In Behn's Orronoko (1688), racism is a pertinent theme.   It is evident that Behn believes that her European ancestry and Christian beliefs are superior to that of her native Indian and African counterparts.  Racism, in this prose, could be personified as a double headed monster.  The author's prejudices are not just confined to the physical attributes of the native Indians and the West Africans of Cormantien (Oroonoko's people) but, to the their culture as well.

    Notable accounts of the presence of racism, begin when Behn first introduces the native Indians of Surinam.  She admirably describes the natives' culture, their talents, and the beauty of the women.  However, in speaking of the women, she insinuates that it is a pity that such beauty was bestowed upon women of color (Behr, p. 7)  Similiar sentiments are said later, almost enviously, when referring to the king's wives (Behr, p. 10) and in her description of Imoinda and the white men responses to her (Behr, p. 12).  After the description of the women, she continues, describing the "friendship" between her countrymen and their Indian counterparts.  She has basically exact their relationship to the needs of her people rather than genuine companionship. She stated that the only reasons that her people did not dominate the natives were because they had known them to be skilled (which in turn is beneficial to the Europeans) and that they had outnumbered them considerably.  The reasoning of this decision may have been fairly logical to her people, but is a quite cowardly notion when considering their undertaking of the Africans.

    The"monsters" continues to terrorize as Behn describes in a matter of fact tone, the concept of  the slave trade of the Africans (Behn, p.9).  I have to pause and say that I did some further research on this prose.  Many articles stated that this prose was considered to be anti-slavery.  I would like to know by who's terms?  Behn by all means does not denounce the institution of slavery in this book but rather considers it to be beneficial to the livelihood of her people. This truth is exempliifed when she and Mr. Treffey decides to lead Oroonoko on with a lie that promises his and his family's freedom. She almost seems to count it victoriously when she says that the main reason they chose Cormantien as a prime location for slave trafficking was because they ( the Africans) were the minority and divided among themselves by war.

     The author contridicts herself frequently throughout the book when referring to race and Christianity. Quite possibly the most notable account of racism is present in the contradictive description of Oroonoko, whom she later refers to as Caesar*.  Behn grew a liking for the young man simply because he was an exception of his people, speaking several languages and closely resembling the European standard for physical beauty, education , and demeanor (Behr, p. 11).  On the contrary, in regards to Oroonoko, she made such remarks as: "his skin was not of the brown, rusty black which most of that country are", that his lips were not "great turned lips" and his nose was not flat but "was Roman". She further commented that he was an example of true beauty, "capable of love" and  possessed a stately manner and fine wit, that usually was confined to "white men, especially those of Christendom".   According to Behn, he " had nothing of barbarity in his nature...bating (except)his colour."   In a reference to the Indians, Behn states that "they have a native justice which knows no fraud , and understands no vice, or cunning, but when they are taught by white men". This quote is a contradiction to her high esteem for her fellow Christian countrymen and their "fine" demeanor that she speaks frequently of.  She later denounces the moral behavior of the Africans though she and her people seem more barbaric and illogical than they.  I find it hard to believe that true Christianity would condone such behavior as owning another person under such conditions. Yet, Behn does not do so much as cringe when describing the institution.   The Europeans in this period seemed to have twisted the words of the Bible for their own use.  Their prejudices causes for them to view other people as "barbaric", savaged, and animal-like beings in which they believe they have dominion over.  As a Christian, she should have learned from Bibical history and example that birthright (whether into a family -like Jacob and Esau of the OT or a particular race- like the Jewish sect of the Pharisees of the OT) neither constitutes superiority nor preferential status before the sight of God.

    In conclusion, Behn's prejudices and personal beliefs are filtrated throughout her book.  She simply wrote a book that depicted the social views of her time and quite frankly, in some cases (and places) still applies to our modern-day society.
 

Notes

* His and other"s names were thought to be rather barbaric so the Europeans changed it as a part of their Christendom belief.  The practice, though  insensitive due to the circumstances, probably derives from when such patriachs as Abraham and Jacob (Genesis) names were changed when they came into covenant with God.)