The Preface and Aspects of Morality in Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe

I find the preface to Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe to be especially interesting. It touches on a few important topics relative to 18^th century novels.  As readers, we are aware that it is the editor prefacing this novel. Defoe has distanced himself from personally providing the opening to his own accounts, which makes him seem unbiased.  The editor is claiming that Crusoe’s private adventures will be made “Publick” as though readers are offended by private thoughts. It is also interesting to note that the editor explains to readers that Crusoe’s adventures are various, therefore, demanding publication. The editor is highly regarding Defoe’s novel, and because the private is becoming public and because Crusoe’s adventures are in such “variety,” readers are trained to believe the novel is an account worth reading. What makes this novel even more attractive to readers is that it is about individual truths, focusing on one man’s adventures and perspective.  

Another interesting aspect about the preface is the way in which it shapes the reader’s perspective before she/he has even read the novel. The editor claims, “The story is told with Modesty, with Seriousness, and with a religious Application…which wise Men always apply them (viz. ) to the Instruction of others” (3).  Thus, the novel is meant to instruct readers.  What is interestingly different about this novel as opposed to Eliza Haywood’s Love in Excess is that readers are not in the dark about the novel’s didactic intentions. Haywood’s narrator does instruct readers at certain points in the novel, but we are told that Robinson Crusoe is meant to be critical of religious application, and upholds modest values. Morality is therefore built into the novel, and I wonder how this changes the reading of it. Readers begin the novel with the expectation of learning something new, perhaps about contemporary societal flaws or even shortcomings in their own morality.

Similar to Aphra Behn’s Oronooko, Robinson Crusoe is meant to be a “just History of Fact” (3). Thus, it is meant to be realistic. As a reader, being told the novel is void of “any appearance of Fiction,” I might not believe this, and will probably be skeptical about the validity of a novel that denies any aspects of fiction. However, then I think about our 21^st century society and how for example, when we see a movie in theatres, if the headline reads, “Based on true events,” we instantly take the movie more seriously. Perhaps this maneuver was to ensure that readers do not simply regard Robinson Crusoe as a novel of entertainment, but that it is also meant to be didactic. Moreover, it makes readers think that the story is real! The editor finds fact, not fiction, the works of this novel. It seems to me that at this point, the 18^th century is moving further away from Romance as a genre and possibly closer to realism, heroism, valor, and morality.

There are many instances in the novel that represent moral ideals. For example, we learn that Defoe set out to sea without his parent’s permission. He claims that he left home “without asking God’s Blessing, or my Father’s” (7). When at sea, and the winds began to blow heavily, Crusoe claims, “ I began now seriously to reflect upon what I had done, and how justly I was overtaken by the Judgment of Heaven for my wicked leaving my Father’s House” (7).  He also claims that if he gets on dry land again, he would go home directly to his father (8). The novel is teaching us that it is wrong to disobey your parents; if you go against God and your parents’ wishes, you will suffer.

Furthermore, I’m looking forward to discussing the novel’s tension between spiritualism/Christian morality and materialism/capitalism. The novel is filled with so much “stuff,” and the Puritans of the time will view this as materialistic. However, my question is, does Defoe balance this tension out? Does the novel justify materialism? Can we view Defoe as a hard working, self-made man? (See page 57, for example, where Crusoe makes candles and even a lamp, which provided him “Light”). In Christianity, Christ kept constantly working and improving, is Crusoe acting like Christ and stressing the importance of work?

I’m also curious as to when “things” became so important. Cruseo claims, “I found my self wanting in many Things” (57).  He also says, “I spent eighteen Days entirely in widening and deepening my Cave, that it might hold my Goods commodiously” (55). There is such an emphasis on “goods.” Do “things” determine someone’s identity?

Speaking of identity, does anyone think there is a good reason why Crusoe and Defoe rhyme? Any links between Defoe and his character?