do anything just for money. I suppose that this story doesn’t just apply to the creative spirit, but to any aspect of life where the truth is altered just for monetary gain. The most prominent image in my mind is the slaughtering of sharks by the Japanese. The Japanese people market their senseless killing of thousands of innocent animals by stating that it is for public safety, yet more people die every year by having vending machines fall on top of them… If we’re really that concerned about public safety, I guess we better torch all vending machines.

I also found Crusoe himself to be a rather intriguing character. I far preferred the Crusoe of Foe to that of Daniel DeFoe’s classic tale. In the original piece, Crusoe appeared far too perfect of a castaway, really. He just didn’t seem plausible. The Crusoe of Foe appeared far more realistic, and he showed this real mental shift from the “civilized” world to complete isolation. After spending however many years on an island all by one’s lonesome, I feel that one would almost become more content in solitude. As well, Crusoe of Foe showed far more mental and emotional complexity. I really could see Crusoe as a human whose lost all sense of authority and structure in life. Daniel DeFoe’s Crusoe just didn’t sit well with me…