In fact, the novel does not describe the mistreatment of slaves, but the slaves in the novel are more of a negative image. I have to say that the writer’s skill in writing is excellent. The author describes a slave owner as a victim, because the slave owner in the novel gives slaves certain freedom and does not restrain them, so the slave owner is a good person, even if he is a slave owner. Instead, slaves who rebelled for freedom killed and threatened their original masters. So slaves are bad and punished, so they deserve it. There is no logic to this!! The author is deliberately avoiding some things, the real events are often more brutal. Especially at the end of the novel, the author deeply reveals the evil deeds done by the slaves. This dilutes the fact that slave owners sold slaves. One of the interesting things about the novel, of course, is that the slaves who were supposed to be in charge took control of their masters, and the slave owners became the slaves’ hostages. This is also the author is playing down the differences between the two classes. There is no difference between them. When their positions are reversed and they become slaves of the upper class, they also suppress the slave owners of the lower class. It doesn’t matter what race, color or nationality, because it’s human nature. There are actually no really good people in this novel, and I don’t think any of them deserve sympathy, even Delano. Delano’s arrogance and hypocrisy. From beginning to end, Delano sees himself in the way of a hero. He was not kind; he was merely taking advantage of his lofty position to pity the poor. I don’t think he was doing justice when he finally got the ship back, for there is really no justice in such things. He simply did not allow his authority to be threatened.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.