In the Agora: The Art of <em>Huckleberry Finn</em>

« 8-bit genius | Main | Howey's Podcast Pilot and Telecom Reform »

January 21, 2006

The Art of Huckleberry Finn

A new book on Mark Twain, recently reviewed in reason, tells us again what every critic and probably most readers have known for a long time: that Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, despite being the greatest work in American literature, is a greatly flawed novel. So flawed that you're not even supposed to read the last twelve chapters, with similar rotten spots abounding throughout the book.

This has nothing to do with the fact that the word "n-----" appears some 211 times in the text. That is simply a part of the novel's realism - the blatant, naive honesty that propels it past all the more high-styled works of its time and makes it such a precious document for nineteenth-century American culture. After all, if violent movies with brutal depictions of murder can be defended for their "truth to actual life," it seems like the same defense should hold for this unfortunate relic of our language.

The problem is a more artistic one. There are certain sections of the book that suffice to almost single-handedly propel it to the ranks of the world's great literature: the scenes, written in spare, evocative prose, of Jim and Huck floating down the river, or of Huck wrestling in his frank way with some deep moral problem, or of the horror and absurdity of the towns that they come to. But there are also places where Twain seems to lose his touch: stale, formulaic sections in which a single narrative device is repeated over and over, with ever-diminishing return. This is true of the last twelve chapters, in which Tom Sawyer develops his plans to rescue the imprisoned slave Jim in a style that is "by the book" - Twain's way of mocking his own childhood obsession with the old adventure stories - and the joke is repeated ad nauseam. This is the section that prompted Hemingway, after declaring famously in "Green Hills of Africa" that "All American writing comes from a single book by Mark Twain called Adventures of Huckleberry Finn," to advise, "If you read it, you must stop where... Jim is stolen from the boys. That is the real end. The rest is just cheating."

I agree with Hemingway about not reading the end. I also agree with him that Huckleberry Finn is probably our best book - although I'm too much of a Hawthorne fan to say that American literature begins with Huck Finn, and I think The Great Gatsby has in many ways a finer touch. Where I would tend to diverge from Hemingway is in the idea, not stated but at least implied in his comment, that Huckleberry Finn is a great artistic whole up until the last twelve chapters. For me, the truly golden part of the book ends much earlier than Chapter 31 - all the way back, in fact, in Chapter 16.

This is where Huck and Jim are run down in their raft by a steamboat, and forced to briefly end their river journey. As far as I'm concerned, there are great moments in the book after this, but nothing as touched with the dew of imagination as what came before. Most of the remainder of the book involves their interaction with the various characters they come across downstream, with Jim dropping out entirely for long periods; in the earlier chapters it was primarily Huck and Jim drifting down the river together, with nature developing so significant a presence as to form almost a third character. This is the part I remember loving as a child, and I am convinced that it is responsible for the book's high place in the hearts of most readers.

The two halves of the book were actually written quite separately from one another. Twain penned the first sixteen chapters in 1876 as a possible sequel to The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, but when he came to the end of chapter 16 he put the manuscript down (Twain, who tended to write spasmodically, was known for doing this; his papers contain many abandoned novels). Huck and Jim's original plan of sailing up the Ohio River towards the free states is foiled when they drift past the convergence of the two rivers in a fog (the truth is that Twain did not know how to write about the Ohio as he did the Mississippi, having never been a pilot on it), and when Twain realized that, with the raft drifting further south, there was now no conceivable way to save Jim, he wrote out the scene of the steamboat crash and put down the book in frustration.

It was not until seven years later, when Twain visited the Mississippi (he now lived in Hartford, CT) to refresh his mind for another book he was writing, Life on the Mississippi, that the idea of continuing Huckleberry Finn came back to him. His sentiments were powerfully moved after seeing his boyhood home in Missouri, and the idea of making a literary record of the various river towns that he had known as a pilot became strong in his mind. The ideas came churning out, and the book was finished in a few short months. Its second half presents a fantastic panorama of antebellum Mississippi life - a gold mine for the cultural historian - but it does not contain a meaningful continuation of the narrative of Huck and Jim. That bond, along with the haunting, understated record of their contact with nature (a vein of writing which Hemingway himself would try to build on in his Nick Adams stories), culminating in the nigh-mystical experience of chapter 15, remains lost after the sixteenth chapter.

The question thus becomes, if Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is as faulty and inconsistent (indeed, discontinuous) as I am arguing it is, what entitles it to the rank of America's greatest book? Certainly not any special elegance of its form. The idea that a novel should be some sort of unified, finely-crafted whole was in fact just being brought out as Twain was finishing his novel: Henry James printed his essay on "The Art of Fiction" in 1884, a year before Huck Finn was finally published. But James' pronouncements on novelistic craft belong to a later era and are suited for a different taste; Twain's writing should not be measured with them (Twain himself detested James). It would be like judging Homer's epics by the rules of the sonnet.

What Twain's novels are most praised for, and what most writing in the Jamesian tradition noticeably lacks, is a rendering of life in all its crude, incongruous substance, a faithfulness to the texture of life, without any concern to reshape it into elegant narrative. Twain, in writing a novel, did not seek to create a well-wrought urn; instead he wrote down the ideas as they presented themselves, frequently in dialect, and following with no preconceived plan the lightning strikes of his imagination as he went along. He was, as his friend and fellow novelist William Dean Howells described, the "divine amateur," a log cabin kid and newspaper humorist who at some point discovered a knack for writing about things in such a way as to make his readers' jaws drop open. His novels tend at times to soar, at other times to trudge; he was probably oblivious of when either was occurring. Hemingway took Twain's way of describing nature and developed a whole style out of it; his productions are thus even and flawlessly consistent, while Twain fluctuates wildly in and out of this voice. But when Twain unconsciously gets it right, he cannot be excelled, and his better novels thus stand at the summit of our literature.

There is another thing worth pointing out about Huck Finn, and it is a rule that I have found, if not exactly true of all great art, is at least so of my own favorite works. It is that the books, poems, short stories, movies, etc. that are most enchanting never seem to go where you hope they are going to go. The best moment - the phrase that puts chills down your back, the scene that sends your blood rushing - happens somewhere in the course of the story, and nothing that can come later could possibly fill your expectations from that moment. You get a glimpse of heaven, but never the whole thing. The end is always something more mundane, and you have to more or less forget the ending, and sometimes forget even the whole subject of the story, to savor what you enjoyed. The same is true of the song that seems so enrapturing until you read the lyrics, or the painting that is so captivating, but whose subject matter you could hardly care less about. It was almost certainly an accident of the artist that you were seized when you were - indeed, the best works tend to be the least conscious, the most accidental.

I don't know where I thought Huck and Jim would end up as I read the beginning of the book, and I'm not sure Twain did either. Nor do I know what is so mystifying about the sounds that come floating across the river to their raft, the sight of the lights of St. Louis spread out like the stars in the night sky, or the fog that is so heavy, Jim is even able to mistake it for a dream. There's no really sensible explanation of why these moments have the effect that they do, nor any plausible ending to which they could all converge, that could somehow bring to consummation all the feelings and ideas that they evoke. But it is a riddle of art that this is how the greatest works must be, like open containers where what is suggested but lacking is always better than what they contain.

Update: 2006-01-22 17:30 Slight alterations for clarity and composition.

Posted by Michael Mattair at January 21, 2006 03:50 PM

Comments

Twain himself: ...persons attempting to find a plot in [Huck Finn] will be shot.

Lucky for you, he's not alive to read your complaints. Regardless of the fact that the ending sucked (it did), I don't have it in me to criticize Twain beyond that.

Huck Finn was the first book I ever read that made me want to be a better person, and The Diaries of Adam and Eve was one of two books that ever made me cry. To each his own, of course - especially in a field as subjective as literature - but in my opinion, while there may be stories I prefer, there's no better writer.

Posted by: Nick Blesch at January 22, 2006 05:03 AM | permalink

Having read my pal and onetime boss Nick Gillespie's Reason piece on Huck Finn that you've mentioned, what you fail to note is that he essentially refutes those assessment by arguing a contrarian view: That in bringing Tom Sawyer into the picture, Twain actually shows Sawyer, the loveable prankster of his first great book, isn't exactly all that loveable and there are consequences to his reckless desire to be the hero.

Now it's more likely that Twain, tired of writing and also considering the profit motive figured that bringing back Sawyer would help close the book and boost sales. Since he's been dead a five-score, nobody knows for sure. But having read the book, I never thought the last chapters took away from the rest of the book. Gillespie therefore, probably has a more valid argument than the traditionalists on this one.

Posted by: RiShawn Biddle at January 22, 2006 12:37 PM | permalink

Thanks for your reply, RiShawn. Hopefully no one took my article as a negative piece on Twain. I'm not sure that Gillespie's suggested explanation necessarily refutes my argument... couldn't Twain have developed this point about Tom Sawyer in much less time? Don't you find the final chapters a little tedious and repetitive? I don't think it makes the book any less great though, as long as you're not looking at it through a formalist lens.

Posted by: Mike at January 22, 2006 05:04 PM | permalink

couldn't Twain have developed this point about Tom Sawyer in much less time?"

Since Twain is the guy in the literary hall of fame and the rest of us aren't, the answer is if Twain wanted to develop it in less time, he would have done so. Besides one must remember that we're in a far different era than the one in which Twain wrote his piece; for most of us today, a three-page magazine article is tedious enough due to our attention spans and adaptation to the higher-paced excitement delivered by a "Harry Potter."

That may not satisfy you, but then there is no answer that will satisfy anyone. After all, an opinion is in many cases an impression of something that we then wrap around in facts that support that impression.

"Don't you find the final chapters a little tedious and repetitive?"

That's a secondary question and one that really doesn't matter when judging great books because it deals with something that doesn't necessarily take away from a told tale. As far as I'm concerned, the question remains does a book tell the story well and would you want to pick it up again. The answer to both those questions are "yes." That's all that matters.

The problem in your case is that as a english grad student, you spend more time on the technicals -- what I usually call the copy editor's syndrome -- and not at whether the book tells the story well, which gets to the essence of whether it deserves a place in the pantheon of great books. One can argue about plenty of works that aren't perfectly executed; Coleridge's "Kublai Khan," being one example and "Tale of the Tub" by Jonathan Swift being another. But they're still great because they do their job despite or even because of their technical flaws. And at the end of the day, it's all that matters.

Posted by: RiShawn Biddle at January 22, 2006 10:13 PM | permalink

RiShawn,

I think you're being a little unfair to Michael, here. It is WAY to easy to pull the "Since Twain is the guy in the literary hall of fame and the rest of us aren't, the answer is if Twain wanted to develop it in less time, he would have done so..." line and you know it. It would suck if we used this rhetorical device all the time ("since George Bush is the expert on effective wiretapping, I guess we will have to let him make the decisions about effective wirteapping), and you of all people know that it is altogether useful and appropriate for those without historic acclaim to poke holes in the work of our heroes. It is out of respect, admiration, and a drive to add nuance and understanding to pieces (while simultaneously evolving the literary form) that a lot of folks like Michael and Nick revisit these stories and critique them, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Heck, if we want to pull the "ethos" string, here, Michale is joined in his criticism by the likes of (if I remember the Huck Finn intro correctly) Harold Bloom; and it is almost undeniable that the ending to Huck Finn (particularly when compared to the beginning) is flawed. So what do we do about? Why not do like Michael: admit the work is imperfect, try and understand why (maybe this understanding will lead him or another writer to improve on the formula and become another historic writer someday), and then, all of that remembered, note that despite its flaws Huck Finn is a fabulous work of fiction--perhaps the best we as Americans have.

Posted by: John at January 22, 2006 10:55 PM | permalink

I always thought that great literature was that which allowed the reader to get totally involved in the book itself - almost like visiting another country - and then let you back into your own life as a better person for having read it. A great author, then, would be one who could consistently create books that accomplished that objective (which is why I'm not a writer). Sigh! To have the time and really good books to read.....

Posted by: lawyerchik1 at January 23, 2006 10:50 AM | permalink

Michael, you have put together an excellent piece here. You are clearly a great addition to ITA.

As for Twain, I expect he would be pleased to see a comment thread such as this, many years later. As you know he had no reservations about disecting other writers, sometimes with a dull pocket knife rather than a lancet.

At a time when reading anything longer than a magazine article takes more time than most people will budget, I find it reassuring that anyone is still reading Mark Twain for anyting more than aphorisms.

I'm looking forward to your future posts.

Posted by: Hootsbuddy at January 24, 2006 08:50 AM | permalink

If there's anyone here who hasn't read Twain's essay eviscerating James Fenimore Cooper, go and do so. It's funny and true, imo.

Posted by: Nick Blesch at January 24, 2006 10:47 AM | permalink

Reflection
Huckleberry Finn is a very symbolic novel, it contains many themes or many ideas that the writer Mark Twain wanted to convey. He was describing and reflecting the society at that time. Mark Twain was mocking the American society and the American values in is novel. Huck is the character of change or the truth. I think Mark Twain was so intelligent when he set a child character to be the protagonist of his novel; Twain is attempting to say that all the society's men are children and this child Huck is the only man among them in the corrupted society.
Mark Twain introduced a big conflict in the novel which is between Huck's personality and his society.Huck could apply his own rules on his small land the raft and not the society's rules, and it was a strong challenge towards his society. Twain was describing the society as a society of sheep or a cattle of animals anyone can play in their minds and was describing them as cowards when S.R killed the man in front of many people , the people went to his home to get revenge, but the couldn’t because he changed their views by few strong words and he let them go back like cowards he said "look into my eyes cowards" ,so this shows us how were uneducated and uncivilized people at that time.Moreover,Twain shows in this situation that the people were lost they don’t distinguish between the true side and the bad side .
On the other and, Twain presented two symbols, such as Huck and Tom, Huck was a symbol of realism and, Tom was a symbol of romanticism. Twain introduced romanticism in a picture of fun, such as the dead daughter who painted many picture and wrote many poems for the dead people the funny thing here is that when se died no one done her anything. Moreover, the plans of Tom and Huck to return Jim from his prison, we could see that Tom was just imagining solutions and plans which were unreal. Tom was to be killed just to have adventures, though he knows that Jim is already free without his imaginative plans .Huck was presenting realism, like when the King and the Duke came to them and said that they are a King and a Duke he said aside that they are just liars, neither a King nor a Duke, but he kept this fact to himself without telling Jim know because he wanted Jim to put the hope in them to set him free.
The main idea that Twain wants to convey is the theme of slavery. Twain is explaining that Jim was just a symbol for the slaves all over the States. The American society treated the Afro-Americans people like furniture the white people have the right to sell them to kill the and to do whatever they want , The Black man was just a thing at home or anywhere else ,they treated them like a machine to raise their money.
In Huck's novel Twain was succeeded to convey the message of discrimination at that society by introducing Jim instead of the slaves at that period of time. Twain described Jim in his novel as an ideal human being .Huck said about him "Jim was like my father". Till that moment Huck was thinking himself doing something not good, even till the end he told Tom are you sure that Jim is a good man after rescuing Tom's life Tom replied that yes he is good . The slaves were a very important element at that period of time, specially in raising the economy of American by working under their orders in the plantation of cotton and tobacco, moreover, they were cheap labors this idea was mentioned by Twain in the scene of the farmer, he has many naggers who are working with him in plantation instead of machines .The society was abusing the slaves and putting down their status. Such as when Miss Sally asked Huck about if anyone was injured in the incident he said no no one was injured but a nigger was killed ,she said that "Thank God no one was injured " ,so for her a nigger is not a human being .At Beckey's home everyone in his home has a nigger . I think Twain has put Jim in the trip and the adventures of Huck to convince him, the readers and the society that Jim is a pure human being and not just a thing.
Twain gave us a very clear theme here which is the religion. Twain was mocking the religion aspects of the age such as the difference between borrowing and stealing .Twain's attempts in the novel were skepticism of religion ,Such as at the beginning of the novel when he said about the bad place which is the Hell and he wanted to make everything that makes him be in the Hell .We have a clear evidence for mocking the religion when Miss's Duglass asked Huck to pray and God will do everything for what he is praying for ,he prayed but according to his thinking nothing ad happened Huck said to the widow why your family cant go back after your praying .Moreover, when he had a small discussion wit Jim about the stars if they happened or created. Twain wanted to say that if the religion doesn’t make the people equal the white man beside the black man equals, so it is not a religion or it is not complete religion for the society.
The last theme as I expected or from my view point, is Colonialism .Twain is trying to convince people to go and make adventures and make people free ,even at the end he is trying to express this idea frankly ,when Huck said he is going to have a new adventure at "the Indian Territory" .Twain is teaching the children how to be stronger than men and to have adventures by the name of giving freedom to the oppressed people such as the black people .As I read from the history America that the needed army to be ready because the had a wore with Britain and the civil war so, they needed to prepare new strong people or armies who love and adore new adventures and to make people free. In my opinion that this novel is a revolutionary novel, which is preparing people for the coming revolution.
Twain was very intelligent in putting the end that tells us tat this novel as other novels which are related to this novel .Twain succeeded by using the suspense in order to make readers to be waiting for the next scene or for what will happen in the next chapter.
I think the novel has many ethical lessons and moral lessons Such as all people are equal and don’t judge people for their appearance and more and more.

Posted by: Ibrahim Alejla at April 21, 2006 01:40 PM | permalink

I want to say uts a very precious essay mr Ibrahim and its rational interpretion for the novel.
byee
sameh A habeeb
freelancer and News Producer ,Gaza
972599306096

Posted by: Sameh Habeeb at August 31, 2006 02:53 PM | permalink

January 21, 2006

The Art of Huckleberry Finn

Comments

Post a comment