GENDER ROLES REVISITED: FRIDAY AS "THE SECOND SEX" IN ROBINSON CRUSOE

Abstract

Daniel Defoe's canonical text, Robinson Crusoe (1719), has received feminist criticism for its lack of female representations. The limited representation of female characters reflects the patriarchal ideology of the time, which viewed women as inferior and less important than men. Initially, the presence of women in the novel is observed through Robinson's mother's traditional gender role as the protector mother. However, it later becomes evident that gender dynamics implicitly operate over hierarchical relations between the central characters of Friday and Robinson. The relationship between the two is complex and multifaceted, inviting diverse perspectives and critical readings. The study, hence, unpacks how Friday is depicted as occupying a gendered position that is traditionally associated with femininity and that is often subjugated by Robinson's patriarchal authority akin to women in traditional family settings. Examining how Robinson and Friday are gendered through narration, dialogue, and descriptions makes it possible to uncover how gender is constructed and reinforced. Benefiting from the discourses of theorists such as Butler, and de Beauvoir, the study examines how the relationship between language, religion, culture, power, and gender forms through the example of Friday, concluding that gender roles can emerge as both masculine and feminine among men even in the absence of female characters.

Headnote

Abstract: Daniel Defoe's canonical text, Robinson Crusoe (1719), has received feminist criticism for its lack of female representations. The limited representation of female characters reflects the patriarchal ideology of the time, which viewed women as inferior and less important than men. Initially, the presence of women in the novel is observed through Robinson's mother's traditional gender role as the protector mother. However, it later becomes evident that gender dynamics implicitly operate over hierarchical relations between the central characters of Friday and Robinson. The relationship between the two is complex and multifaceted, inviting diverse perspectives and critical readings. The study, hence, unpacks how Friday is depicted as occupying a gendered position that is traditionally associated with femininity and that is often subjugated by Robinson's patriarchal authority akin to women in traditional family settings. Examining how Robinson and Friday are gendered through narration, dialogue, and descriptions makes it possible to uncover how gender is constructed and reinforced. Benefiting from the discourses of theorists such as Butler, and de Beauvoir, the study examines how the relationship between language, religion, culture, power, and gender forms through the example of Friday, concluding that gender roles can emerge as both masculine and feminine among men even in the absence of female characters.

Keywords: Robinson Crusoe, Friday, Gender, Narration, The Second Sex.

Introduction

Robinson Crusoe (1719)1 narrates the story of a man named Robinson Crusoe stranded on a deserted island for twenty-eight years. While the novel is often seen as a tale of adventure and survival, it also reflects the patriarchal values of its time. Feminist literary theory emphasises the importance of exploring how gender roles and power dynamics are constructed in literary texts and how these constructions reflect and reinforce social norms and values. A mainstream feminist reading would detail how women are systematically disadvantaged both in private and public spaces. When the word feminism comes into effect, it, by its very nature, invites readers to concentrate on the power relationships between the two sexes, namely men and women, within a given text. However, this study problematizes femininity not as a concept necessarily associated with women but as a social construction that can operate even in the absence of female characters, through cultural perceptions and power dynamics.

As a canonical text, Robinson Crusoe possesses, in the words of Harold Bloom a "[...] richness of interpretation and the ability [...] to accommodate multiple readings"2 that would vary across centuries. Since its publication, it has resonated prominently with anti-imperial analyses, postcolonial theory, or discussions on capitalist discourses. However, none of these mainstream readings could fully reveal if not exhaust further potentials of the novel. This fact is in line with Bloom's interpretation of a given classical text: "A classic is a work that has stood the test of time, and because it has stood the test of time, it invites rereading, different interpretations, and further exploration."3 Within the margins of literary criticism, Robinson Crusoe encourages ongoing interpretation through diverse theoretical readings and cultural perspectives. Bloom's scholarly contribution highlights the enduring significance of Defoe's work, demonstrating its capacity to stimulate critical discourse and engage readers across time and space.

Taken outside the mainstream readings, the novel bears the potential to offer a divergent reading on the intersections of gender and power relations. Robinson Crusoe was shipwrecked on a supposedly uninhabited island. Having discovered the presence of a native man that he named Friday on the island, Robinson indoctrinates his new fellow into assuming practices of Christianity and Western culture. An unequal power dynamic can characterise the relationship between the two men. Robinson exercises power over Friday by teaching him language, religion, and labour skills, thereby controlling his knowledge and reshaping his identity. Michael Foucault4 emphasises the interconnectedness of power and knowledge, stating that "power is not an institution, and not a structure; neither is it a certain strength we are endowed with; it is the name that one attributes to a complex strategical situation in a particular society." Robinson, deemed "superior" due to his Western background, occupies a strategic position that enables him to generate power through language and knowledge. This dynamic, which allows him to control Friday, aligns with Foucault's understanding of the relationship between power and knowledge. Several studies have focused on Robinson Crusoe as a canonical text through critical accounts of colonialism, imperialism, patriarchy, capitalism, and economic and individual freedom. This study mainly focuses on the relationship between Robinson and Friday to further explore how the latter is feminised culturally and socially.

The Problem of the Study

The absence of female characters in the novel, apart from a passing mention of Crusoe's mother, suggests a lack of female agency and voice within the narrative. Claiming that gender roles can even operate in the absence of female figures, this research interrogates traditional perceptions in gender studies. Rather than focusing on a relationship between men and women, the research offers new insights in the case of two men through gender performativity. In this way, the study problematizes canon formation and ideological messages perpetuated therein. As such, western images of patriarchal men during the 18th century that pertain even today are challenged by demonstrating that the images of men as self-sufficient, adventurous, practical, and superior over women have more to do with cultural perceptions rather than a biological matter as claimed by patriarchal narratives.

The Purpose of the Study

The rationale of this research springs from the title of Simone de Beauvoir's acclaimed book The Second Sex (1953).5 The novel's absence of female characters offers a potential gap for research on gender performativity. This gap exemplifies how gender is constructed and performed through language and narrative structure in literary texts. The masculinist viewpoint that dominates the novel evokes de Beauvoir's (1953) assertion of "the second sex" in critiquing women's perceived secondary status as promoted by cultural and social norms.6

A closer look at the novel hints at the ways through which Friday is enforced, like millions of women on earth, to assume his gender identity as the second sex. This suggests that Friday, albeit a male figure, deviates from traditional gender roles when he embarks on a hierarchal relationship with a white European man. The way Friday is treated evokes the reality that women are systematically and culturally made to internalise gender expectations of femininity both in public and private domains. The study hence demonstrates that gender identities are not fixed and biological as promoted by patriarchal doctrines but fluid and social depending on the circumstances in which they are created.

Theoretical Framework

This study benefits from intersecting theories that detail how power relations operate between Robinson and Friday. Interpretation of Friday potentially with feminine characteristics or gender non-conforming highlights the ways in which gender roles are not fixed or innate but are instead socially constructed and subject to change over circumstances. To apply Simone de Beauvoir's assertion, "One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman,"7 to the case of Friday, the feminist theory of gender performativity developed by Judith Butler (1990) comes into effect.8 According to Butler (1990), gender is not a fixed or natural attribute, but a social construct performed through repeated acts or behaviours.9 Gender is not something one "has," but something one "does." In the case of Friday, his gender is constructed through his interactions with Robinson and the cultural norms of the society that Robinson carried over the supposedly uninhabited island.

Robinson and Friday embark on a relationship that is sustained through power dynamics in a rigid hierarchal manner. Michel Foucault's concept of power-knowledge discourse10 is particularly relevant to an analysis of the construction of Friday as the "second sex." Foucault argues that power is not solely held by individuals or groups but rather is dispersed throughout society and operates through discourses, institutions, and social practices.

These power-knowledge discourses unpack how Friday and Robinson shape the way they understand and experience the world. The discourse operates to maintain and reproduce existing power relations between the two. In this way, Friday's identity construction as the second sex is grounded in the dominant masculine identity embodied and perpetuated by Robinson. Foucault writes that "the deployment of sexuality is connected with a complex network of power relations".11 He argues that discourses about sexuality are used to control individuals and groups and that this control is exerted through various forms of knowledge and power. Assigning or creating a feminine sexuality for Friday makes it easier for Robinson to control him to his own needs.

Friday's portrayal of backward and submissive creates a space for Robinson to build his own sense of masculinity. To borrow from John Locke12, Friday can be considered a "blank slate" on which Robinson scribbles his patriarchal motivations. Robinson introduces gender relations to the island. In the absence of a woman, he practically applies hierarchal domination over Friday to make use of his services as much as possible. To sustain patriarchal control over the island, he forces Friday to internalise feminine traits and makes him follow his orders accordingly.

The existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre13 famously wrote that "existence precedes essence," meaning that individuals create their own identity through their actions and choices rather than being predetermined by some inherent nature or essence. Existentialism emphasizes individual freedom and choice, and the meaning and purpose of human existence can also be traced within the relationship between the two. Robinson does not attempt to learn Friday's culture or norms that are likely to have created Friday's unique identity; instead, he becomes the norm according to whom readers are expected to perceive Friday. The ways Robinson perceives the island evokes the existentialist assertion that being-in-the-world is a meaning-giving activity.14 His engagement with the objects on the island is an act of meaning-giving according to his motivations and gender preferences. This is particularly relevant to discussions of gender and femininity, as the meanings associated with femininity and what it means to be a woman are not natural or fixed but are constructed and constantly evolving within cultural and social contexts. Robinson Crusoe uses various tools on the island to sustain himself and produce necessities for survival. Some of the tools he uses include axes, knives, saws, hammers, and shovels. With these tools, he builds a shelter, constructs fences, hunts for food, cultivates crops, and crafts various items for his daily needs. Most references here are often made to the tools and works associated with production that are masculinized. Meanings for the objects come out of the experiences that are mostly gender based. In this context, Friday's experience of the world is shaped by the meanings and values assigned to his gender by the dominant culture, rather than being a product of his own agency and subjectivity.

Patriarchal Ideology During the Eighteenth Century

The novel was first published in 1719, at a time when rigid gender roles and patriarchy were deeply dominant in Western society. The concept of gender as a social construct was not yet widely acknowledged. In the 18th century, the perceived and dominant belief that men were naturally superior to women was challenged gradually. During that time span, women were expected to be submissive and obedient with their roles limited to the domestic sphere, while men were supposed to be strong, independent, and rational. Robinson Crusoe's decision to leave his family behind and embark on a journey of exploration and economic freedom is seen as an act of expressionist behaviour that could be associated with masculinity. Robinson's journey is also depicted as a journey of self-discovery and personal growth, which can be read as a journey into exploring and constructing his masculinity. The fact that women in his life are portrayed in the form of passing references such as his mother and wife, renders them passive figures devoid of equal opportunities for exploration and development.

The novel features masculine strength and independence. For example, the novel's protagonist, Robinson, features several of the qualities associated with the ideal masculinity of that time. He is resourceful, courageous, and self-reliant, even surviving on a deserted island through his ingenuity and hard work. In contrast, Friday, the novel's only other major male character, is depicted as submissive and hence secondary in concern and importance. Robinson's success on the island is often attributed to his ability to create a profitable economy through his own labour and ingenuity based on his perceived masculinity. This reflects the dominant belief in the 18th century that men are naturally suited for business and economic success, while women are relegated to the domestic sphere.

While Friday is not explicitly presented as a woman, this portrayal of him as a vulnerable and dependent figure reflects the social and cultural expectations placed on women in the 18th century. Women were often seen as needing protection and provision from men and were expected to be obedient and subservient to male authority. The fact that Friday is presented in a similar manner suggests that the novel is perpetuating these gendered expectations and power dynamics. This dynamic is further reinforced by the fact that Robinson is presented as being in a position of power and authority over Friday. Robinson assumes the role of the "breadwinner," and "protector" providing for Friday's needs, while the latter is depicted as obedient to the commands of the patriarch, reminiscent of the patriarchal control exercised by men over women through traditional gender roles.

Analysis and Discussion: Friday as "The Second Sex"

An initial reading of the novel could hint at the ways in which Friday's ethnic identity relegates him to an inferior status before the "white man." However, a close reading of the novel also suggests that the patriarchal perspective employed can create the ways in which Friday is feminised. As such, Friday's performative identity can be read through de Beauvoir's "the second sex" due to his subordination to Robinson's dominant masculine identity. The way he is depicted as submissive and passive perverts the codified male behaviour in the society of that time. As such, Robinson imposes specific behavioural patterns upon Friday in line with the cultural and social norms of the period in which the novel is set.

The concept of "the second sex" refers to the culturally perceived position of women as subordinate to men in a given society. Friday's position as a subordinate to Crusoe is evident throughout the novel. Crusoe, as a white European man, occupies a position of power and control over Friday, who is portrayed as a "savage" and a "heathen" due to his non-European background. The following quote gives a vivid account of the hierarchal relationship in which Friday is totally submissive to Robinson's authority:

I beckon'd him again to come to me, and gave him all the Signs of Encouragement that I could think of, and he came nearer and nearer, kneeling down every Ten or Twelve steps in token of acknowledgement for my saving his Life: I smil'd at him, and look'd pleasantly, and beckon'd to him to come still nearer; at length he came close to me, and then he kneel'd down again, kiss'd the Ground, and laid his Head upon the Ground, and taking me by the Foot, set my Foot upon his Head; this it seems was in token of swearing to be my Slave for ever; I took him up, and made much of him, and encourag'd him all I could.15

This scene offers a chance to critique the patriarchal perspective, as Robinson Crusoe's viewpoint may predispose him to merely perceive other cultures and individuals as tools serving his interests. The narration of this scene is entirely from Robinson Crusoe's perspective. Readers are not given the opportunity to consider whether Friday's actions, such as "kneeling" or "taking him by the food," as a non-European character, constitute a display of respect or an introductory ritual stemming from his own cultural background. From this perspective, Friday's actions may indicate his adherence to his own cultural codes and values. However, through Robinson-centred narration, these actions appear to be presented to reinforce his motivations of power and control on the island. By normalising Friday's submission and service to him, Robinson presents himself as superior and dominant in this relationship. This can be considered an example of the patriarchal perspective, consolidating its own power and domination, not respecting different cultures and individuals.

The language used in the quote also reflects a gendered dynamic, with Robinson taking on a traditionally masculine role as the dominant figure, and Friday taking on a traditionally feminine role as the submissive figure. The ways Daniel Defoe presents Friday's gestures of submissiveness and deference, such as kneeling and kissing the ground, are reminiscent of traditional gender roles in which women are expected to defer to men and to be subservient to their authority.

Robinson's acceptance of Friday as "his slave" may reflect male dominance and power relations in gender roles. Here, Robinson's power and authority manifest in how Friday serves and submits to him. Friday's passivity and submission in this scene can also be associated with ideals of masculinity. His admiration for Robinson and desire to serve him may reflect dependence on a strong and impressive male figure in the context of masculine ideals. Robinson indoctrinates Friday into Western norms and behaviours, effectively imposing his own cultural values on him. In this way, Friday becomes a loyal servant to Robinson, performing domestic-based tasks, such as cooking, hunting, and building shelter, whereas Robinson Crusoe appears as the bread-winner.

Initially, the absence of any prior knowledge about gender relations on the island suggests that Robinson becomes the norm according to which gender norms and dynamics have been shaped on the island. Most of the novel exemplifies how Robinson forces Friday to internalise feminine traits to follow his orders accordingly. In this way, Robinson's comfort zone as the only patriarch on the island is reassured and sustained. The monolithic relationship between the two highlights how masculine traits are employed as a mechanism of control.

Gender is not solely determined by biological sex but rather constructed through cultural codes and norms. Butler states that gender is "an identity tenuously constituted in time, instituted in an exterior space through a stylized repetition of acts."16 The idea that Friday's feminisation is a result of cultural construction rather than biology challenges traditional binary notions of gender, and it suggests that gender is not an essential characteristic but rather a fluid and changing identity that can be constructed and deconstructed depending on the circumstances individuals are in. For instance, with Friday's inclusion in the novel, Robinson assumes the role of breadwinner as the one expected to meet the basic needs of Friday as evoked within the following quote:

I [Robinson] begun now to consider, that having two Mouths to feed, instead of one, I must provide [emphasis added] more Ground for my Harvest, and plant a larger quantity of Corn, than I us'd to do; so I mark'd out a larger Piece of Land, and began the Fence in the same Manner as before [...]17

Here, the idea that Robinson feels he must feed "two mouths" reflects his traditional gender roles in society. Robinson, who had to meet only his own needs while living alone, now also takes care of Friday. This indicates traditional gender roles, where men have a strong and protective role in society and are responsible for caring for the family as "the breadwinner." Friday has a more passive role in this situation, as he is depicted as a figure who works alongside Robinson, who finds him a job, feeds him, and protects him. The statements in the quote signal the initial rise of gender division of labour and hence power dynamics between the two akin to the one practised within a traditional family setting.

Narration and Language

In the novel, Friday is depicted as a non-European largely unable to communicate his thoughts and demands coherently due to his broken English. The dominant culture denies his agency as he stands in a subjugated position. In a traditional family setting, the control of language signals the patriarch's control over women. The patriarchal ideology 'empowers' men in a way that their control of language is translated into control of women accordingly.

One aspect of Friday's position as the second sex can be seen in his relationship with language. In The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language18, Foucault analyses the ways in which knowledge is produced and transmitted through language and discourse. Robinson is the primary narrator throughout the novel, and his perspective and experiences dominate the text. This dominance of the male voice reinforces the idea that men are the primary agents of power and knowledge and that their experiences and perspectives are more valuable than those of women. Readers are given Friday's perceived inferiority through the narration:

Here I gave him Bread, and a Bunch of Raisins to eat, and a Draught of Water, which I found he was indeed in great Distress for, by his Running; and having refresh'd him, I made Signs for him to go lie down and sleep; pointing to a Place where I had laid a great Parcel of Rice Straw, and a Blanket upon it, which I used to sleep upon myself sometimes; so the poor Creature laid down, and went to sleep.19

Robinson shares his experiences on the island through patronizing and controlling language. This form of language is shaped by masculine motivations such as hunting, exploring, and inventing. In order for Robinson's masculinity to exert its influence, Friday needs to be feminised and educated. This dynamic allows Robinson to maintain control over Friday, despite the latter potentially possessing superior knowledge of the island as a long-time resident. Robinson's control over language enables him to dictate the positioning of Friday as the one to be defined and himself as the norm, along with shaping the perception of the material world around them.

The ways in which Robinson indoctrinates Friday into learning a language can also evoke Lacan's reference to the function of language in shaping and promoting gender roles. According to Lacan20, human beings are fundamentally divided subjects, shaped by the symbolic orders of language, culture, and social norms. Lacan's ideas about identification are particularly relevant to an analysis of Friday's position as the second sex. As a non-European character, Friday's identity and sense of self are shaped by his identification with European cultural and linguistic norms. For example, Friday's adoption of Christianity and his learning of the English language from Robinson can be seen as emblematic of this process of identification. These cultural and linguistic norms are fundamental to the formation of Friday's gendered and cultural identity, and they play a central role in shaping his relationship with Robinson and the other European characters in the novel.

Language and communication are regulated and controlled by Robison, having the first and the last words in their communication. Friday is expected to conform to European standards of behaviour and expression. In other words, the one having more access to linguistic and cultural knowledge can shape the way the other perceives the world. This suggests that Friday's own experiences and perspectives are largely ignored as those of women in traditional family settings. Friday's inability to express himself fully in English can be seen as a reflection of this broader process of cultural erasure and subjugation as the following quote highlights:

At last he lays his Head flat upon the Ground, close to my Foot, and sets my other Foot upon his Head, as he had done before; and after this, made all the Signs to me of Subjection, Servitude, and Submission imaginable, to let me know, how he would serve me as long as he liv'd; ... in a little Time I began to speak to him, and teach him to speak to me; and first, I made him know his Name should be Friday,· which was the Day I sav'd his Life; I call'd him so for the Memory of the Time; I likewise taught him to say Master, and then let him know, that was to be my Name; I likewise taught him to say, Yes, and No, and to know the Meaning of them; I gave him some Milk, in an earthen Pot, and let him see me Drink it before him, and sop my Bread in it; and I gave him a Cake of Bread, to do the like, which he quickly comply'd with, and made Signs that it was very good for him.21

The quote details the ways in which Friday can be considered the "second sex" in relation to masculine authority. Reading the lines above through Butler's theory of performative identity suggests that Friday's gender identity is constructed through language and social norms, which work to naturalise and reinforce his subordinate status.22 This is evident in the way Robinson uses language to assert his dominance and control over Friday and how Friday is expected to perform subservient labour and adopt European cultural values to be perceived as a "human." By teaching Friday to speak and behave in a manner that is consistent with Robinson's own patriarchal values, he ensures that Friday will continue to serve him and uphold the gendered power dynamic he has established. Further by asserting his own title as "Master," Robinson solidifies his dominance and control over Friday. On the other hand, Friday's limited English serves to reinforce the gendered power dynamics within the novel that would be considered akin to the relationship between men and women in a traditional family setting. Friday's cultural and linguistic assimilation can be considered a form of gender socialization, through which he is indoctrinated into performing specific feminine gender roles.

The process of socialisation involves more than simply learning language and cultural practices; it also involves the internalisation of gender norms and expectations that dictate appropriate behaviour and roles for men and women in a given society. The reference to the role of language in shaping gender perceptions can be relevant to the discussion here: "But language does not allow itself to be worked upon, without parallel work in philosophy and politics, as well as in economics, because, as women are marked in language by gender, they are marked in society as sex".23 Wittig's ideas stress the power of language in defining individuals' assigned places in society. By highlighting the linguistic marking of women through gendered language, the quote implies a parallel marking of women in society as primarily defined by their sex. This observation hints at the pervasive influence of language in shaping and reinforcing gender norms, reflecting broader power dynamics within society. Friday carries the same biological features as Robinson, placing them into the man category. However, the language imposed upon him by Robinson creates a social structure in which Friday is culturally indoctrinated to perform feminine gender roles. Here biological and cultural aspects of gender roles contradict, problematising the patriarchal assertion that gender roles are fixed and natural results of biological features. Wittig's notion of a "power-knowledge discourse" suggests that the dominant culture, in the example of Robinson, uses language to reinforce and maintain its power over oppressed groups, such as Friday in public and private domains.

The Social Setting of Gender Performativity: Religion

The use of religion as a means of control is a common feature of patriarchal societies. In several cases, any given religion has been used to justify and reinforce gendered power imbalances, with men holding more power and authority within religious institutions and using religious beliefs to justify male dominance and control over women. The novel can be read as a reflection of the larger Christian patriarchal worldview, which positions men as the primary agents of power and authority, and "the second sex" as subordinate and subservient. Other than sheltering from the dangers on the island, Robinson also uses religion to control and discipline Friday's behaviour and beliefs. As a potential convert to Christianity, Friday is expected to adopt the religious beliefs and practices of the dominant group. This can be seen as another attempt to subjugate him and to reinforce his position as the "second sex." By internalising the doctrines of Christianity, Friday is also adopting the norms and values of a dominant religion, which can be seen as a form of cultural assimilation and subordination.

Friday is presented as being spiritually inferior to Robinson, who is portrayed as having a more profound understanding of Christianity, and this fact reinforces the idea that Friday is inferior to Robinson in other ways as well. The novel hints the ways in which religion plays a role in the construction of Friday's gender identity. Robinson is depicted as the religious authority, and his Christian beliefs are portrayed as the dominant worldview. Friday, on the other hand, assumes a passive role in embracing this doctrine of religion, akin to what Simone de Beauvoir termed the "second sex," as his perceptions are limited and marginalized in the eyes of Robinson. As a patriarchal figure, Robinson assumes the role of teacher and guide, introducing Friday to Christianity and teaching him how to speak and behave according to English customs. This dynamic reinforces the power imbalance between the two characters, with Robinson assuming a position of authority and control over Friday's life and beliefs:

Particularly I ask'd him one Time who made him? The poor Creature did not understand me at all, but thought I had ask'd who was his Father; but I took it by another handle, and ask'd him who made the Sea, the Ground we walk'd on, and the Hills, and Woods; he told me it was one old Benamuckee, that liv'd beyond all: He could describe nothing of this great Person, but that he was very old; much older he said than the Sea, or the Land; than the Moon, or the Stars: I ask'd him then, if this old Person had made all Things, why did not all Things worship him; he look'd very grave, and with a perfect Look of Inno-cence, said, All Things do say O to him: I ask'd him if the People who die in his Country went away any where; he said, yes, they all went to Benamuckee; then I ask'd him whether these they eat up went thither too, he said yes.24

The quote details a dialogue about Robinson Crusoe asking Friday religious questions with the knowledge and power he has. By asking Friday questions about religion and cosmology, Robinson positions himself as knowledgeable and superior as can be clearly inferred once he labels Friday as a "poor create" just at the beginning. Friday is depicted as uninformed and weak in front of him. The questions reflect Robinson's dominance and cultural superiority. Friday's answers, however, seem to indicate that he accepts Robinson's perceived superiority. This may be a reflection of colonialist ways of thinking and white supremacy, using religion as a secret knowledge that can only and fully be accessed by "superior" individuals. While Robinson enforces the superiority of his own religion and culture, Friday's culture and beliefs appear secondary and worthless:

From these Things, I began to instruct him in the Knowledge of the true God: I told him that the great Maker of all Things liv'd up there, pointing up towards Heaven: That he governs the World by the same Power and Providence by which he had made it: That he was omnipotent, could do every Thing for us, give every Thing to us, take every Thing from us; and thus by Degrees I open'd his Eyes. He listned with great Attention, and receiv'd with Pleasure the Notion of Jesus Christ being sent to redeem us, and of the Manner of making our Prayers to God, and his being able to hear us, even into Heaven; he told me one Day, that if our God could hear us up beyond the Sun, he must needs be a greater God than their Bena-muckee.25

The representation of Robinson as the knowledgeable, religious, and questioning male figure relegates Friday to the position of "the second sex." Similarly, this position is reinforced when Friday is convinced that Robinson's God is far superior to his own traditional deity "Bena-muckee." The quote also unpacks the androcentric view that solidifies hierarchal relations between the two. Esther Mombo26 defines androcentrism as a "male-centred worldview which values the male as the norm and devalues and or excludes and silences female perceptions, critiques or contributions." Mombo27 further argues that "the patriarchal ideology operates on the premise that men are biologically superior to women and that, as a result, women are weak and have to depend on men for survival." Friday, as a character representing the colonized and oppressed, is denied agency and voice in matters of faith and spirituality. This mirrors historical and contemporary instances where women and marginalized individuals have been silenced or excluded from religious discourse and leadership roles. As such, Robinson "appropriates" the authority of God to make Friday dependent on him. He indoctrinates Friday into believing that religion is necessary for their salvation. However, through their conversation on religion, he effectively silences Friday, implying that he already possesses a good understanding of religion and, therefore, stands in a position to be followed and obeyed. As such, the novel exemplifies how religion here, in the form of a patriarchal structure, can be used as a tool to perpetuate and reinforce existing power imbalances based on gender and race, relegating Friday into the position of "the second sex."

Body and Labour

During the course of the story, Friday is forced to adopt practices mostly associated with femininity so that Robinson's masculinity can operate at ease. The initial encounter between the two sets the tone for their future relationship that would be partly based on the politics of labour and body. Robinson's tendency to patronize "the second man" on the island is evident in his focus on Friday's physical attributes through his body:

He was a comely handsome Fellow, perfectly well made; with straight strong Limbs, not too large; tall and well shap'd, and as I reckon, about twenty six Years of Age. He had a very good Countenance, not a fierce and surly Aspect; but seem'd to have something very manly in his Face, and yet he had all the Sweetness and Softness of an European in his Countenance too, especially when he smil'd. His Hair was long and black, not curl'd like Wool; his Forehead very high, and large, and a great Vivacity and sparkling Sharpness in his Eyes. The Colour of his Skin was not quite black, but very tawny; and yet not of an ugly yellow nauseous tawny, as the Brasilians, and Virginians, and other Natives of America are; but of a bright kind of a dun olive Colour, that had in it something very agreeable; tho' not very easy to describe. His Face was round, and plump; his Nose small, not flat like the Negroes, a very good Mouth, thin Lips, and his fine Teeth well set, and white as Ivory.28

Here the quote details the ways in which Friday is positioned as the other to be femininized through a perspective that privileges European ideals. Judith Butler discusses the ways in which gender norms are enforced through the performance of certain bodily acts, stating that "the body is itself a culturally scripted medium of agency."29 Robinson describes Friday's physical features in detail, emphasizing his muscular build and his exoticism. This can be seen as a reflection of the objectification of women that is common in patriarchal societies, where women are often valued primarily for their physical attributes. Friday's position as a subordinate to Robinson Crusoe can be interpreted as representative of "the second sex" in the novel.

As the quote illustrates Robinson employs a comparative strategy through European standards of beauty and masculinity. Phrases such as "not too large," "not a fierce and surly aspect," and "especially when he smiled" suggest that Friday's physical attributes are measured against European norms. This Eurocentric lens perpetuates the very ideological idea that European features are the standard of beauty and civility, inherently "superior" to other cultures. Also, the juxtaposition of Friday's appearance with negative stereotypes about Virginians, Brasilans, and other Native Americans reinforces the patriarchal colonial mindset that marginalizes non-European cultures. Therefore, this reading also problematizes the reliability and objectivity of the narrator's perspective. While the narrator notes Friday's physical attributes in detail, there is little emphasis on his intellect and individuality. Robinson's masculinist gaze imprisons Friday's agency through his physical and superficial qualities. Here it is also possible to see how biological features are transformed into diverse ways of domination. The criteria for what count as nice or beautiful is determined by Robinson. Then, Friday becomes the one to be described, defined, and then controlled, creating a context in which Friday is positioned as the second sex. This "one-way" relationship recalls the one between men and women in traditional families where women's existence is validated through their physical attributes and perceived beauty standards.

Gendered labour also operates through the ways in which Friday is depicted as a loyal and subservient servant to Robinson. As a non-European character, Friday is excluded from positions of power and authority, and his labour is exploited by Robinson for his own benefit. Friday's position as a servant and labourer can be seen as emblematic of the broader gendered power imbalances within European colonialism that was characterized by the exploitation and extraction of labour and resources from colonized populations. In terms of manual labour, Friday is portrayed as performing tasks that are traditionally associated with women, such as cooking and cleaning. This can be seen as another example of how Friday is being forced to conform to gender roles that are traditionally associated with women.

Butler notes, "gender is a performative act which constitutes the identity it is purported to be."30 This quote suggests that gender is not a natural or inherent trait, but rather something that is constructed through repeated performances of specific behaviours and actions. In the case of Friday, his performative identity is constructed through his adoption of certain feminine gender roles that are deemed subservient to Robinson's dominant masculine identity. By performing these roles, Friday is constructed as "the second sex" and relegated to a position of subordination.

Conclusion

The character of Friday in Robinson Crusoe has been the subject of this study, particularly in relation to the concept of "the second sex." Through various lenses, such as feminism, Lacanian psychoanalysis, and Foucauldian power discourse, the study has explored Friday's position as a marginalised and subjugated figure within the novel. The critical analysis of Friday's character has revealed that he is situated within a power structure that is dominated by men, and that his gender identity is shaped by the norms and expectations of this structure. The study has pointed out that Friday is depicted as being culturally indoctrinated to perform gender roles that are typically associated with women, such as cooking, cleaning, and other domestic labour. This can be seen as an attempt to subordinate him to the role of a "second sex", and to maintain the dominant position of Robinson.

In applying de Beauvoir's argument to the character of Friday, we can see how the construction of gender is not only a product of social norms and expectations but is also deeply intertwined with issues of race and colonialism. This intersectional analysis provides a more conscience understanding of the ways in which power operates as a way to consider multiple forms of identity and oppression in literary analysis.

This study has demonstrated that Friday's character can provide deeper insight into the ways in which power dynamics operate within the novel. He is a non-white character who has been controlled and dominated by the protagonist, Robinson Crusoe. This further complicates the relationship between gender, race, and power dynamics as a theoretical discussion. The intersectionality of these identities highlights how multiple systems of oppression can interact and reinforce one another. The study has also revealed that by examining the novel through a feminist lens, we can gain a better understanding of how patriarchal codes shape our perceptions of gender, race, and power. The text has demonstrated examples where religion serves as a patriarchal motivation in which the male authority promotes and finds pleasure within. Religion is one of the ways in which power-knowledge discourse, as offered by Foucault, operates throughout the text.

In terms of literary criticism, the novel is worthy of exploration for a deeper understanding of the treatment of gender and power dynamics that ideologically pertain to today. Traditional families or social spheres point out how gender operates by systematically disadvantaging women. However, in some instances, power relations can operate among men through an implicit feminisation of the one, as in the example of Friday. This study can be considered an attempt to subvert the canonicity of the novel Robinson Crusoe, inviting readers to respond to cult literary productions in non-conventional ways.

Footnote

1 Daniel Defoe, D. Robinson Crusoe, eds. T. Keymer & J. W. Kelly, Oxford University Press, 2007.

3 Ibid, p. 1.

2 Harold Bloom, The Western canon: The books and school of the ages, Harcourt Brace & Company, 1994, p.1.

4 M. Foucault, & Cole Gordon, Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977, Pantheon Books, 1980, p.93.

5 Simone de Beauvoir, The second sex, trans. H. M. Parshley, Knopf, 1953.

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid, p. 249.

8 Judith P. Butler, Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity, Routledge, 1990

9 Ibid.

10 Foucault, op. cit..

11 Michel Foucault, The history of sexuality. Volume 1, an introduction, Penguin, 1978, p.2.

12 John Locke, An essay concerning human understanding, The Pennsylvania State University, 1999.

13 Jean Paul Sartre, Existentialism is a humanism, Yale University, 2007, p.20.

14 Martin Heidegger, 'Being-in-the-world is a meaning-giving activity', in Sein und Zeit [Being and Time], trans. J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Blackwell Publishing, 1962.

15 Daniel Defoe, Robinson Crusoe, eds. T. Keymer & J. W. Kelly, Oxford University Press, 2007, p.171.

16 Judith Butler, Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity, Routledge, 1990, p.140.

17 Defoe, op. cit., p.179.

18 Michel Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language, Charleston, SC: Createspace, 2017.

19 Defoe, op. cit., p.173.

20 Jacques Lacan, & Cormack Gallagher, The Seminar of Jacques Lacan IX: Identification, 2002.

21 Daniel Defoe, op. cit., p.174.

22 Judith Butler, Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity, 1990.

23 Monique Wittig, The Straight Mind and Other Essays, Boston: Beacon Press, 1992, p.82.

24 Daniel Defoe, Robinson Crusoe, eds. T. Keymer & J. W. Kelly, Oxford University Press, 2007, p.182.

25 Ibid, p.182.

26 Loreen Maseno, Elia Shabani Mligo & Esther Mombo, Women within Religions: Patriarchy, Feminism, and the Role of Women in Selected World Religions, Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock, 2020, p. xi.

27 Ibid, p.xi.

28 Daniel Defoe, Robinson Crusoe, eds. T. Keymer & J. W. Kelly, Oxford University Press, 2007, pp. 173-174.

29 Judith P/ Butler, Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge, 1990, p.135.

30 Judith P. Butler, Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity, Routledge, 1990, p.25.

References

References:

Beauvoir, S. de. (1953), The second sex. (H. M. Parshley, Trans.). Knopf. Bloom, H., (1994), The Western canon: The books and school of the ages. Harcourt Brace & Company.

Butler, J. P., (1990), Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.

Defoe, D., (2007), Robinson Crusoe (Oxford World's classics) (T. Keymer & J. W. Kelly, Eds.). Oxford University Press.

Foucault, M., (1978), The history of sexuality. volume 1, an introduction. Penguin.

Foucault, M., & Gordon, C., (1980), Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. Pantheon Books.

Foucault, M., (2017), The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. Charleston SC: Createspace.

Heidegger, M., (1962), Being-in-the-world is a meaning-giving activity. In Sein und Zeit [Being and Time]. (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Blackwell Publishing.

Lacan, J., & Gallagher, C., (2002), The Seminar of Jacques Lacan IX: Identification.

Locke, J., (1999), An essay concerning human understanding. The Pennsylvania State University.

Maseno-Ouma, L. I., Mligo, E. S., & Mombo, E., (2020), Women within religions: Patriarchy, feminism, and the role of women in selected World religions. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock.

Sartre, J. P., (2007), Existentialism is a humanism. Yale University.

Wittig, M., (1992), The straight mind and other essays. Beacon Press.