To End or Not to End?

Anyone who has read Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn can agree that the ending of the book not quite what they were hoping for. The impromptu arrival of Tom Sawyer, the freeing of Jim, and departure of Huck, have left many wondering what Twain was thinking when he finished writing the novel. Personally, I liked where Twain left it. For me, it didn’t end; rather, the story had only just begun. The ending relates so much to who Huck was and still is: a young, dirty, cheeky, adventurous boy who lived to live. T.S. Eliot, who is somewhat on my side, said because the character of Huckleberry Finn had no beginning or end, the ending must not have one either. On page 288, he says, “Huck comes from nowhere and is bound for nowhere..he is the independence of the vagabond..therefore, he can only disappear..” I agree with Eliot on this. The character of Finn embodies the epitome of someone who thrives off of living life on the edge, or in Huck’s case, on a raft down the River. How can he be held back? It is in Huck’s very nature to discover a new place, roam it for awhile, and then “disappear”. If Twain had left us with a different ending, Huck would not be able to follow his future adventures awaiting him down the River. He went on to say that “It is right that the mood of the end of the book should bring us back to that of the beginning”. Going back to the beginning at the end gives Huck the freedom he has a sought, found, and fought for. Twain’s ending enables him to fight further still.

Marx, one who didn’t quite get what they were hoping for in the end, argued on page 299 that the ending of Twain’s novel was not unified and “lacked coherence and meaning; blurring the end”. He disagreed with Eliot over trying to “justify” the ending and giving it “reason” (pg 300). He felt the conclusion to be frustrating; neither plausible nor reasonable, leaving him completely unsatisfied (pg 302). To him, the quest for freedom that Huck was on could simply not be attained in the wilds of the Mississippi. He said his quest for freedom down the River in the raft was in fact “virtually doomed”. If Marx is right, no one should ever attempt freedom. In the book, the Raft and the River are 2 crucial elements that allow Huck and his companion Jim to escape from their difficult lives and Marx says the raft and the river are clues for us to see they will never succeed in their path to find freedom. He says the raft “lacks power and maneuverability” and cannot carry the “weight” of what it is carrying. You could say the “weight” on the raft is Huck’s companion Jim, a runaway slave travelling with a young white boy down the Mississippi. Perhaps he should have left Jim on a bank somewhere and continued on his journey. You could also say that the River is Huck; unpredictable, wild, and even calm at times. You could read into the metaphors in many different ways but the actions of Huck and his companion remain the same. They are on a quest for freedom. Freedom from abuse, freedom from slavery, freedom from racism, from backwards politics, from stuck-up religion, from the confines of social status, and I believe they reach these freedoms despite the ending in the book.

Some may call Huck the backwoods Peter Pan of the south who is chased by his father with a knife, rather than by washed up pirates. Or he could be called a young Christopher McCandless (Into the Wild); leaving all social society and its restraints behind him as Huck did. The point is, though fiction or real life, these boys all shared one thing in common: they lived to live.

Huck

 I had never read Huckleberry Finn in high school and I was not sure if I would like reading it in this class. When I began reading Huckleberry Finn I was so drawn by Tom and Huck that I did not want to put the book down. I felt that I could see who they were while I was reading. Tom enjoyed being adventurous while reading prison and pirate books. He was a typical boy who wanted an adventure and Huck was along for it.

Huck is fourteen and torn between what he is taught by the upright townspeople that he should do and what he wants to do. Huck’s father coming back took his life in a different direction and I could not help but want to help Huck and save him from his abusive father. Huck faking his own death and escaping the chains of his father pulled me even more into the book.

I kept reading to see what was going to happen next to Huck now that he was on his own.  Huck become free in a sense and the only place he finds serenity is on the river with Jim. Huck continues to stay with Jim as they travel, despite his belief that he is breaking all of society and religion's beliefs. Huck's struggle with the concept of slavery and Jim's freedom continued throughout the novel. I enjoyed reading this book and discussing each character and their struggles helped me understand the book even more. I began to learn more about Huck as a character and the type of person he was to Jim.

You're a Good Character, Huckleberry Finn

Characters can really make or break a story for me. The writing can be excellent, the plot can be intriguing, but if I don’t sympathize with the characters in any way, especially the protagonist, then it will be very difficult for me to like a piece of literature. It’s one of the reasons I did not like Leaves of Grass, because Whitman came across as arrogant with his “I celebrate myself” attitude and that drove me nuts.

Thankfully, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is not only well written and entertaining, but it has characters that I actually care about. I will focus on Huck Finn himself and why I find Huck to be a sympathetic, likable character.

I think Huck ultimately has a good heart. He can be immature, he can be a prankster on occasions, he can be a rowdy kid, but in the end his heart is usually in the right place. An example of this is the scene where Huck tricks Jim by the river, trying to get Jim to think that he only dreamed that Huck left. Huck has fun with the prank at first, but when he realizes that it hurt Jim, Huck ends up feeling guilty and mean about what he did. He says, “It was fifteen minutes before I could work myself up to go and humble myself to a nigger- but I done it, and I warn’t ever sorry for it afterwards, neither. I didn’t do him no more mean tricks, and I wouldn’t done that one if I’d a knowed it would make him feel that way.” (100)

Another quality that I liked about Huck is that he is very clever. One example of this cleverness is when he fakes his own death to escape his father. Huck does this in a creative way that fools everyone; he works out all these intricate details, from putting his hair on the bloodied ax to hiding the pig in the river. (57-58) The escape was very entertaining and a mark of how Huck thinks things through. He knows how to think on his feet, and he will do whatever it takes to get where he wants to go.

In many situations, Huck tells these insane lies to people to get what he wants or needs, or to get himself out of trouble. He pretends to be a boy named George Jackson when he comes across the Shepherdsons. He pretends to be Tom Sawyer at Aunt Sally’s house. He gets a couple of men to think his father is ill, which results in them giving him directions and money (103). He even pretends to be a girl, though he doesn’t fool anyone for very long. Huck becomes a natural at telling lies and most of the time he is convincing. One might argue that this is more because of the naïveté of the people, but I think it shows that Huck is quick thinking. As sick as this sounds, it’s impressive how good he is at lying to people.

These qualities I described seem to be at odds with each other; Huck wants to do the right thing, and yet he is willing to lie to get what he wants or needs. But I think that’s what makes him likable. He’s human, he struggles to come to decisions and that makes him relatable. It can also be hard to remember that he’s only a kid. That can account for some of the conflict. One of my favorite lines in the entire book is when Huck says, “All right, then, I’ll go to hell” (201). He was wrestling with the decision of whether he will tell Miss Watson that he knows where Jim is, and his declaration of how he will go to hell is his decision to free Jim after all. It is interesting that he sees freeing Jim as an act that would send him to hell, and others in that society would say the same thing. But I, a reader in the 21^st century who sees slavery as wrong, think Huck made the right choice by choosing to free Jim. It’s kind of an interesting thing to think about.

Rollin' On the River with Huck Finn

The river has gotten its fair share of metaphorical use over time in our culture. Tina Turner aims to find bliss by “rollin’ on the river.” Emily Dickinson is looking for companionship in “My River.”In the 1955 Western comedy, an unlikely couple joins forces in what is called “Many Rivers to Cross.”

 Similarly, T. S. Eliot believes that through understanding the metaphor that lies within the river in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, readers will find the book’s central meaning. Eliot goes on to explain the integral connection between the river and Huck. Eliot says in his essay that “Huck…gives the book style. The River gives the book its form” (286). He goes on to say that the river ultimately controls Huck and Jim’s destiny as it separates, unites and forces them to understand one another through their many conversations floating down the water.

Eliot says that in the novel, “Mark Twain makes you see the River, as it is and was and always will be, more clearly than the author of any other description of a river known to me.” This causes the reader to experience the river for themselves. This is what makes the book a masterpiece in his mind. He further unites Huck and the river by saying that both have no beginning or end; they are immortalized into the story. “Huck Finn must come from nowhere and be bound for nowhere.” (288).

 The issue I have with this statement is that any morality that Huck may gain throughout the story is then taken as meaningless. He then doesn’t really learn anything and isn’t changed whatsoever. He is a character that cannot be developed. He is a static player in an evolutionary novel. As Huck is upstaged by Tom in the novel’s ending, Eliot believes that this allows Huck to disappear, because of his immortalization. Likewise, the river represents an immortalized player in the story. The river cannot be overshadowed by the larger story itself. Eliot believes that “things must merely happen” (289) for wherever the current takes Huck is where he will end up.

 For Eliot, this justifies the ending of the novel. He says that no other ending could have resulted, for it would confine the immortal character that is Huck Finn. While Eliot’s argument is convincing, I believe it is too extreme to take the central argument of the novel upon the river. By doing so, it causes the characters to be left at the disposal of nature. They become mere puppets to whatever happens along the river. Again, the character development of Huck throughout the novel is disregarded. It puts Huck out of reach. For Eliot, Huck is no longer a young boy experiencing the world, but now almost like a legend that cannot be confined to earthly bounds.

 Eliot furthers himself away from answering the novel’s peculiar ending. While I agree that Huck possesses the “independence of a vagabond,” (288) the river did not necessarily impress this upon him. He is merely a child that doesn’t understand the consequences of his actions. The river served to teach him lessons that he hasn’t sorted through just yet. I believe the experiences along the river represent an important part of Huck’s development, but it does not serve to answer the questions about the novel that we are still asking today.

"Parting is such sweet sorrow . . . "

When I picked up Emily Dickinson's Selected Poems, I was not aware of how her writing would connect so closely to my life.  Some have called her "the poet of death," but I would say her writing is life-giving as well.  Dickenson's poems describe the events, thoughts, and feelings of loss so precisely, they resonate with my own experience.  Surprisingly, I found her perspective in these poems comforting.

In the poem Parting, Dickinson talks about events in her life that have caused such severe anguish, she feels as if she has died:

My life closed twice before its close;
It yet remains to see
If Immortality unveil
A third event to me,

So huge, so hopeless to conceive,
As these that twice befell.
Parting is all we know of heaven,
And all we need of hell. 

Dickinson's reference to heaven and hell at the end of this poem intrigued me.  The phrase, Parting is all we know of heaven, was easy to understand.  As I have learned, being separated by death from someone you love makes Heaven more real.  However, the phrase: And all we need of hell, was harder to decipher.  English professor Lilia Melani at Brooklyn College offers this explanation: "The last two lines of this poem present a powerful paradox; parting is both heaven and hell. We part with those who die and--hopefully--go to heaven, which is, ironically, an eternal happiness for them; however, we who are left behind suffer the pain (hell) of their deaths (parting)."

The painful suffering that death brings to the family is perfectly depicted in this next poem.  Here, Dickinson describes the day after the death of a loved one and the feeling of broken hearts:

The bustle is a house
The morning after death
Is solemnest of industries
Enacted upon earth, - 

The sweeping up the heart,
And putting love away
We shall not want to use again
Until eternity.

In another poem, Dickinson portrays the shock felt by all in the neighborhood:

There's been a death in the opposite house
As lately as to-day.
I know it by the numb look
Such houses have alway.

The neighbors rustle in and out, . . .
The children hurry by; . . .
The minister goes stiffly in
As if the house were his, . . .

In Memorials, Dickinson describes how death causes us to slow down and reflect on what is important.  When a "perished creature" dies, we have the opportunity to honor a life and to remember:

Death sets a thing significant
The eye had hurried by,
Except a perished creature
Entreat us tenderly

To ponder little workmanships
In crayon or in wool,
With "This was last her fingers did,"
Industrious until

The thimble wade too heavy,
The stitches stopped themselves,
And then 't was put among the dust
Upon the closet shelves.

Again, the death of a loved one makes heaven more of a reality, which Dickinson beautifully portrays in this next poem:

I never saw a moor,
I never saw the sea;
Yet know I how the heather looks,
And what a wave must be

I never spoke with God,
Nor visited in heaven;
Yet certain am I of the spot
As if the chart were given.

In the poem Retrospect, Dickinson illustrates the heartbreaking thoughts of a person who has died.  She imagines the places and things that are dear to her and wonders if her family will miss her at Thanksgiving and Christmas.  In the final stanza, she is overwhelmed by grief and decides to focus on the day when her loved ones will join her in heaven:

But this sort grieved myself,
And so I thought how it would be
When just this time, some perfect year,
Themselves should come to me.

To be sure, the experience of profound loss brings unfathomable pain.  Some people say, "It is a wound that never heals."  In her poem, The Mystery of Pain, Dickinson puts it this way:

Pain has an element of blank;
It cannot recollect
When it began, or if there were
A day when it was not

It has no future but itself,
Its infinite realms contain
Its past, enlightened to perceive
New periods of pain.

Finally, in the poem Griefs, Dickinson compares the weight of her own grief to the grief that others bear.  She wonders: "if it hurts to live, and if they have to try, and whether, could they choose between, they would not rather die."  Dickinson then ponders the different kinds of grief and concludes:

And though I may not quess the kind
Correctly, yet to me
A piercing comfort it affords
In passing Calvary,

To note the fashions of the cross,
Of those who stand alone,
Still fascinated to presume
That some are like my own. 

My thoughts focus on Christ: "A man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief."




 



       

Are we alone?

Pain. We all experience pain. The young and the old, the rich and the poor. It’s unfortunate and inevitable. There’s no escaping it. This is just what Dickinson felt in many of her poems. Pain. Even though Dickinson lived a private life which escaped much of society, she was not able to escape the pain that comes along with being merely human. In much of her writing she talks about her feelings and her thoughts. She shows her true heart in her writing and doesn’t hold anything back. She is vulnerable and open, which is why I think we can all relate with her to an extent. We are all human, so we all understand pain.

One of the poems that really struck me was her poem Griefs. This is what she wrote:

I measure every grief I meet

With analytic eyes;

I wonder if it weighs like mine,

Or has an easier size.

I wonder if they bore it long,

Or did it just begin?

I could not tell the date of mine,

It feels so old a pain

I wonder if it hurts to live,

And if they have to try,

And whether, could they choose between,

They would not rather die.

I wonder if when years have piled –

Some thousands – on the cause

Of early hurt, if such a lapse

Could give them any pause;

Or would they go on aching still

Through centuries above,

Enlightened to a larger pain

By contrast with the love.

The grieved are many, I am told;

The reason deeper lies, –

Death is but one and comes but once,

And only nails the eyes.

There’s grief of want, and grief of cold, –

A sort they call ‘despair;’

There’s banishment from native eyes,

In sight of native air.

And though I may not guess the kind

Correctly, yet to me

A piercing comfort it afford

In passing Calvary,

To note the fashions of the cross,

Of those that stand alone,

Still fascinated to presume

That some are like my own.

This poem is so honest. That’s one of the reasons I think I really like it. I can hear where she is coming from. Most people would be able to relate to Dickinson in losing a loved one. Or if you personally haven’t lost a loved one, you probably know someone who has lost somebody important to them and have seen the sorrow they’ve gone through. What Dickinson is getting at in this poem is the amount of grief everyone goes through. There is no way of really knowing how much grief and sorrow someone else is experiencing. We may try to compare our pain to others and wonder whose is greater. It’s as if Dickinson is looking for someone else who has experienced the weightiness of pain she has felt. She’s doesn’t want to be alone in what she is feeling.

The last two lines of the poem show her surprise that others could be carrying the same heavy burden she is carrying. I think many times we think we are the only one’s going through something tough. The common phrase among teenagers or adolescents is that their parents just don’t understand them. Their parents don’t know what it’s like to be a teenager. Although this is somewhat of a cliché way to make this comparison, it works. There’s a great comfort in knowing that you are not alone. Comfort in knowing that someone else really has felt the same way you have before. I personally have found great relief in knowing someone else understands me. They understand where I’m coming from. They may not be able to relate to me completely 100%, but the similarity in grief has made the grief itself more bearable.

Since Dickinson spent most of her time by herself, she could only speculate as to what other people were experiencing. This poem is a whole bunch of wondering statements. She wonders the severity and depth of others pain and how it relates to what she is experiencing. But since she doesn’t have many relationships with other people, she can never fully answer her questions. She’s stuck in a place of isolation, because she can’t relate to others about her suffering. That thought alone makes me very sad for her.