"The Lovers thus, thus uncontroul'd did meet,
Thus all their Joyes and Vows of Love repeat:
Joyes which were everlasting, ever new
And every Vow inviolably true:
Not kept in fear of Gods, no fond Religious cause,
Nor in obedience to the duller Laws.
Those Fopperies of the Gown were then not known,
Those vain, those Politick Curbs to keep man in,
Who by a fond mistake Created that a Sin;
Which freeborn we, by right of Nature claim our own.
Who but the Learned and dull moral Fool
Could gravely have forseen, man ought to live by Rule?"
"And why, said he, my dear Friends and Fellow-sufferers, should we be Slaves to an unknown People? Have they Vanquish'd us Nobly in Fight? Have they Wone us in Honourable Battel? And are we, by the chance of War, become their Slaves? This wou'd not anger a Noble Heart, this wou'd not animate a Souldiers Soul; no, but we are Bought and Sold like Apes, or Monkeys, to be the Sport of Women, Fools and Cowards; and the Support of Rogues, Runagades, that have abandon'd their own Countries, for Rapin, Murders, Thefts and Villanies: Do you not hear every Day how they upbraid each other with infamy of Life, below the Wildest Salvages; and shall we render Obedience to such a degenerate Race, who have no one Humane Vertue left, to distinguish 'em from the vilest Creatures? Will you, I say, suffer the Lash from such Hands?" — from Oronooko, her tale about an enslaved African prince in Surinam
When it comes to biographical details, the Restoration poet and author Aphra Behn (1640-1689) may be close to limit of typability, considering how much of it is a mystery. She clearly felt comfortable swimming in the waters of secrecy and duplicity to the point she gave different versions of her parents, her name and her marriage ("Behn may have married Johan Behn", as Wikipedia says it, others suggest that the husband was invented for respectability, and in any case, it's not clear what was the reason for their separation). The self-presentation and the literary output survives, though, and is typable.
Her poetic style of writing is described as "free, somewhat risqué." The Restoration era was known for being relatively sexually liberated, especially when compared to Cromwell's Puritan dictatorship that preceded it, but Behn, it seems, was even more unfettered than average. Her poem "The Golden Age," quoted here, presents the ideal state as devoid of rigid laws, rules and "civilized" constraints, attacking the notion of honor for contributing to the formality that "first taught lovely Eyes the art, / To wound, and not to cure the heart." The Poetry Foundation asserts that "in her other poems as well, there is a precedence of close personal relationships over public enterprise." In her poems, she was willing to break conventional boundaries and norms, in sex as well as in broader morality.
Her preface to the Lucky Chance comedy is more SEE-ish — she wrote that she values fame almost as much as if she had been born a hero. But ultimately, she chose to live by her pen rather than seek a protector or to gather material power and political influence, even "feminine" behind-the-scenes one (likely the only one possible in her era) to herself. And despite its prideful tone, the preface ultimately asks for "the privilege for my masculine part, the poet in me," which is a claim to equal permission, in the face of being told that a bawdy comedy is unfit for a woman's pen, rather than to superiority. Her adventuruous career — she spied for Charles II, was never paid, borrowed to get home, went to debtor's prison for it, got out of it by unknown means — is, in any case, definitely one of an extraverted irrational.
Besides the poetry, she's famous today for the ambiguously anti-slavery novel Oronooko, about an African prince who was betrayed to be a slave in Surinam, a place which she may or may not have actually visited. The themes of this novel, in fact, are not laid straightforwardly and are endlessly debated. At the first impression, Behn primarily objects to a man of royal blood being deceived aboard a ship by a lying captain and treated as chattel. The colonists' sin is that they broke their word to a man whose quality was visible, making excuses not to emancipate him even as they recognize his qualities (despite her libertinism, Behn was a lifelong royalist). However, note that the main character does, in fact, make an anti-slavery argument, albeit one different from 18th century emancipationism: it's fine and noble to take slaves in war, but distant slave trade is something that arouses his indignation. So slavery is being tested not against a global principle, but against a narrative — was there a contest, was it fought, was it won? Absent that story, the relation is void. And the second half of his speech evaluates the moral character of his masters, and finds it wanting. The author judges the merit of the case off the particular person and of whether faith was kept between the parties involved.
The other possible diagnosis is EIE, since this type is also known for poetic innovation (see Lord Byron). But Behn doesn't seem that EIE-ish to me. Yes, Oronooko has a doomed noble prince in love with his fellow ex-noble enslaved woman, and a public dismemberment narrated in detail. But while EIE is definitely not a straightforward type, it's still one that has a direct, dramatic public projection. Behn's characteristic mode is wryly comic, which is not the typical EIE register. She writes her verse in the tone worldly amusement and commentary on the game of life, rather than emotional exaltation. Even in her African prince tale, she involves the reader by claiming to have been there and known him personally, not by raising the temperature herself.
Comments
Post a Comment