Rewriting Colonial Narratives: Intertextuality, Feminism, and Postcolonial Subversion in J.M. Coetzee’s Foe

Authors

  • Suresh | Regmi Sikkim Professional University, India
  • Shreedhar Gautam Tribhuvan University image/svg+xml

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3126/irjmmc.v7i1.93192

Keywords:

reinforcing colonial, colonial discourse, subaltern speak, marginalization, imperialist, disrupts, indigenous figures, dominant narratives, reconfiguration

Abstract

Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719) is often regarded as a cornerstone of English literature, reinforcing colonial ideology through its narrative of exploration, conquest, and civilization. However, J.M. Coetzee’s Foe (1986) challenges this foundational narrative, using intertextuality, postmodernism, and metafiction to expose the silences and erasures within colonial discourse. This study critically examines Foe through postcolonial and feminist perspectives, drawing on Edward Said’s Orientalism (1978) and Gayatri Spivak’s Can the Subaltern Speak? (1988) to reveal how Coetzee subverts the imperialist and patriarchal assumptions of Defoe’s text. Employing a comparative textual analysis, this research positions Foe within the broader landscape of postcolonial literature and intertextual theory. Through Said’s contrapuntal reading, the study explores how Coetzee deconstructs Defoe’s narrative authority, particularly through the reimagined voices of Susan Barton and Friday. Spivak’s concept of subaltern silence is central to the examination of Friday’s muteness, illustrating how Coetzee critiques the marginalization of colonized subjects in both historical and literary contexts. The findings reveal that Foe is not merely a retelling of Robinson Crusoe but a radical revision that dismantles the myth of the self-sufficient European man while highlighting the epistemic violence imposed on women and indigenous figures. Coetzee’s use of narrative fragmentation, unreliable narration, and metafiction disrupts the traditional colonial framework, emphasizing the instability of historical knowledge. This study argues that Foe serves as a politically charged reconfiguration of literary history, challenging dominant narratives of empire and authorship. By interrogating colonial storytelling and questioning whose voices are heard and whose are erased, Foe becomes a powerful act of literary resistance, creating space for alternative histories that reclaim the voices of the silenced.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

  • Suresh | Regmi, Sikkim Professional University, India

    Ph.D Scholar

  • Shreedhar Gautam, Tribhuvan University

    Tribhuvan University

References

1. Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. Routledge.

2. Bobkina, J., & Dominguez, E. (2014). The use of literature and literary texts in the EFL classroom: Between consensus and controversy. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 3(2), 248-260. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.2p.248

3. Carter, R., & Long, M. N. (1996). Teaching literature. Longman.

4. Coetzee, J. M. (1986). Foe. Viking Press.

5. Dymoke, S., & Hughes, J. (2009). Using a poetry wiki: How can the medium support pre-service teachers of English in their professional learning about writing poetry and teaching poetry in a digital age? English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8(3), 91-106.

6. Hanauer, D. I. (2012). Meaningful literacy: Writing poetry in the language classroom. Language Teaching, 45(1), 105-115. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000455

7. Head, D. (2009). The Cambridge introduction to J. M. Coetzee. Cambridge University Press.

8. Hutcheon, L. (1988). A poetics of postmodernism: History, theory, fiction. Routledge.

9. Iida, A. (2016). Poetic identity in second language writing: Exploring an EFL learner’s study abroad experience. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 1-14.

10. Kırkgöz, Y. (2008). Using poetry as a model for creating English poems. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 4(2), 94-106.

11. Lazar, G. (1993). Literature and language teaching: A guide for teachers and trainers. Cambridge University Press.

12. Leong, P., Joseph, S. R. H., & Boulay, R. (2010). Applying constant comparative and discourse analyses to virtual worlds research. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research, 3(1), 3-26.

13. Mittal, R. (2016). Poetry is language at its most distilled and powerful: Bringing poetry in language classes can make language understanding and communication skills better. Linguistics and Literature Studies, 4(1), 52-56.

14. Paran, A. (2008). The role of literature in instructed foreign language learning and teaching: An evidence-based survey. Language Teaching, 41(4), 465-496.

15. Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon Books.

16. Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271-313). University of Illinois Press.

17. Watson, G., & Zyngier, S. (2007). Literature and stylistics for language learners: Theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan.

Downloads

Published

2026-03-31

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Rewriting Colonial Narratives: Intertextuality, Feminism, and Postcolonial Subversion in J.M. Coetzee’s Foe. (2026). International Research Journal of MMC (IRJMMC), 7(1), 455-464. https://doi.org/10.3126/irjmmc.v7i1.93192

Similar Articles

1-10 of 33

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)