Chicken or the Egg

A "chicken and egg" proposal is the classic example of a circular process, with no beginning or end. Yet this analogy is flawed from the start. Chickens have not been around since the beginning of time, so the whole process has to start somewhere. So how did the very first chicken arise? Two almost-evolved-into-chickens-but-not-quite-there parents laid an EGG, containing the first true chicken. The egg did indeed proceed the chicken.
Some, however, might vehemently argue that an egg containing a fully evolved chicken must be laid by an equally evolved chicken. Genetically, this makes sense. The argument that a non-chicken cannot beget a chicken is a very reasonable one, but it has one logical fallacy. Mutations in gene replication make the offspring more than just a product of the parents. They are the root of all diversity on earth. One minute mutation is what distinguished the true chicken from all other small clucking flightless avea. That one mutation first appeared in an egg.
Others will argue that evolution does not exist at all, so the first chicken was placed on earth as a chicken, and there have always been chickens, and the whole argument of the egg is therefore ludicrous. There are more than one fallacies with this point of view, but these reasons have been so often repeated and so little heeded by those of this point of view, it does not seem worth saying them again. For those who do believe in evolution, however, there can be no question as to the true beginning of this circle.

Mark Twain--you're ruining my life.

I don't know where I want to go with this essay. I have tried and tried to motivate myself for it but the fact that I don't care the slightest bit about the topic has put quite a burden on my shoulders. The only things that I have to say is that mom was freaking off the wall insane, and if she cares so much about her daughter reading Huck Finn then she should take her daughter out of the class for the duration of the time that they will be focusing on the topic; instead of making a total fool of herself. Personally I don't think that Huck stressed the issue to the extent that he should have. This novel was almost written in a child's perspective, you know how children can see the broader picture but not notice the details? Take sex for example, Mommy is all of a sudden pregnant and a stork will soon drop off the baby that is magically extracted from her stomach on the front step, they don't question how it got into her stomach in the first place, they will just go with the flow and think all is true about what they have been told without further investigation. In a way they are blind to reality. This is the way Huck is with the issue of slavery and demeaning the blacks by using the word Nigger. He has seen and heard it being used therefore he thinks that it is hunky dory for him to use it as well. He does not consider the fact that it might as well be offensive to Jim or to others of the race, it is merely a word representing a color. Adding on to this, I think that we should be exposed to a novel that really illustrates the brutality of the time, as we were while studying the holocaust. We need to take in the fact that slavery was a very real issue and it did happen. People were treated horribly, and history should never repeat itself. Yet why cover it up, it is history, it is what it is. There was no silver lining to it, and thus there shouldn't be any sheltering of what had happened in any novel related to the issue. Moreover, if we are going to be reading a book that is racist (whether or not you find Huck Finn racist, so be it) we should also read a book that is racist toward whites as well. This is not something that we see often, and I think that it would be an interesting followup or even pre-read to a book such as Huck Finn; maybe then people can stop freaking out and come to the conclusion that racism is not only focused on blacks, but the other way as well (being on whites). This was a really lousy book, not that I disliked it, but all of the controversy that it stirred up is ridiculous and I can't wait to be finished with the whole bit. Mark Twain has got to be rolling over in his grave laughing his ass off at all that he has stirred up. [To anyone that is reading this please do not take offense to anything I said, and if you do leave a comment, I do not care]

Huck

The book Huckleberry fin has racist elements, but as a whole is not racist in fact it is an anti racist novel. The concluding chapters is in fact almost a definition of satire on not only the institution of slavery but also the beginning of the reconstruction in which southerners negligently forgot to tell their former slaves oh by the way you’re free. In fact most of this novel’s events off the river are satirical. As far as the question as to wither it should be taught in school or not, it should be taught as an optional assignment in conjunction with Uncle Toms Cabin and other novels that touch upon America’s history with slavery. Passages I plan to cite include the scene on Jackson Island, the third trick played on Jim, the journey down river when it was only Jim and Huck, and the ending it self. To discus the use of this book in school I will use the movie to show that not all students are ready to be taught Huck Fin and teachers must use their discretion to see if students are able to handle the copious amount of Racist elements.

Kenya's Prospectus

Huckleberry Finn was a huge step in literature, especially for the times when it was written. I think that the book expresses an amazing pro-acknowledgment of the realities of slavery. I think that the last 13 chapters are incredibly important in the book because, even though quite satirical they express an incredible reality of the hardships of slavery and the way that white people simply believe that it is just alright.
I want to base my paper first around the three transformations of Huck Finn and how he stepped out from the norms of society (even though he was trying to be forced into them through Ms Watson's rules and schooling). His first transformation happens on Jackson's Island when he says "they are after us," to Jim. His second one is when he says he'll go to hell for the freedom of Jim, and the third is his final ability to humble himself to Jim after playing a rude trick on him. This not only represents the transformation of a young boy, but the idea that one day society may transform into the belief that blacks do too have rights. But does society really change? No. The end of the book proves this through Huck's submission to Tom's cruelty. It's like this glimpse of hope has been snatched up in what is really reality, what is still partially reality today. Still, society has a frame of mind biased towards colored people. Though the cruelty of slavery still may not exist, the reality of racism and outward, demeaning acknowledgment of racism does.
After using the three transformation scenes, I will use different examples of slavery from Tom's harsh cruelty towards Jim in the end. When he makes him write with blood, sleep with snakes, dress as a woman for almost pure enjoyment. I will truly hit hard that he knew all along he was free, making the cruelty even harsher. It represents societies "true knowledge" (I guess you could say atleast some people knew it was wrong) that slavery was immoral. People such as Huck. But they too get sucked back into what is society: slavery.
T.S. Eliot proves my point in saying that "the story descends to the level of Tom Sawyer."
Leo Marx: "Jim's yearning for freedom, is made the object of nonsense. The conclusion, in short, is farce, but the rest of the novel is not."
Trilling: "there is a certain falling off" (at the end) "yet it has a certain formal aptness"

Huck Finn Essay

I loved Huckleberry Finn and I enjoyed it thoroughly, but I am still very undecided on how I am going to write this essay. I believe that this book is an American classic and that it is revolutionary for it's time, not only because it is in the vernacular, but that the language in the book was very accurate to the way they spoke, acted and believed back then. I personally believe that this book should be tought, but I am also a young white teenager. Even though I understand how bad the n word is, I will never be able to feel the hurt that people of color feel when that word is used. Throughout the documentary, "Culture Shock," many of my classmates were annoyed by the mother. She was obviously hurt by the way that her daughter was made to read this book and the manner in which the book was taught to her. This goes against my initial arguement that it should be taught in school. If it is, it must be taught in a very gentle manner and anybody that doesn't want to read this book, because it hurts them, shouldn't be forced to, or cast out.

Huck Finn and Twain

It tooke me a while to figure out exactly what I was going to argue about this book because there were just too many options I could try. I decided that my strongest argument would be to argue that the book is neither racist nor anti-racist, it's simply a product of the times in which it was written. I also feel that this book should be taught in schools because though the ending (one of the greatest flaws of the work) is a satire which few people seem to pick up on.

I love Mark Twain as a writer, so my argument about this book is going to biased, but that being said, I do recognize the flaws in this novel and there fore will not try to make the case that this is the single greatest american novel, there are much better works out there. My case is, however, going to be based in the fact that Twain was not a very serious person. He took is work very seriously, but very rarely did he write something that was dead serious.

Another thing that I would love to address, but I don't want to argue too many things at once, is the fact that maybe the point of the end, though a satire, is just as much about Jim becoming a father figure to Huck's moral awakening, seeing as Jim saves Tom in the end even though he makes Jim's life a living hell in the end.

Critics such as Peaches Henry, and James Cox I've found might be useful, as would be Marx. I sould love to find a critic that had a strong argument against mine which I could use to help strengthen my own point (like Sanders did to Rushdie) but I definitely find those 3 critics helpful in their points.

As for direct scenes, I am obviously going to be focusing on the ending to make the case of the satire which Twain created, and in doing so I can reference the gang of "robbers" which Tom Sawyer creates to help reiterate some of the cyclical formatting Twain used. I can extend this argument about satire past Tom by including the humorous retelling of Romeo & Juliet with the Grangerfords.

However, my argument that the book is a product of the times rather than racist I'm finding slightly difficult. I can make the argument that the word usage and some of the actions are clearly what would be expected in the time it was written, much less set in, but I really am trying to figure out scenes which might strengthen this argument. While I could use many scenes from the novel where Huck makes a moral decision, these seem to be making more of a racist/anti-racist message, while my argument is that it is neither.

Either way, I know my argument and I can write a good paper off of it, but if there are any critics or scenes that might help me, point me to them. Thanks

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.