The novella Benito Cereno has been a topic of controversy amongst several critics. In their perspectives, some differ and others coincide on themes in Benito Cereno. The theme that we are concerned with is if violence, even if it was for a worthy cause, was justified in Benito Cereno. Violence, as depicted by these analysts was used as a median to control slaves and alternate subordination in the story. Several critics, such as Joseph Schiffman, Charles Swann, Eric Sundquist, and Kermit Vanderbilt assert this issue. This paper will analyze these most relevant critics and their positions on this theme in the story.
One of the pro-justification critics for instance, Schiffman, justifies the violence by justifying Babo's position. He quotes Williams to assert his own position, Williams says, "Babo, after all, as perhaps his name suggests, is just an animal, a mutinous baboon." Schiffman then, contradicting Williams, states his position by saying, "Though he was mutinous, as Williams says, he was no baboon." …
