I had never read anything by J.M. Coetzee and he was recommended to me, so when I saw this second-hand, I picked it up. Foe is a retelling of Robinson Crusoe (Defoe means 'the foe') but from the perspective of a woman castaway who joins them on the island (who was not in the original). The original Robinson Crusoe is a slave trader (he was shipwrecked whilst on his way to Africa to buy slaves) and Foe is very much a commentary on that, with Friday's tongue cut out, making him unable to tell his story. 
Foe is a commentary on a book written in 1719 (and set 50 years previously). What about our perspective looking back on a book written in 1989 (35 years ago)? The woman is given a voice, but she is not really presented as Crusoe's equal (but maybe he thought that would be unrealistic)? The evil of slavery is clear, and all the stuff about cannibalism from the original exposed as a myth, but still Friday has dull eyes and sits in a corner (or is that meant to be a result of being enslaved)? It is difficult to know what to make of it, but that of course is good, it encourages the reader to think, and that is of course rather the point of literature. 
Whilst reading this book, I was reminded of James by Percival Everett (https://app.thestorygraph.com/reviews/ac84db99-5bec-4a8d-b459-c028367ebcc0) in which the story of Huckelberry Finn is retold from the perspective of Jim, the runaway slave. Perhaps if Coetzee was retelling Robinson Crusoe today, he would take the perspective of Friday.