Close Reading Huck Finn.... Finally

Text: Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by William Faulkner

Critical Lense: Psychoanalytic Lens

“Do you reckon Tom Sawyer would ever go by this thing? Not for pie, he wouldn’t. He’d call it an adventure—that’s what he’d call it; and he’d land on that wreck if it was his last act. And wouldn’t he throw style into it?—wouldn’t he spread himself, nor nothing? Why, you’d think it was Christopher C’lumbus discovering Kingdom-Come. I wish Tom Sawyer was here…” (Twain 69)

“By this time Jim was gone for the raft. I was just a-biling with curiosity; and I says to myself, Tom Sawyer wouldn’t back out now, and so I won’t either; I’m a-going to see what’s going on here.” (Twain 70)

During this part of the novel, Huckleberry Finn is with Jim on the water after they have left the island. They are on their way down the river and Huck Finn spots a shipwreck. Obviously at his age curiosity is controlling most of his actions, but he is just a bit scared to go through with them. This is what causes him to use Tom Sawyer as a bit of an excuse to go through with the actions.

The unconscious thoughts and desires are usually influenced and formed at an early age. Since Huck is around his early teens, like 13, his hidden thoughts and desires are beginning to be finalized. The majority of his thoughts are based around adventures and discovering something. Twain mentions the search for “adventure,” because he is showing how naive Huck Finn is and how he is only looking for things that could give him short-term benefits. This is different from what Jim is thinking, because he’s older and is looking for a long-term plan revolving around safety. This hidden desire for adventure shows how he is still looking for something fun that will take up his time. Even though he should be looking for shelter and somewhere safe to stay, he is more concerned about finding something new and exciting, because that is generally what his age group wants to do.

Huck Finn also mentions that he wants to discover something like “Christopher C’lumbus.” This is a very naive thought, which will not likely happen, because first of all if he comes out with the discovery, then he would get caught. Also he is just young and looking for adventure, so he believes that he can do almost anything.

The different thought process and goals are mainly based around age, because his thoughts are still developing. Since his thoughts and reacting actions are still being developed, he searches for an excuse to perform the actions that he truly desires, such as saying that Tom would do this or that.

Matt Khoury Critical Lens Expert Huck Finn

Matt Khoury

AP Literature

Huckleberry Finn Critical Lens Expert

In the article Morality And Huckleberry Finn by Julius Lester, the idea that Huckleberry Finn is a racist work and should not be read in schools. Reading this article brought up some very important points that cover a multitude of problems in the book. For the most part, I agree with what Lester is saying. The book certainly does have racist themes, but the book was pretty progressive for it’s time. By today’s standards however, it’s still incredibly racist. The use of the word “n-----” is just about as common as the word “the” in the book. It is still shocking to me that this book is still in curriculum. I am very aware that this is one of the greatest American works of literature and makes sense to read during high school because it is a coming of age story, but there are a whole plethora of stories that convey the same message without the racist overtones of the book. I do not share the same experience as Julius Lester, but his article is certainly informing. He states that although Mark Twain was considered progressive for his time, the city he wrote these stories in is still racist to this day. It is truly funny how that works out.

Close Reading into Song of Solomon - Bondonno

“They were listening to the radio. … A young n----- boy had been found stomped to death in Sunflower County, Mississippi. There was no questions about who stomped him - his murderers had boasted freely - and there were no questions about the motive. The boy had whistled at some white woman, refused to deny he had slept with others, and was a Northerner visiting the South. … ‘ It was on the radio! Got to be in the paper!’ ‘They don’t put that kind of stuff in no white paper.’ … ‘Oh, they’ll catch them,’ said Walters. ‘They’ll catch ‘em all right, and give ‘em a big party and a metal.’ ‘They got to catch ‘em.’ ‘So they catch ‘em. You think they’ll get any time? Not on your life!’ “ (Song of Solomon pg.80-82) 

Here, Milkman and Guitar are in the barber shop listening to the radio about how am African American man was visiting the South and simply whistled at a White woman and was killed. This clearly shows how much tension was between African Americans and Whites in this time period. The fact that, a boy was killed for finding interest in a woman who just so happened to be White, should not have happened and it shows how African Americans were always at risk of being arrested, beaten, or even killed for things that do no harm or that are not against the law. I think it is also important to point out their conversation in the barber shop. They first rightly argue about how wrong they think the killing was, but then they have a discussion on whether the killing will be put into the newspapers. This is interesting because, we live in a time, that doesn't even read paper newspapers but rather watch the news on TV or read it online. And with many current events being around African American rights and brutality, it definitely would have been in the news. But back then, it was debatable on whether it would be or not, because the newspapers were run by White people and most White people thought that the killing was just. However, looking at the killing in a different perspective, not about race, it was not and should never be just. They never say if it was in the newspaper or not, but I am guessing that it wasn't because, if it was it would have been mentioned and it probably would have had wrong information or made the killing seem just when it wasn't. They then debate on whether they will arrest the White men who killed the boy. This should not even have to be a debate, but back then, no one was for sure. They first don’t even think that the police will look, and even if they do, they won’t put them in jail. Again, I am not sure if they ever do because it is not mentioned, but I again think that they wouldn't because the police are White and would rarely arrest other White people for doing something to African Americans because most of what they did was considered ok by many Whites. Overall, this excerpt gives us a view of what many people would have thought about African American brutality in that time. We see that some have faith in the government to arrest the White men who wrongfully killed the boy and that they would report about it, but many doubted that they would even look the case over, search for the men, or arrest them even if they did find them. This shows how hard it was to grow up in this time as an African American and how they were treated wrongfully.

"If you wanna fly you gotta give up the shit that weighs you down"

“Some glad morning when this life is o'er, // I'll fly away. // To that home on God's celestial shore,//  I'll fly away.” It was that sorrowful refrain that rang out  at the funeral of Freddie Gray, the young man who was murdered by police in Baltimore in this April. The hymn played is full of the same flight imagery and symbolism that laces Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison. This theme defines the novel and is tied into Morrison’s message of hope for the black community.

Much of black folk music is similarly full of stories and images of flight. These ideas inspired slaves, imagining themselves flying away from bondage on earth.  Yet in Morrison’s novel, set way after the fall of slavery, such imagery crops up repeatedly. In the very first couple of pages Mr Smith a black tax collector attempts to fly off of the roof of a building. Of course he failed to break the bonds of gravity. This event takes place at milkman’s birth, his whole life seems to become a road on the path to flight. He wants to be a pilot when he is young and he eventually learns of the story of his grandfather Solomon’s own avian exploits.  At the end of the novel Milkman himself attempts to fly. It is left ambiguous whether or not he succeeds but considering how he has evolved over the course of the novel, from a man who is like his father a bourgeois land owner with no qualms to a caring young man aware of history it is clear that Morrison is trying to present flight, not as a method of escape, but as symbol of ascension, of enlightenment for the black community. “Learn your roots, reject capitalism,” she is saying “and you too can fly into the heavens like Milkman”

         As someone who is obviously not part of the black community I will defer to Morrison’s judgement. If she believes that the route to salvation for her community is through introspection and anti-capitalism than it probably is. It certainly is an appealing stratagem. I hope that one day her vision comes true.

"Go get me my money!"

“For more than an hour Porter held them at bay: cowering, screaming, threatening, urinating, and interspersing all of it with pleas for a woman. He would cry great shoulder-heaving sobs, followed by more screams... ‘'Come down outta there, n****!' Macon's voice was still loud, but it was getting weary.’ 'And you, you baby-dicked baboon' -- he tried to point at Macon -- 'you the worst. You need killin, you really need killin. You know why? ...I know why...Everybody know why.' As he sank deeper into it, the shotgun slipped from his hand, rattled down the roof, and hit the ground with a loud explosion. The shot zipped past a bystander's shoe and blew a hole in the tire of a stripped Dodge parked in the road." ‘Go get my money,' Macon said.’ ‘Me? Freddie asked. 'Suppose he...’ ‘Go get me my money.’ ‘Porter was snoring. Through the blast of the gun and the picking of his pocket he slept like a baby.'"
         This quote says a lot about what one is required to do to achieve success in the America described in Toni Morrison’s novel. Not only is Macon dead forced to become reviled by his own community but also to emulate the racist white ruling class.
       The lack of care for his neighbors that Macon reveals in this passage is astounding. The only reason that Macon seemed to care at all about Porter was getting “His money”. Even after Porter incapacitated himself the first words out of his mouth are an order to his lackey to “Go get me my money”. It is not that Macon doesn't care about Porter. When Freddie told him that Porter was "Drunk Again" He sprinted across town in order extract the cash
       Macon's desire for material wealth has also caused him to emulate the white bourgeoisie that despises him and all others who have the same color of skin.  When he orders him to "come down outta there" he is acting more like a a slave master dictating to his slave than a land owner to his tenant. He even ads in the n-word. adding to the racial tension of the moment. It is illogical for a black man to use a term that specifically demeans people like him unless he doesnt consider himself to be a black man. He has left behind his identity on his search for riches.

All of the tells in Macon’s interactions with Porter really show how much of his identity he has left behind in order to become part of the bourgeois ruling class.

Class consciousness in song of Solomon: An expert's analysis

Since 1923 Marxists have been espousing the concept of Class Consciousness as a solution to capitalism. The theory goes that once the masses truly understand the true nature of their oppression and the true identity of their oppressors they will rise up against them as one and shatter the system that holds them in bondage. This idea was taken on by the radical black liberation movement in the United States and applied to race as well creating the idea of “Race Consciousness” In her critique of Toni Morrison’s Song of Solomon Dorothea Mbalia takes both of these ideas and cross applies them to the development of the central character in the novel: Macon “Milkman” Dead. Her central Idea being that as the novel goes on the character of Milman becomes more and more class and race conscious. While this may be true in terms character of character development by the end of the novel despite what Ms Mbalia has to say, the black community is no closer to revolution or socialism. Mbalia starts the essay by describing “Milkman” in his pre “conscious” state depicting him as a man full of misogyny and indifferent towards the plight of his own people. As far as misogyny goes she says he is a man who “Shits on women”. This is fairly accurate and she uses examples of his treatment of Hagar to back up the claim. Mbalia then moves onto race consciousness describing a Milkman who is so focused on himself in his privileged wealthy life that the problems faced by his friend, guitar and other members of the black community mean nothing to him. As an example of this she brings up his indifference to Emmett Till’s murder again and again repeatedly citing the time he said “Fuck Till.. what about me”. All together in the first half of her essay Mbalia accurately demonstrates the complete lack of empathy Milkman exhibits towards everyone he meets clearly he is not conscious and yet despite her claims does milkman ever reach a conscious state by the end of the novel? Even if he does his consciousness makes little difference by the end of the novel, when he returns home he finds hagar dead, pilate stricken with grief and guitar full of violent religious zeal. His new found consciousness has brought nothing back to his own community. In fact his actions have lead to death and destruction for many of his closest friends and family members. All together Mbalia’s description of milkman’s character arc as a development of class consciousness sells both the idea and milkman short. It does not examine the motif of flight and is really trying to insert certain marxist ideas into the text while failing to understand much of the socialist symbolism that is already there.

Responding and Reflecting Huck Finn- Matt Khoury

Matt Khoury

Responding and Reflecting

To be completely honest, I wasn’t at all surprised by this book. The racism apparent in this book is obvious, especially for the time. Sure, in our time it is incredibly racist, but during the time it was actually pretty progressive. I am in no way defending the use of the word “n-----”, but that was the norm during that time. The power structure is prevalent throughout the book. This structure is still somewhat prevalent today. Although slavery and extreme racism aren’t the norm anymore, there is still racism in our society today. The most obvious form of racism is verbal, but the biggest problem is institutionalized racism. In this country, there is still a power structure at work. People of Color, such as Latinos and African-Americans, are usually at the bottom, while White people are at the top. This book shows us just how far we’ve come, but it also shows how far we have to go. I think most people have a skewed perception as to what racism is. People look at the racism exemplified in Huck Finn and pin that as the only way you can be racist. Yes, that is the most blatant form of racism, but that is certainly not the most detrimental form racism. The struggle that most people of color face is not justified.

Matt Khoury Close Reading

Matthew Khoury

Close Reading

"Oh, yes, this is a wonderful govment, wonderful.  Why, looky here. There was a free n---- there from Ohio—a mulatter, most as white as a white man.  He had the whitest shirt on you ever see, too, and the shiniest hat; and there ain't a man in that town that's got as fine clothes as what he had; and he had a gold watch and chain, and a silver-headed cane—the awfulest old gray-headed nabob in the State.  And what do you think?  They said he was a p'fessor in a college, and could talk all kinds of languages, and knowed everything.  And that ain't the wust. They said he could vote when he was at home.  Well, that let me out. Thinks I, what is the country a-coming to?  It was 'lection day, and I was just about to go and vote myself if I warn't too drunk to get there; but when they told me there was a State in this country where they'd let that n----- vote, I drawed out.  I says I'll never vote agin.  Them's the very words I said; they all heard me; and the country may rot for all me—I'll never vote agin as long as I live.  And to see the cool way of that n----- —why, he wouldn't a give me the road if I hadn't shoved him out o' the way.  I says to the people, why ain't this n----- put up at auction and sold?—that's what I want to know.  And what do you reckon they said? Why, they said he couldn't be sold till he'd been in the State six months, and he hadn't been there that long yet.  There, now—that's a specimen.  They call that a govment that can't sell a free n---- till he's been in the State six months.  Here's a govment that calls itself a govment, and lets on to be a govment, and thinks it is a govment, and yet's got to set stock-still for six whole months before it can take a hold of a prowling, thieving, infernal, white-shirted free n-----, and—"

In this quote, Huckleberry Finn is listening in on his father’s drunken rant. His  is notorious for being a drunk and rambling in the streets. In this instance, he is ranting about how the government is flawed because freedmen had more money than he did and he was white. He has this sense of entitlement due to the fact that he is white and therefore is more worthy of wealth than the freedman he sees.

The rant that Pap goes on is very reflective of the time period. This belief stems from the power structure of that time. It was often believed during that period of time that African-Americans did not deserve the wealth white people had. The structure that was forced was that white people had power over black people. This power came in all forms; financially, influentially, and educationally. This is why Pap gets angry when he sees the freedman with all the wealth he has. he notes his wealth and compares him to a white man. “a mulatter, most as white as a white man.  He had the whitest shirt on you ever see, too, and the shiniest hat; and there ain't a man in that town that's got as fine clothes as what he had; and he had a gold watch and chain, and a silver-headed cane—the awfulest old gray-headed nabob in the State.” This anger toward the freedman is because of instilled belief. Pap has this belief that if you are black, you are automatically below him and that you cannot be more wealthy than he is.

Responding and Reflecting Historical lens

“those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” this is what stuck with me while reading the book. This book is a time capsule that allows us to learn an abnormal way of an abolitionist to manifest his thoughts about slavery.131 years after the book was written the book has evolved in message. At the time time it was a book intended to deliver a message. While it can also still teach a message, the book can now teach us about the past. Everything going on around Twain's life had a say in his writing. learning and making hypotheses about how his life affected huckleberry Finn has allowed me to understand twain's writing decisions. The relationship between Jim and Huck may not have been such a rare one. Because, many slaves raised the kids of their masters; parent like bonds was not such a rare occurrence but they were still talked to and treated like slaves. In a way Jim and Huck’s relationship was created to expose that blacks and whites could create that bond. In a way both Huck and Jim had similar backgrounds. Jim was an escape slave and Huck was abused by his father. Both characters came from a dark place. The historical lens not only about the book in general but about individual characters has allowed me to make connections from characters to  their actions. In addition to character development word chose was something that was explained through the historical lens. Now and back in 1884 this book brought much controversy towards its message. History worked as a double bladed sword for this book. in one corner we have the message that twain is trying to bring across and in the other corner we have the heavy weight his word chose had. Word choice and character development was the tools that twain used to deliver a message. Twain being an abolitionist wanted to teach America that they were wrong. He decided to educate americans through a peculiar way. Instead of telling them they were wrong, twain decided to show how blacks and whites could live together through the use of a fictional text.

Experts Historical Lens

Sunup  to sundown the life of a slave showcases the true every day life a slave had to go through. It eliminates any myths about slaves and talks about what really went on behind every slaves life. It defines slavery as what it really is an “economic institution”. According to the author slaves had many different life styles depending on their owners and work positions. The integration of Slave quotes helps solidify his writing one example being “We got to eat what the while folk got to eat”. It is true that every slave story was different and integrating that in his writing allowed by the reader understand the life of a slave a little bit more. His opinion towards slavery was very apparent throughout the text.

“Slavery was an inhumane institution. slaves were suppose to be protected by the law from excessively harsh treatment. Any person found guilty of cruel or inhumane treatment of slaves was fined or sent to jail, but slaveholders paid little to no attention to the laws.Cruel treatment, such as a female slave whose master had left her hanging by her thumbs in St. Louis in 1839. Was not uncommon.”

     I did not know that there were even any laws that aid slaves. This was a real eye opener. Mentioned before in the text slave owners did and said something to simply shut the abolitionist up. Huckleberry finn targets to send a whole new message. While this tries to emphasize a sad and hatred towards slavery huckleberry finn tries to make slavery

By making jim interact with finn with a dad and son relation it tells people “Hey, they are not as different as us. Skin color should not make others inferior to you. Black and white people can live together with no alteration because of their skin color.” The author also included opinions from other historians which in my opinion made the text even that more interesting.As expressed in an earlier blog, Twain had a very good idea of how slaves were treated. While working in the riverboats he had to come across many slaves working in the canal boats. He new that slaves no no more different that a white american. He had to see at the suffering these people endured every day. In a way twain captured a slaves potential if they were not tied to all the social restrictions. It was his interaction with slaves that made twain so sure that both races were the same. The author  talks about the false description of slaves that was given to satisfy abolitionist by slave owners. It talks about different historians opinion of the food and shelter conditions slaves faced. Ultimately both authors wanted to send a abolitionist ideology towards slavery. The difference was that one author used facts about slavery and the other created a fictional story to in essence get the same message across.  

Close reading historical lens

  To understand why Mark twain uses the N-Word so many times, we first have to look at the history of the this word. The n-word derived from the word negro which means black in spanish. In other countries Negro does not have the same weight as it does in America. Americans adopted N-Word as a derogatory word to dehumanize and offend african and african american slaves. The Portuguese being the main slave traders  were the ones who started to give more racist and derogatory definition to negro.The definition that slave traders and slave owners gave to the N-Word was dumb animal. Even at the time when the book was written many people were outraged at the high number of time the N-Word was used throughout the book. At the time like now N-Word was an offensive word.

     Is you think that mark twain used the N-word as a derogatory and  racist word you have to consider that he was an abolitionist. In reality mark twain did not support slavery.

“I hain’t been nowheres,” I says, “only just hunting for the runaway nigger—me and Sid.”

“By and by they fetched the niggers in and had prayers, and then everybody was off to bed.

I went up to my room with a piece of candle, and put it on the table.” Using the N-Word so commonly in the book makes it seem ordinary and makes fun of how americans used the word. In a way it manifest how the N-Word is a dumb and stupid word that suppresses others. Working in  a river boat for a few years mark twain was exposed to a diverse amount of people. He got to interact with slaves and slave owners throughout his journeys. It is known that his characters were real people he met while working in the river boat. The word chose in Huckleberry finn is no more than a manifestation of the absurdity of the what thats word means. In certain pages like in page 295,246 and 244 the N-Word Is used 5 times. In pages 36,193 and 289 the N-Word is used 6 times. These pages all exaggerate the N-word. It is this exaggeration in the use of this word that makes his message come across stronger. If mark twain wanted to make a statement he first wanted to grab the attention of others. The use of the N-Word was used 219 times to make fun of how stupid and inhumane whites were treating slaves. By showcasing how everyday people were using the word mark twain could show them just how stupid and ignorant they sound. The sole definition of this word makes and should make it one of the most taboo words in the english language. All that  Twain is trying to do is show others the true stupidity of slavery itself. Weather you agree with his method is a different story.

Expert's Journal on Huckleberry Finn

Julius Lester’s excerpt “Morality and Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” on Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn, gave a new view of the novel. Lester explains his point of view on reading the novel for the first time as an adult and his emotions and feelings about it. He starts off with explaining that he had not read the book as a child and then reading it as an adult is glad he did not. He says, “I am grateful that among the many indignities inflicted on me in childhood, I escaped Huckleberry Finn. As a black parent, however, I sympathize with those who want the book banned, or at least removed from the required reading lists in schools. While I am opposed to book banning, I know that my children’s education will be enhanced by not reading Huckleberry Finn.” Here, Lester is not only glad that he did not read Huckleberry Finn as a child, but he goes so far as to say that his children will actually gain knowledge by not reading it. These are strong opinions and later he goes on to explain why he thinks this way. He digs deep into the relationship between Huck and Jim and notices, “Twain makes an odious parallel between Huck’s being ‘enslaved’ by a drunken father who keeps him locked in a cabin and Jim’s legal enslavement.… A boy held captive by a drunken father is not in the same category of human experience as a man enslaved…. Twain did not take slavery, and therefore black people, seriously.” Lester shines a light on how Twain views Huck’s ‘slavery’ to his father and the legal slavery of Jim. Lester agrees that while Huck’s being locked in a cabin by his father was “awful and wrong”, however, that is different than being “legally owned by another human being and to have that legal ownership supported by the full power of local, state, and federal government enforcement”. I agree with Lester when he points out how it was wrong for Twain to parallel Huck’s ‘slavery’ with his father to Jim’s slavery backed by everyone around him, including government enforcement. It is not the same thing and should not be treated as the same thing because then it will degrade the reality of what slavery was when compared to what Huck went through even though it was immoral as well.

Overall, I agree with Lester on how Twain’s perception of slavery and African Americans was immoral, unfair, and degrading to what it was in reality. However, some things Lester read too far into the lines and was judgemental of the book from the beginning and didn't have the opportunity to read it with an open mind. An example is when he describes his thoughts on how Twain depicted a black hero. “‘I got to have help, somehow; and the minute I says it, out crawls this n----- from somewheres, and says he’ll help, and he done it, too, and done it very well. Of course I judged he must be a runaway n----- … I never see a n----- that was a better nuss or faithfuller, and yet he was resking his freedom to do it … He ain't no bad n----- gentlemen.’ This depiction of a black ‘hero’ is familiar by now since it has been repeated in countless novels and films. It is a picture of the only kind of black that whites have ever truly liked - faithful, tending sick whites, not speaking, not causing trouble, and totally passive.… A century of white readers have accepted this characterization because it permits their own ‘humanity’ to shine with more luster.”  Here, Lester goes into to detail about the scene when a doctor is tending Tom Sawyer but can’t help him alone and Jim risked his freedom to help save Tom. This depicts Jim as a caring person who would risk his freedom to help save a White boy, even with everything he had to do for White people and how they all treated him. That’s what I depicted when I read this passage, that Jim had his chance to shine and become a hero to Tom which was against the norm. However, Lester digs way too deep and read it through an emotion of hatred of the book since the beginning. He read this heroic story and was infuriated about how the doctor viewed Jim. He went so far as to say that this heroic act was the only way that White people could stand African Americans; “faithful, tending sick whites, not speaking, not causing trouble, and totally passive”. Lester goes far beyond what Twain intended for this scene to mean. Twain wanted to show Jim as someone who stood up, past racism and the fear of what would happen to him, to help a boy who needed medical help. Yet, Lester could only see how Jim was being viewed by the doctor, looking past his act of heroism.

Was Mark Twain an Anarchist?

As I read through Huckleberry Finn it seemed to me that Mark Twain was trying to ask a question with this book: Is the price of “civilization” worth it? As the book goes on it becomes more and more critical of the idea of civilization in general and the society of the south in particular, so much so that the idea and concept of an escape from civilization becomes a major theme of the novel.

At the beginning of the book Huck is forced to go to school and be civilized, and Jim is a slave about to be sold. Their escapes from their respective lives are cause massive improvements, Huck no longer has to go to school and church and can lounge all day on the raft, and Jim no longer has to do abusive back breaking work. Everytime they return to hamlets and villages of the south they are confronted with brutality and deceit, thugs, murderers and conmen seem to be abundant in Twains south. The novel sometimes feels almost like an anarchist critique of society leaving reader wondering, Is civilization really that much better than the idyll of Huck’s raft?

While I’m not about to abandon my life of electric luxury for a raft on the mississippi, with this novel, Twain makes that decision very appealing. Without the people around us forcing us to be part of their world the only human we would have to deal with is ourselves and that is quite an appealing concept. Is there a person in the world who has not felt overcome by the crowds and strangeness of others that confront us in modern life. I for one would be more than happy to get the same peace quiet and solitude that Huck and Jim have, at least for a short while.

Freedom... Is it free?

In the course of human events it becomes necessary to read huge, over-interpretive essays. In my case it was “The Form of Freedom in Huckleberry Finn” a sprawling piece about power and freedom in the novel. The author, Alan Trachtenberg, focuses on how plot and word choice in the book change the way that Twain portrays freedom. Trachtenberg’s ideas are often seem odd or overly analytical but his essay really digs deep into the novel.

The first major idea introduced by the paper is the so-called paradox of “autonomy and conformity” Immediately upon beginning the book Trachtenberg observes that the carefree lifestyle that Huck experienced in Tom Sawyer has been replaced by one of where he is perpetually “cramped and confined”. In order for Huck to experience the freedom to be “Bad” he must submit to the appearance of “respectability”. Trachtenberg notes that upon the arrival of Hucks father “the paradox is reversed” now huck can lounge at the “expense of virtual confinement”.

Trachtenberg points out an interesting paradox, that gets down to the crux of a central issue in the novel: How can Huck truly free himself? The lifestyle he used to posses comes with it the chains of an abusive father and the interaction with the wicked Tom Sawyer comes with it the oppressive weight of forced “Civilized behaviour. This interpretation makes total sense to me, I feel that Trachtenberg has really hit upon a central point of Twain’s that there is no real freedom in the south as long as the idea of “Civilization” pervades everyday life.

The next major idea of the paper has to do with the escape of Jim. Trachtenberg supposes that twain uses the juxtaposition of the “two runaways” in order to free readers of “the normal historical ambiguities in order to accept as a powerful given the possibility of fulfilled freedom for Jim”. Looking beyond the academic hokum it seems that he is saying that Twain was trying to use the contrast between Huck and Jim to highlight the true meaning of freedom. The concept seems sound yet Trachtenberg doesn't really explain what this contrast actually highlights about the concept of freedom beyond that the “boundary between slave and free is unequivocal” which doesn't really even mean anything. He could have really pulled meaning from this idea and written a whole essay about how the contrast between Huck and Jim tells us about what Mark Twain believed about freedom. Instead he briefly mentions it in a smaller essay in passing wasting the potential for some great analysis as he rushes on to his next concept.

Trachtenberg’s whole essay is just like that. A headlong rush for him to mention all the ideas about freedom that popped into his head. It suffers because of that. Some of his ideas including the idea of Huck’s paradox of freedom and exploring his relationship with Jim could have been essays in their own right despite all that his ideas really bring new understanding to how freedom and power are portrayed in the novel.