Huckleberry Finn

I think that while Huckleberry Finn is a blatantly racist novel, it was not written with the intent of condoning racism or slavery. In my essay, I want to talk about the whole "racism VS. realism" issue. I believe that the very act of trying to write a realistic story based in the 1840's South is inherently racist. You cannot write a true tale of the south in that timeperiod without mentioning slavery or including racism. However, I don't believe Mark Twain was racist. I think, if anything, he was mocking racism, its cruelty, and its prevalence in the story's society; Huckleberry Finn is a satire, not a book written to encourage or discourage racism. I also don't think this book should be taught in school. I believe that since the book's publication, its audience has taken the novel way too seriosly. I mean, come on, this book is a satire, a joke, about a couple of guys floating down a river, not some epic novel that was written to change lives. I believe this book has little literary value other than an interesting and informative view of Southern culture and vernacular in the 1840's. I can understand using this book in school to teach about racism and such, and to see where we come from, but I think that subject would be better suited to a humanities class of some sort. It seems strange to me that so many English teachers use this book in their curriculum when its literary value is pretty, well, nonexistant.
I'm not sure what passages in the book I want to use to encourage this argument. There are plenty of passages that are outrageous enough that I can use them to highlight the satirical side of this book. And, of course, the examples of racism within the novel are almost limitless - the entire novel is comprised of racial slurs. It's these slurs and other examples that I can use to show how the book is not some literary jewel and is completely overrated.
For critics, I think I'll use Shelly Fishkin from that documentary to show that the book was not written to condone racism. While, due to the use of the n word and other racial slurs, that book is wraught with racism in the writing, I don't believe the sentiment behind the novel is racist. I think I will also quote Langston Hughes, who said that (I paraphrase) "Before Mark Twain's Huck Finn, there was no unromantisized view of the South, or the view of slaves in the South." This quote highlights the realism of the novel; it's the realism that gives the novel it's value, in my opinion. I will also be quoting the documentary when it says that "great writers should be causing trouble and asking controversial questions" to note that while the book is on a very touchy subject, it can be used to teach (however, it's that controversial topic that should be taught in schools, not the litereary value of the book). I will also use a few quotes form T.S. Elliot. However, I will be relying most heavily on Leo Marx for my quotes. He agrees with me that the book is a satire and should not be taken too seriously. One of my favorite quotes from his essay is "...Clemens certainly did not intend us to read [Huck Finn] solemnly. Surely the tone...is familar to readers of Mark Twain."
I'm not so sure on the logistics of the essay, and how I want to construct it.

huck

Ugh. I hate this book. There is something so frustrating about it. I don't feel like it was well thought out at all. Mark Twain has no control over the story. On event follows another and so on and so forth. There is no true excellence or appreciation for the reader. He just drags them down the Mississippi River. He disregards the questions a reader may have and simple gives them a time line of an uneventful and terribly written scenario. Whether it is racist or not truly should have no effect in why it shouldn't be read. It shouldn't be read because the book sucks. Reading a book like " The Handmaid's Tale" where Margaret Atwood is so conscientious of the reader and the connection they make with the characters and then reading a book like "Huck Finn" it is hard to recognize the authors hand in any of it. The reader wants to give Mark Twain their trust but it is difficult to do so when he so flippantly leaves the reader in the wake of his story. Yeah, I hate this book.

Kids Need Crap Too.

Is Huck Finn racist? Of course it is. It may not be a blatant sermon for white power, but the language and characterizations are plenty racially motivated. Is this the great American book? Of course not. The idea that any novel in which even it's most excited supporters cannot defend effectively the plot and development should never disgrace it's country by being declared a national classic. In short, Huck Finn is a racially insensitive, poorly written, indecisive, bewilderingly bad book. But we should teach it nonetheless.

The idea that children can flourish knowing only what to do is naive. We must know what not to do as well. If children were only taught how great condoms are but not how bad teen pregnancy is few would use protection. This is the dangerous path English education has taken. By teaching only the "great" books we have sabotaged the wide view of literature our children need. The preposterous reviews by Trilling and Elliot are a blessing in disguise, for they have sneaked a bad book into classrooms, and have given good teachers a chance to show kids all sides of literature; the good, the bad, and the ugly.

I will use the aforementioned essays to point out how children must learn not to be bought off too easily by cheap arguments. I will use the essays of Leo Marx and Smiley to show that they have good arguments about the lack of literary merits about this book, but had they not been taught it they would have skipped that important critical step. From the book I will take specific passages as well as the progression as a whole to use as examples of how children should not write.

Almost all of the books taught in English classrooms are "great." Yet they loose their respect because if all that is taught are great books children have nothing to compare them with. By teaching Huck Finn we can reinforce the value of good books, and encourage a healthy skepticism. If good examples were all we needed the dunce cap would never have been invented. Mark Twain would look good in one.

To introduce my argument I will first do background on the time period. I will discuss the attitude of many people towards African Americans in this time period. I will hope this will support my argument that the book is not racist and simply a product of its times. People in this period were brought up to think of African Americans as inferior people without the mental capabilities of white people. The book uses the word "nigger" because it was a common word in the time period. While it is natural for some people to become offended by the use of the word, reading this novel shows a window into a different time, a time when the attitude towards minorities was different than it is today. By keeping this thought in mind, you can simply view the book as a piece of history, a tale from a different age where the ideals and ideas where much different than now. I argue that America during this time was extremely racist, so should all the books and ideas that came out of it. In today's society equality is the popular movement, so modern people should be able to read this book, knowing the ideas are wrong and simply reading it for what it is, a tale from another time.
As for whether it should be taught in schools, honestly beyond the fact that it is racist, i don't think the book is simply good enough to be taught in schools. Did I enjoy the read, of course. I feel like all you get is simply a fun tale from a different time, with the only discussion to go over is whether it is racist or not. I have enjoyed our class discussion, I just don't believe the quality of the book overshadows its massive controversy. Even if i don't agree with them, people are offended by this book and causing a major uproar about it being put on a required reading list, and honestly i dont think it is good enough to stand against the massive opposition.

Racist? Nonracist? Where is the line?

How is it that a book such as Huckleberry Finn can create such a controversy that people would move to have it banned from high school curriculum? Can a book represent both racism and anti racism at the same time? At this time period it is true that the word ‘nigger’ was the common term for a person of color. So does using this word in a realistic novel automatically make the novel racist? And can’t one argue that Huck is a person who can look past the stereotype given to African Americans during this time in age? Now is this because he no longer is bound by society, or merely the fact that he has come to the realization that Jim is a human being? It seems to me that the growth that Huckleberry goes through should be taught to children of all ages. It is a necessity to learn from our past history so that we don’t repeat it. On the other hand I can see that this book could be offensive to any that do not separate what is said and what is implied. I feel as though I have a biased when it comes to this book, as I am not African American, I cannot truly feel as they feel they read this book. On the other hand if the term did not mean anything in today’s time period I would be surprised to find as much controversy as they is circling this book. The real question that comes to mind is what restrictions can be put on realism? Is it not the point of realism to make things as realistic as possible? I can see that many people have elevated this book to the top of American literature, all the while there have been others trying to dispense of this book. In order for Huck to undergo his emotional growth there has to be an aspect of racism involved within the novel. Would it make sense to write a book that is suppose to be realistic in this time period without involving the aspect of racism.

I feel as though this book should be taught in high school merely for the racial aspect presented. It is important to understand others and our own culture. I also believe that if this book it taught that the teacher must teach it in a way that doesn't make anyone feel less like a human. It needs to be addressed in a critical view point, one that is separated from the negative aspect and more involved in what the overall message.

People I plan on quoting-
Jane Smiley- I disagree with her point of view on many aspects of the novel Huckleberry Finn and feel as though she will help further my own personal point of view.
T.S. Eliot- He made the novel to be a great work of American Literature and is very apparent in his feelings that this is a anti racist novel.
"Born to Trouble"- James Miller made an incredible point in the beginning of the movie about racism and how it comes about. I want to incorporate this into my paper to prove that racism and anti racism depends on the person.
Mark Twain- The scene when Huck humbles himself to a nigger.
Leo Marx- His point of view on the ending of the novel.

Huck Finn, Racism, Idiots, and Lobo's take on it all.

The basic arguement of my essay will be as follows: Huck Finn is racist in it's setting, but the ideas in the book and the interactions of the main characters are very anti-racist. Unfortunately most high-school students are idiots. (No offense to anyone here) Because of this general idioticy most high school students, especially ones who don't have Huck Finn taught to them properly, aren't going to get this anti-racism. So a lot of them will inevitably end up being offended. So I think that this book should be taught in schools for a few reasons, they being: #1 Everyone who reads it will gain from it. People who get the anti-racism get to read a great book, and enjoy the colorful vernacular that makes this book so fun. The people who get offended because they think it is racist, will get to be offended. This is good because what point is an education that never causes you to be offended? What good is going to high school and learning how to live in the world if you never learn how to be offended. The world is always going to throw insults around, and will always try to beat you down. Thats just the way the world works. So why would we not want our high school students to learn how to handle being offended? It's an essential life skill. If we let ourselves learn to run away from offense then is that really going to create a strong populace? #2 is that for those who understand, or are taught to properly there is a beautiful novel to enjoy. Not only is the book an outstanding anti-slavery novel, but it is also (and i say this without sarcasm) a heartwarming tale of love and courage. Plus that vernacular is really fun!

So the general outline of my paper will be as follows:
My first page or two will be used to argue my point that the book is very anti-slavery. I will use the scenes of huck tearing the letter, the third trick played on Jim (the one where Huck humbles himself to a nigger), and will compare the early characterization of Jim to the tricks that the King and Duke play as they travel down the river.

After setting that up, I will use the movie and critics to set up that there are many people who find the book offensive. Then I will argue that the racism is because of the time period. Then I will transition to my arguement that it should be taught in schools, and that people should be offended. that arguement should get me 3-4 pages, so with a brief and admittedly underveloped conclusion I should arrive at 5-6 1/2 pages.

Huck Finn -Perspective of a small white child

Perspective is everything. The reality of the situation from one persons eyes might be completely different from another’s eyes. Some say that Huck Finn is a racist book and other’s say it is anti-racist. It shows slavery in the south through a small white boys eyes. This causes the tone of the book to be lighthearted and fun, as opposed to the way it realistically was in the south. Although there are times where you will hear an outrageously racist comment in the book, it doesn’t serve the reality of the racist south justice. The book has a very warped perception of how things really were in the south. After all the struggle black people had to go through, their struggle is communicated very poorly through the eyes of a little white boy. This in itself is frustrating and outrageous. As for the ending, it does not communicate any moral message about racism, Huck doesn’t grow from his experiences, it merely ends with two selfish white children exacerbating Jim’s struggle for freedom. It returns to the playful make believe that the book starts out with, Tom and Huck breaking Jim out of jail the way its done in the “books.” This makes any moral value that Huck gained meaningless because for him it is all a little game. You can never know what Huck perceives as reality and what he perceives as make believe. I will use Julius Lester's critical essay to support my point. I will focus my essay around the beginning and end of the book to show that Huck thinks the same in the end as he did in the beginning. I will point out that throughout the book, you never encounter other slaves besides Jim. I will also point out that the most struggle Jim has to go through is caused by the two boys when they make him play their games in the end. You never actually see the struggle and hardships that black people had to go through.