Benito Cereno

Content Warning: This section discusses racism, enslavement, and implied cannibalism.

Benito Cereno’s depiction of slavery and the racial bias that accompanies it have garnered much critical attention. Because the story unfolds largely through the eyes of two white men—one of whom is an active participant in the trade of enslaved persons—the extent to which their biases are the narrative’s own is open for debate.

One of the more straightforward critiques of racism the novella leverages unfolds through the characterization of Captain Delano. Despite Delano’s verbal disapproval of slavery and professed fondness for Black people, his thoughts and language reveal deep-seated prejudice. He uses derogatory terms when referring to Black people and perceives them as inferior, particularly intellectually. He compares Babo to a shepherd’s dog and considers him an ideal servant—submissive and dedicated, which he sees as the natural inclination of Black people. He believes Babo is happy and fulfilled as an enslaved man, overlooking the inherent violence of slavery. In fact, he explicitly recasts Cereno’s relationship with Babo in a way that elides Babo’s enslaved status: “Don Benito, I envy you such a friend; slave I cannot call him” (23). This romanticized view of Babo and Cereno’s relationship conveniently disregards the existence of power imbalances and Babo’s lack of freedom. That Delano’s dehumanization of Black people is misguided is clear from the novel’s events, as his prejudice makes him oblivious to what is really happening on the San Dominick; he believes Black individuals lack the intelligence to orchestrate a rebellion and wield power, while his perception of Black people as possessing “a certain easy cheerfulness” prevents him from acknowledging that the enslaved passengers (68), like all humans, are capable of both good and evil. With Delano’s delayed response to the situation aboard the San Dominick, the novella effectively punishes him for his racism.

However, the stereotype of the “happy” enslaved person is not the only racist stereotype at play in the novel. The brutality of the uprising on the San Dominick appears to testify to the supposed “savagery” of African people. The implied cannibalism of Aranda’s corpse is an obvious example, but Cereno’s remark that the Black women wanted to torture Aranda to death is noteworthy as well; it so utterly conflicts with the gentleness and mercy expected of 19th-century white women as to call the Black women’s humanity (or at least their womanhood) into question.

There are two possible counterarguments to this reading. First, it is important to remember that Cereno, like Delano, may not be a wholly reliable narrator. Second, when Delano acknowledges the cruelty of slavery, he describes it as “breed[ing] ugly passions in man” (76). In context, Delano is referring to the cruelty that absolute power inspires in the one wielding it—i.e., the enslaver. However, it can also apply to those who are enslaved, particularly once they themselves end up in a position of authority. From this perspective, the revolt on the San Dominick can be viewed as a justifiable reaction: Babo and the other enslaved passengers seek freedom from their Spanish oppressors and wish to return to Africa. However, the brutal and dehumanizing nature of slavery compels them to adopt inhumane actions even as they seek freedom and autonomy. Slavery is in this reading a corrupting influence that transforms the enslaved individuals into perpetrators of cruelty themselves, while Benito Cereno emerges as a cautionary tale, signaling that slavery is bound to bring about bloodshed and conflict.