A Response to Smiley

In googling Smiley's article, I came across an interesting response to it--an essay in direct response to Smiley by the psychologist Maria Konnikova. In this, she uses her scientific background to show that the abrupt reversal of Huck's behavior when Tom returns to the scene at the end of the novel is not, in fact, out of context, or necessarily unpredictable.

While the beginning of the essay is mostly just the common knowledge of peer pressure and its influences on teen behavior, she later analyzes several sets of statistics, showing the likelihood of Huck's behavior. As she compares these statistics, she shows that because of Huck's age, gender, status, lifestyle, situation, etc. (especially in comparison to Tom's), Huck would be more than likely to bend to Tom's will. 

While this article, like Smiley's, doesn't tell the whole story of Huck Finn, it does shed new light on the ending of the novel. Konnikova argues that the ending many critics have deemed inappropriate and unfitting absolutely does fit the story. Despite this, she also recognizes it is not her current place to judge the artistry of the ending, and in doing so she leaves room for possible literary flaws. 

It seems to me that this article is an excellent point of reference in analyzing the legitimacy and quality of Twain's ending to Huckleberry Finn. As a modern reader, it is easy to take on a modern perspective of slavery--a mindset in which the end of the novel may come as a shock. However, Konnikova takes on the perspective of a pre-civil-war era southern boy, showing the revolutionary, and thus unlikely nature of Huck's "enlightenment" as he travels with Jim. Therefore, while Huck's regression into racism and insensitivity seem absolutely abhorrent to Twain's 21st century reader, it is understandable in the context of Huck's historical time period, and therefore fitting to the story. An understanding of the differences between the perspectives Konnikova describes accounts for much of the unaccountability found in the ending of Twain's novel, and therein ironically emphasizes his objective, showing the flaws of Huck's society, especially in its moral contradiction and repression of the individual. With this in mind, Twain then uses the corruption of Huck's character, with whom the reader relates, to urge the necessity of mass reform, because, he believes, individual reform without the support of society is futile. With Konnikova's conclusions in mind, it makes sense to me that much of the criticism surrounding the book's ending stems from the separation rather than unification of perspectives, which might lead a reader into essentially "missing the point" Twain is trying to make.

Link to Maria Konnikova's Essay:
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/literally-psyched/2012/10/05/is-huckleberry-finns-ending-really-lacking-not-if-youre-talking-psychology/

Huck's development

So towards the end of the novel, when Tom Sawyer comes back. I notice that Huck fell right back into the pattern of following everything that Tom says, instead of thinking for himself. Huck's development is stop when Tom returns.

Now at the beginning i didn't think Tom was a bad guy, but that he wasn't a great guy either. Now after finishing the novel, i don't like him. I think he is a villain, and i really can't stand him. He uses Jim as a toy, he allows him to stay locked up and captured, knowing that Jim is free and has been free for 2 months. All Tom wants is an adventure, he talked about that adventure at the beginning of the novel, when he started the banned of robbers, and he would pretend that they were stealing something else, when they were just stealing food.

Then Tom comes back into Huck's life, and claims he is going to help him "Catch the N*****" Which Huck is not a big fan of, yet the plan that Tom comes up with is way to crazy and dangerous, it may even get them all killed. And Huck knowns there is a easier plan, but he doesn't say anything. Throughout the plan, there are many things that Tom says they have to do, when in reality, those things are not need. Tom just wants the adventure. And time after time, Huck wants to know, how what they're doing is going to help Jim. Once they do get Jim, Tom even wants to cut off Jim's leg. And he would have done it too. All of this show that Tom treats blacks only a little better than slaveholders. Tom uses Jim as a toy to go a great adventure that he has read about he all his books.

I also believe that the reoccurrence of Tom, temporarily stops Huck's moral development and growth. Tom is the wall that Huck must get over. When Tom comes back, Huck just goes along with what he said, and becomes to go back to the ways, and thought. Before his moral development.

This is why i believe that Tom Sawyer is a villain of the novel.

Huck vs. The Duke and King

In showing Huck's sympathy for the Duke and King in chapter 33, Twain really makes his reader think, both about why on earth Huck would feel this way, and what Twain's intentions are in this passage.

In my analysis of the passage thus far, I have reached a few realizations. First, that Huck has a natural instinct for appreciation and connection to the human condition. He seems to be able to recognize the humanity in the characters that society has cast out--first Jim, and now the Duke and King. 

My second realization is that there are definite parallels between Huck and the Duke and King. The most obvious of these is their tendency to take on different "roles" in the different towns they go to. However, while both are essentially doing the same thing (taking on alternate identities in order to somehow benefit themselves), the reader perceives the acts differently. For example, when Huck pretends to be Tom at Aunt Sally and Uncle Silas' house, his intention is to steal Jim, who is essentially property. Likewise, when The Duke and King pretend to be the Wilk's brothers, their intention is to take the girls' money and property. This parallel is obscured by the reader's differing perceptions of the two instances--glorifying Huck's and condemning the Duke and King's. In other words, the perspective of morals with which the reader approaches the novel in some ways destroys the parallel. However, in the eyes of the society in the setting of the novel, Huck is on the same level of immorality as the Duke and King--an idea that "re-solidifies" the parallel between the two. 

Huck's view of himself strays from both of these ideas. Rather than seeing himself as superior to the Duke and King or as their immoral equal, he identifies himself to them and seems to simply recognize their common human status. This, ultimately, is what Twain is attempting to convey when he writes of Huck's strange flash of sympathy and sorrow in the moment of their public condemnation. 

Huck seems to understand--whether he consciously knows it or not--that people have an inherent human dignity that is to be respected. He regrets the cruelty that people exhibit in their treatment of others, and ultimately places the blame for these conflicts on society when he rejects civilization at the end of the novel, choosing to move to Oklahoma instead.

Showmanship

As Huckleberry Finn goes to rescue Jim, he encounters Tom Sawyer. He encounters Tom while he is pretending to be Tom. Huckleberry wants Tom's help to rescue Jim. Huck just wants to save Jim and get out of there. Tom on the other hand wants to make the escape like an epic story. Tom can not resist making the escape a big deal. He makes Huck steal many things from the house to trick Sally. Eventually Tom gets shot when they run away from the farmers. He kind of deserves what he received because he was the reason they were still at the house.