Review: 'Robinson Crusoe' by Daniel Defoe

'Robinson Crusoe' is an example of a novel that has become almost too popular for its own good. Everyone knows the story of the man who was shipwrecked on an abandoned island and has to build a life for himself there. Only few know how the novel actually works and until last week I was one of those people. I would probably never have read this novel if it hadn't been for University, but I think this was the perfect context in which to read a book which is, in all honesty, too detailed for its own good.

Shipwrecked in a storm at sea, Robinson Crusoe is washed up on a remote and desolate island. As he struggles to piece together a life for himself, Crusoe's physical, moral and spiritual values are tested to the limit. For 24 years he remains in solitude and learns to tame and master the island, until he finally comes across another human being. Considered a classic literary masterpiece, and frequently interpreted as a comment on the British Imperialist approach at the time, Defoe's fable was and still is revered as the very first English novel.

I gave myself almost two months before reviewing this novel after finishing it, because I wasn't sure how I actually felt about the novel as a whole. The premise is interesting, which is why the novel was survived this long, but it is very much a novel of its own time. Never has this much been written about 'she-goats' and the building of defensive walls on an abandoned island in any other work of fiction I've read. As I said above, there is an incredibly amount of detail in this book which might have been perfect back in the 1700s, adding credibility to Defoe's story, but clogging up the book for modern readers. Occasionally he skips over three years by simple stating he was busy building a cellar to store his crops in. It is impossible to belief that in those twenty-eight years that Robinson was stuck on that island, he never had either sexual or simply social desires but was perfectly content to colonize his little piece of Earth and come to terms with God and his own role in this world.

There is another aspect not many people are aware of: 'Robinson Crusoe' is an incredibly religious book. God and Providence permeate the book and are what guide Crusoe's thoughts and actions. Being completely alone, everything that happens is either the consequence of one of his own actions or has to be have come from God. The footprint is therefore a crucial part in the novel. Let's take a look at Robinson's response to the footprint:

'I stood like one thunderstruck, or as if I had seen an apparition.  I listened, I looked round me, but I could hear nothing, nor see anything; I went up to a rising ground to look farther; I went up the shore and down the shore, but it was all one; I could see no other impression but that one.'

Robinson has completely resigned himself to a solitary existence and the sudden 'apparition' of a footprint is not only a supernatural reminder that there is an entire world out there, but also a threat against the state he has built up there. The presence of a deity that has the power to change your life outside of your choice is a very important aspect of the novel that has not translated into popular culture.

However, I found 'Robinson Crusoe' quite enjoyable once you accepted the time period and genre within which it was written. The extraneous detail and the very imperialistic turn that the novel takes towards the end simply form part of the world Robinson and Defoe both come from. In many ways the true value of 'Robinson Crusoe' lies in it being one of the first, if not the first, novel that created a true psychological profile for its character. Crusoe's psyche is delved into and developed, bringing the reader a true travel novel that journeys through the mind as well as an undiscovered world.

I give this novel...

4 UNIVERSES!!!

Purely for the fact that the novel is very much of its own time and many of the aspects of its narrative haven't translated into popular culture, I have given this novel 4 rather than 5 Universes. I enjoyed it much more than 'Gulliver's Travels', an equally famous yet relatively unexplored novel written as a response to Defoe's novel, but mainly for the ideas it brought to the forefront of my mind, rather than for its own content.

Have you read 'Robinson Crusoe'? If yes, what did you think of it? If no, do you think you'd enjoy it?

Review: 'The War of the Worlds' by H.G. Wells

When I think of my childhood, it is a vibrant mix between Star Wars, Harry Potter, classical music and Jeff Wayne's adaptation of 'The War of the Worlds'. Nothing was ever as scary and thrilling as the Martians' 'Ulla'. Once I actually understood the words in the songs, I discovered that there was also a novel and immediately read it. That was a couple of years ago but now it has been brought back to my attention thanks to University and I have once again been sucked in by the amazing story. The Goodread's synopsis was terrible, so I've decided to use one from Amazon.

"The War of the Worlds" is a first-person narrative of an unnamed protagonist's adventures in London and the countryside southwest of London as Earth is invaded by Martians. Written in 1895-1897, it is one of the earliest stories that details a conflict between mankind and an alien race. The plot has been related to invasion literature of the time. The novel has been variously interpreted as a commentary on evolutionary theory, British imperialism, and on Victorian fears and prejudices. "The War of the Worlds" has been both popular (it has never gone out of print) and influential, spawning half a dozen feature films, radio dramas, various comic book adaptations, a television series, and sequels or parallel stories by other authors.

Before taking a look at the narrative and style of the novel, it is interesting to look at the ideas behind the novel and its foundation in the imperialistic culture Wells lived in. Wells was not the first or only one to write about alien words at the end of the Victorian age. Crucial to the development of this new sci-fi genre was Darwin's theory of evolution, interestingly enough. The idea that humans have evolved from ape-like animals, i.e. were once less developed, also opened up the possibility that the Victorians were not the height of modernity but might only be a lesser step on the stairway to perfection. Rather than invent silly aliens, Wells created a highly superior species that has no interest in communicating with humanity and that is where the true terror of the book lies. The Martians have only one goal, which is profiting from the Earth's resources, not establish contact. In many ways, Wells here echoes the Imperial sentiments of his time but presents them in a negative light. Although the Martians operate with cold intellect, at least their intention is not to maliciously harm humans. The suggestion is made that European colonizers were out to subject other people, not just countries, and rule over them. However, taking Wells' critical stance into account, he is unable to completely write off the possible advantages of an Empire. Being invaded by a superior species has brought new technology to the humans and has thereby improved their lives. 

I personally love the way in which The War of the Worlds is written. As the synopsis states, the story is told by an unnamed narrator. Although we know where he lives, what his profession is and that he has a brother in London, he is not a set character. As such, even the details of his life become stereotypical enough for him to be a template for any kind of reader to empathize with. As we travel through invaded England with him, the terror of the invasion comes a lot closer to the reader because, unlike in many modern alien movies for example, the reader has no contact to the outside world, does not know who survived and who died. This adds a sense of realism which might otherwise have been completely lost in a novel starring creatures from outer space. Although criticism on Wells often highlights the repetitive nature of his characters, he clearly knows this character and it allows him to mix his interest in science and human nature into one narrative.


The War of the Worlds had a lasting impact on popular culture. Aliens have been a constant presence in the cinemas and in science fiction, but not often do the new interpretations manage to live up to the original stories. The Jeff Wayne radioplay is one of the best adaptations around, fastly superior to the 2005 movie adaptation with Tom Cruise. Keeping the setting but changing the main character to a Journalist and introducing new female characters to balance out the otherwise completely male cast, Wayne and co brought the story into the 20th century while adding some great music. I highly recommend reading the lyrics to the songs, especially 'Thunderchild', 'Brave New World' and 'The Spirit of Man'. Naming one of the songs 'Brave New World' was a nice nod, considering Wells had been thought by Thomas Huxley, who was not only a big Darwin supporter but also the grand-father of Aldous Huxley, the author of the famous novel 'Brave New World'.

I give this novel...

5 UNIVERSES!!!

The War of the World is the novel in which fiction and science truly mixed for the first time. Wells creates a true horror story while still managing to give the reader an insight into human character. Besides that, some of his comic talent still occasionally shines through, making it an overall truly enjoyable read and deserved classic.

Busy Friday

Only got time for a quick one today, Friday's are slowly turning into way too busy days where I try to catch up on things I missed during the week, spend all day at work and then relax at the library, which has become my new haven. I have never spent as much time in an academic building than I have in the library this past week. It's like the concept of the library has only now gotten through to me and I cannot help myself from getting books that are completely non-related to my course. Currently, I have a copy of Nietzsche's work, Sagan's 'The Demon-Haunted World', a book on Paganism and on 'The Germanic Hero'. Ok, the last two are sort of related, but the first two were just cause I can. And that's not a healthy attitude when it comes to me and libraries because I have hardly seen any people this week...


Anyways, onto Follow Friday which is hosted by Alison Can Read and Parajunkee. This week's question:
Are there any book to movie adaptations where you think the movie is better than the book?

This is quite a difficult one, because I absolutely love watching movies, but I also love reading and the two are such different experiences that I can love watching the movie and then read the book straight after and they're two completely different experiences! I am a massive Jane Austen-fan, but I don't really like either Emma or Mansfield Park (please don't throw hate at me for not liking Emma). I absolutely loved the 2009 BBC series of the former though, with Romola Garai, who managed to not make Emma completely ridiculous to me. The 1999 film of Mansfield Park was also pretty good, although I still preferred Crawford over Edmund any time.

What I have just realised is that what both of those adaptations have in common is Johnny Lee Miller. I don't even really like him that much, but he's a good actor so I guess maybe he just helps smooth me into stories I don't really like.

So, how about you? What movie do you prefer over its book?

Waiting on Wednesday - I'm soo excited

I haven't done this meme in aaageees but since I am now genuinely excited about a book coming my way I simply couldn't help myself! Waiting on Wednesday is hosted by Jill over at Breaking the Spine.


I am not, as such, waiting for a new book to come out, but rather I'm waiting for an edition of an old book coming my way. Yesterday I finally managed to win a bidding on Ebay (first time in my life) and get myself a 1943 edition of 'Wuthering Heights' by Emily Bronte with Fritz Eichenberg illustrations. 

Wuthering Heights is a wild, passionate story of the intense and almost demonic love between Catherine Earnshaw and Heathcliff, a foundling adopted by Catherine's father. After Mr Earnshaw's death, Heathcliff is bullied and humiliated by Catherine's brother Hindley and wrongly believing that his love for Catherine is not reciprocated, leaves Wuthering Heights, only to return years later as a wealthy and polished man. He proceeds to exact a terrible revenge for his former miseries. The action of the story is chaotic and unremittingly violent, but the accomplished handling of a complex structure, the evocative descriptions of the lonely moorland setting and the poetic grandeur of vision combine to make this unique novel a masterpiece of English literature.

'Wuthering Heights' is always my answer when people ask me what my favourite book is because I just love it so much and there's always something I can talk about when people question me about why I would like this book.


The illustrations are amazing! I've always wanted a copy of this edition because they just fit perfectly with the story. They're so gothic and sharp and just really underline the different aspects and themes of the story.

So, what are you waiting for?

Lisa Fray: 'Authenticity and the Author's Intrusion into Fiction'

Some of you might remember the amazing guestpost that Lisa Fray did for Universe in Words a while back. Well, I have good news: she's back, this time with a piece about fiction and authenticity. 

Authenticity and the Author's Intrusion into FictionIt is difficult to forget what you know about an author when you are reading one of their books, but the sorts of authorial intrusions that can occur when you know all about an author's history or opinions can have a big impact on your experience of their work. Sometimes, it can enhance the experience, by giving us a sense that we are hearing from someone who really knows what they are talking about, but in other cases, it can prevent us from valuing the work for its own merits. It can also leave us searching for "authenticity" in fiction, rather than allowing authors to live separate lives from their creations. We can end up expecting authors to prove to us that they can give us better insight into that fictional world than anyone else. They are required to show their qualifications before we will suspend our disbelief.

Authenticity and VoiceMany authors tend to write about people and subjects that are close to their own background, but if we required authors to prove that they have real life experience matching the lives of their characters, we would limit creativity too much. Writers do often write about writers, but we shouldn't feel that this is the only subject they can cover, and we need to be wary about questioning how and why authors write across cultures, nationalities and sexes. There has been a nasty tendency in the past to believe that the Western middle class male norm is universal, while everyone outside it must be limited. Writers can then be attacked for writing outside their own experiences, but devalued for sticking to them because they aren't the traditional material of "great" literature.

Authenticity and the AutobiographicalReaders seeking authenticity don't just want authors to speak from their own real-life background, they also search for specific autobiographical elements in their works. We often believe that we see the author in their characters, particularly when books blur the lines between fiction and fact. When we read David Copperfield, we want to see it as a sort of autobiography of Dickens. It is a tendency that authors often play with, suggesting that they are recounting true histories, presenting real diaries or letters that they have only edited, or creating characters who are very similar to themselves. Many authors write about people who live in the same city, who are part of the same culture, or who resemble the public persona they cultivate. Some even indulge in metafictional games, introducing themselves as characters in their own books. A few authors have gone even further. They make their books explicitly autobiographical, or pretend that a fictional work is based on more truth that it actually contains. This is where the fun of playing with the line between the real and the imaginary can leave readers feeling cheated.

Cheating at Authenticity
The problem with the quest for authenticity in literature is that it makes us judge books by how much expertise and authority an author has over a particular topic, rather than by the quality, or even the actual accuracy, of the work. It doesn't matter how realistic a novel about drug addiction and poverty is, or how well it enables readers to empathize with its characters, it just matters whether the author has ever been a drug user. The classic example of a novel that was suddenly re-evaluated when its author's authenticity was challenged is A Million Little Pieces by James Frey, which was accepted by publishers only after the author stopped describing it as a novel and started suggesting it was his true-life story. When it was later revealed to be fiction, readers suddenly felt that their experiences with the book had been cheapened. If the author hadn't actually struggled with recovery in a rehabilitation centre, then his readers suddenly couldn't believe in his characters anymore. Frey is not alone in having lost his readers' confidence after his true relation to his narrator was unmasked, but when readers are begging for more authenticity, it is easy to see why authors would fall back on the time-honoured techniques that convinced readers that Robinson Crusoe was real, or that The War of the Worlds was coming true. Asserting that fiction is true is all part of the game between author and reader that makes fiction work, but it only works as long as we all know that we are playing.

When Authenticity Goes Too FarThe desire for authenticity in fiction can be linked to our need to feel that books can make us better people, by giving us insight into the lives of people who are completely different from ourselves, but in looking for this kind of "reality" in an author's relationship with their creations, we risk limiting both our own interpretations of literature, and the scope which we will allow our authors to cover. It can be interesting to learn that the author's childhood resembled that of the main character, or that their former career has been turned into fiction, but we should be wary of placing too much importance on this type of authenticity. Authors do write from their own experiences, but they don't have to write autobiographical fact. Imagination and empathy allow us to use our own experiences to understand the people we encounter in both real life and fiction, and this means that there are no boundaries we cannot cross when reading or writing literature.

So, what do you think? I think authenticity should only matter to a certain extent. Sure, I want my fiction to be realistic, but we read books because we want to escape and maybe enter a world we thought impossible.

Here are some links to other articles Lisa has written:

The Power of Art, Pablo Picasso and Health Benefits of Aerial Arts. 

I can't believe I'm actually managing to post something...

I have been incredibly busy between doing reading for University (which has increased exponentially from last year and includes the much despised Wordsworth) and working, while freaking out about essays which are due in 3 weeks (who came up with a mid-November deadline?), but I really wanted to do a Friday meme post because, to be honest, I miss them and everyone's answers to the questions. Also, I am looking for book ideas as a gift for my sister, so who knows what I'll find today!


The Book Blogger Hop is hosted by Billy over at Ramblings of a Coffee Addicted Writer and this week is a Halloween special:
What is your favourite horror novel and why?

I don't actually think I've read that many horror novels. I think 'Frankenstein' by Mary Shelley counts, no? I really like that book, despite its occasional theatricality which usually turns me off other books. There is just something about Viktor Frankenstein that I dislike so much that it becomes fun to read him go paranoid. And it is an amazing text to know here at University because you can always compare it to other novels, somehow.

To my shame I have to admit I've never read any Stephen King or H.P. Lovecraft, but I definitely want to get onto the latter because a friend of mine swears by his books. I am actually quite easily scared by things I read, I have had two nightmares related to Carlos Ruiz Zafon's novels (don't judge).


Book Beginnings is hosted by Rose City Reader and Friday 56 by Freda's Voice. This week I'm using 'The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' by Robert Louis Stevenson. I'm using it for one of my essays and discovered that I actually quite liked it while rereading it.

BB:

'MR. Utterson the lawyer was a man of a rugged countenance that was never lighted by a smile; cold, scanty and embarrassed in discourse; backward in sentiment; lean, long, dusty, dreary and yet somehow lovable.'

How a man like that could be lovable I'm not quite sure, unless it's in that surely, grumpy kind of way where you can't help but enjoy how much he hates everything and stumbles over his words in social situations.

F56:

'Small indeed was my appetite.'

That has never really happened to me so this might be the true point in the book where I found it hard to relate to Dr. Jekyll. We've all felt a little bit evil in our own time, but I've always been hungry afterwards.

So, what did you pick? And what is your favourite horror novel? Has it terrified you to tears?

Blood Series: Character Interview - Meet Dominic

I am very glad to present to you, an interview with Dominic Khaled from Ashley Nemer's 'Blood Series'.

Hello there – I’m Nadia Maverick, of the Cedar Rapids Mavericks and I’m here today to sit down with Dominic Khaled, son of the infamous Haydar. Hopefully this interview goes better than the one I had with Haydar … but given they are family, I’ll just be glad I’m not eaten alive. Nadia: Good Morning Dominic. Thank you for taking the time to sit with me today, I really appreciate it.Dominic: Not like I had much of a choice – I was told if I wanted to be mentioned in any more books by our Author that I had to attend. And apparently be nice. Nadia: Well I’ll try not to make this too painful for you, how about that?Dominic: Nah, I like pain. Nadia: Well, okay then. How about we just get down to the nitty gritty. Ashley created this exciting world of vicious and different vampires. How do you think it compares to the others that are already out there? For instance, Twilight and Sookie Stackhouse.
Dominic: First Nadia, we are Algula. Please get our race right. And the main difference with us, just because we are “vampires” that doesn’t make us what we are. It’s as simple as, you’re a human with brown hair. That doesn’t define you. You cannot put Algula into a cookie cutter vampire outline and expect it to be accurate. We are anything but normal. Nadia: How are you not normal? Please elaborate.Dominic: For instance, Algula can die. We are not immortal. If we are lucky we will live 4,500-5,000 years. While to you humans that is practically immortal, reality, it’s not. Nadia: Is that the only thing that doesn’t make you normal? That hardly seems like a label killer.Dominic: You didn’t let me finish, impatient woman. Our Algula also control the elements. We gain this ability through our blood line. Not any two Algula will be identical because our blood lines aren’t. Even brother and sisters, or twins won’t have the same chemical make-up. Nadia: What do you control?Dominic: I control the element of fire. Nadia: And who else controlled that in your family?Dominic: My father passed it onto me, and he received that from his mother, my grandmother Afaf. I never met her but I have heard stories of her ability. Nadia: Do you need human blood to live?Dominic: Isn’t that a definition of, “vampire”? Nadia: Well you said you weren’t normal, so I thought I would ask.Dominic: We need blood to live. Human blood is the strongest for us. Let me put it this way; you humans need meat to survive. It gives you iron and all that crap you need to be strong and healthy, so I can eat you. But you survive without meat; you find other things to nourish you. It’s the same for us. Nadia: Why human blood, why not cow or chicken or dog?Dominic: You want me to go eat a dog? Nadia: No, I’m just asking, why us humans.Dominic: Because you were our creation. Nadia: I do believe science would debate you on that Dominic. We have never been known to come from vampires.Dominic: You know what we allowed you to know and the rest we willed in with what we wanted you to know. My ancestors were the children of the Gods. They needed nourishment and so, created humans. You’re like cattle to us. We made you in our image so you would be the perfect source of nutrition to our system. We allowed you to breed and populate so we wouldn’t have to continue creating more of you. All of those stories in your bible that you know, we are the creators.
 Nadia: My, that’s … quite a … I don’t know what to call that, tale?Dominic: It’s not a tale Nadia. It’s the truth. Look, I’m doing my job, I’m not eating you, I came here to be nice, like I was told to do by everyone. But if you’re not going to believe me I can just leave. Nadia: Sorry, no, don’t leave. I do have another question.Dominic: Proceed… Nadia: How do you feel about Blood Yellow, and the way the stories are unfolding?Dominic: I hope my sister rips my father apart and makes him pay for all the bull-shit he’s put us through my entire life. Nadia: After reading these two books I can see why you would say that.Dominic: Yeah – are we done here? Nadia: Yes I suppose. I think I have enough for a good story.Dominic: Alright – make sure you tell everyone I’m the most vicious and sadistic of the Khaled’s. That my pain will have vengeance and when it does, Haydar won’t know what’s coming. Nadia: I will note that but Dominic, how are you going to do that – your character…Dominic: Silence! I will have my way, even in death I will haunt him and destroy what he claims. After that I watched Dominic flash away – I have to say, that was one of the oddest interviews I’ve had. ** Dominic and Nadia can be found on the Art of Safkhet’s website. Both are characters created by Ashley Nemer for two different series. To check out more please visit www.artofsafkhet.com **

I love character interviews, they're just so much fun to read!