As we studied The Importance of Being Earnest,we explored the way Oscar Wilde bastardizes common cliches by turning them around and changing their meanings. By exploiting how we snap to attention when we expect one thing and instead are delivered another, Wilde is able to force us (as the audience) to think for ourselves.
This seems to be an important idea when we look at the character of Huck Finn, someone who is forced to create his own world philosophy, and morals, for himself. Having been raised by both an uptight and upper-crust widow and a poor, abusive, alcoholic father, Huck’s personality and values seem not to have developed from the dogma of a particular upbringing, but rather as a result of him analyzing the world as he sees it.
In fact, one of the major parts of his life is Tom Sawyer’s gang: a group of kids with no authority. I think a lot of Huck’s savvy comes having to do everything himself. Because he has no source of income, Huck learned to wait for driftwood that he could sell. Being accustomed to having to think quickly and strategically, he concocts an ingenious plan to run away from his father and prevent people from looking out for him.
Of course, Mark Twain was explicit (and maybe a little bit self-important) when he said that we cannot read his book like any other book, where we look for meaning and morals. When reading the book through those lenses, it seems like Twain is trying to pull an Oscar Wilde by breaking the fourth wall and trying to influence the readers by playing on how we read what he has written. When we look at Huck as a character designed to manipulate us as readers, it almost seems wrong to praise about the virtues of having to do for yourself when it is all being spelled out to us by Mark Twain.
(Sorry, I'm a little late!)
I agree that both Wilde and Twain are exploiting our perceptions of clichéd characters and plotlines, but I think we'll need to read a bit more of Huck Finn in order to see where the satire lies. Up to now, we've seen Huck as a child suffering an abusive upbringing who rises above it through ingenuity, courage, and initiative, which is a fairly prosaic storyline. I believe that Twain is making us comfortable in this cliché as he waits in the wings, prepared to spring the reveal on us later in the novel. Wilde's style is much different, as he intersperses little reveals throughout his play, clearly branding it as satire, but Twain's characters and story are more subtle, and we'll have to explore more of the book in order to understanding the overarching social critique.
ReplyDelete*understand
DeleteExcuse me Nat, but I respectfully disagree. As I read, I found that Twain's style of satire closely matched that of Wilde's. Most notably, Twain utilizes irony and "reversals" as masterfully as Wilde himself. For instance, during Huck's discussion of heaven vs. hell with Miss Watson (I think), Huck concludes that he'd rather end up in hell because heaven seems boring. Bam, reversal of traditional values (especially in that time period). A bunch of other examples are in the text as well, such as the fact that Huck goes to school just to spite his father. All of them are rejections of normal convention. In conclusion, I believe Twain is not settling into cliché. Rather, he seems to be breaking society's clichés left and right in a very Wild-esque manner.
DeleteTo further explore Henry's point, I believe that Mark Twain's true message in this book is to completely disregard all societal conventions, such as stock characters and the morality/ideology of the different social classes. Anisha brought up a very interesting point when she said that Huck Finn was brought up by a high-strung, god-fearing stereotype of a widow and the stock character of a horrendously alcoholic and abusive father. Because he has two "role models" on both sides of the spectrum, Huck accepts neither one of those lifestyles for himself. He instead acts based off of his own judgement, and for such a half-baked education and upbringing, Huck has a much broader view on life than anyone else in the story. By choosing a character with a fresh outlook on life, unblemished by either morality or corruption, we're able to see the world in a somewhat naive but powerful interpretation of society. I agree with Henry that Twain is challenging his readers to set aside their preconceptions and truly analyze the novel without any historical context, short of whatever he provides us with (possibly with the exception of race).
DeleteAnisha draws a very astute parallel between Twain's and Wilde's intentions! Clearly, Twain's brief notice at the beginning of the world is parallel with Wilde's concept of rejecting cliches and other conventions without being given an alternative. To extend Anisha's argument, Twain tells us not to find motives, morals, or plot. However, he offers no advice whatsoever as to what we actually SHOULD be looking for. But I disagree with the statement that Twain is telling us what to do. The introductory "Notice" functions exactly as Wilde's epigrams do: to break currently existing mindsets and conventions. Therefore, I believe that Twain is, in fact, encouraging us to act and think for ourselves. Albeit, his method is somewhat more straightforward than Wilde's, but it ultimately has the same effect.
ReplyDeleteI think it's not explicitly Twain telling us what to think via Huck Finn's character - I think it's vitally important that we remember that the story is being told through the eyes of a child. Because of this, although Huck has been exposed to a lot, he still has an air of innocence to a lot of his actions and choices. I think (and this may be exposed further or disproved as we keep reading) that we may even see a critique of society through the way it affects an innocent Huck, rather than Huck being simply the vessel for Twain's own opinions. I think we have seen and will see Huck at times be complacent or complicit in the socialized racism that exists in the time period of the novel, and that in and of itself differs from what Twain thought (staunchly anti-slavery) and rather is a commentary on how inescapable the negative force of racism really is.
ReplyDeleteI like this idea of innocence a lot, Nicky. I think that Twain highlights the youth of his protagonist (everything is an adventure; even the serious issues don't cripple our hope; there's some sort of security that assures us that Huck Finn is a clever boy who can get himself out of any mess), and for me, it's this perspective that distinguishes Huckleberry Finn from The Importance of Being Earnest. Maybe because our protagonist is Huck, a kid with rotten luck who's just trying to make the best of his situation, we are more likely to subconsciously agree with what he says or does or learns. We sympathize with Huck, and consequently, we let our guard down. For me, The Importance of Being Earnest just seems like such a mature play (there's a clear difference between the tone in Huck Finn and the tone in Earnest). And that's kind of weird because Earnest seems more lighthearted and playful, but Huck Finn, this story about a child, examines heavy subject matters like slavery and racism and parental negligence. But I guess it all has to do with the way that each author treats his material: Wilde satirizes the serious commitment of marriage to make us reconsider what is trivial and what is significant, and Twain is ... earnest in his portrayal of Huck's account.
DeleteI've made most of my points in a reply to Natalie above, but I'll give you a short synopsis here:
ReplyDeleteTLDR; Twain wants readers to read the book without over analyzing it from historical/societal context
I'm technically responding to your post above, but I want to address your argument as you concisely wrote it here. Twain obviously wants to make an impression on his readers with his note (and he clearly did), but I wonder if reading the book "without over analyzing it from historical/societal context" was his goal here. He has already--in only a few chapters--put so much complex characterization into Huck, giving him moral gray areas and humanlike contradictions. Why, then, would he mold all of the secondary characters (except Jim) into preset, archetypal profiles? My feeling is that he is trying to get them to represent something greater than just a person... perhaps a representation of certain groups in society, like the religious, moralists vs. the low-on-the-food-chain types.
DeleteIn my opinion: The reason he isn't giving them human characteristics is because they aren't meant to be human. The only humans are meant to be Huck and Jim, and what Twain means by his note is actually the opposite: that this book is about society in general, and the readers are Huck and Jim, so please we can't read this book and think it's about becoming a better person because it's not about the individual.
Huck Finn definitely has unique ideas and a certain degree of independence in his thinking, especially evident in his discussion with Tom Sawyer about the lamp and witches. He holds a perspective that isn't affected by society's common media of moral/educational influence such as books but rather sticks to his own opinions. On the other hand, I don't think Huck Finn represents a complete originality in individual philosophy and morals. He is still pulled between the influences of two opposite extremes, the widow and his father. His opinion on education and going to school, for example, shifted as his father took him away from the widow. I also agree that Wilde and Twain are both breaking conventional ideas. Unlike Wilde, who breaks cliches by completely deconstructing the logical meanings behind them and leaves people with nothing but their own minds, Twain breaks the conventions through the innocent mind of Huck Finn. In the example that Henry used in his comment to Natalie, Huck Finn says he'd rather go to hell than heaven. Twain provides a good reason for Huck's statement: he thinks heaven is boring. So, I think while both writers aim at the same goal, Wilde takes a more radical approach by forcefully taking away cliche's meanings, whereas Twain utilizes the innocent originality of childhood to demonstrate conventions' damage on intellectual independence.
ReplyDeleteI think we're starting to see Huck break away from convention/society more now that he's escaped; something I found really fascinating was how he adjusted and found the good in both his situation with the widow and the one with his father, but later realized that it was constraining "It was kind of lazy and jolly, laying off comfortable all day, smoking and fishing, and no books nor study. Two months or more run along, and my clothes got to be all rags and dirt, and I didn't see how I'd ever got to like it so well at the widow's... But by-and-by pap got too handy with the hick'ry, and I couldn't stand it," (I have a different version, but it's in chapter 4). Huck has experienced life under two "masters," and now that he's escaped, I'm guessing he'll have a chance to really think/do things for himself. Though there were plenty of smaller reversals in the chapters we've read so far, I do semi-agree with Natalie as I expect far more cliches to be broken in the coming chapters.
ReplyDeleteOne interesting thing you brought up about Huck Finn's upbringing I think is his development of his own "philosophy" on how to live his life. Going off of this, the situation when he runs away is extremely important to Finn's character. His running away from both extremes (abusive father and overly-caring widow) shows how Finn makes a conscience choice about how to live his own life. And again, even when Finn has the options to go home (such as when the ferry is shooting cannons into the river), he consciously refuses to return. Also, another thing I noticed while reading the book and Anisha's post, is how Finn's collaboration with Jim breaks the social conventions and shows Finn's own "morality." Finn refuses to turn Jim in to the authorities, and even teams up with him, saying that the authorities are after "us" and not just Jim.
ReplyDeleteThe connection between Wilde and Twain was really well-put and clear. Thanks so much, Anisha!
ReplyDeleteThe post reminds me of a Spanish book written during the baroque called Lazarillo de Tormes. The protagonist, Lazaro (appropriately named after Lazarus) is actually born in a river and separates from his parents at a young age to live with a series of mentors. As he grows up, he forms his notion of the world based on what he sees rather than what is indoctrinated into him. Similarly, Huck Finn deals with the widow, Miss Watson, and now his father and, because of the lack of "centralization" in his upbringing, he is able to form unique ideas based on his observations and experiences. The historical contexts are also very similar. Spain was in an economic crisis at the time, they were trying to build themselves up again. Looking at Huck Finn, when the South lost the Civil War, there was a huge sense of worthlessness and wounded pride. The national crises could potentially lead to tightening of social expectations and a need to make "moral machines" out of people, as Dr. Stogdill put it.
I agree with Jianna's point about Wilde breaking cliches through the reader, and Twain breaking cliches through Huck's innocence, yet I feel we are still unsure about the satire that Twain is trying to achieve through this innocence. I think Twain uses Huck's friendship and jest towards the Jim and the other slaves to satirize slavery and present it as something so ridiculous that it should not even exist. By mocking this issue Twain makes the reader more inclined to listen to what he has to say, instead of forcing an anti-slavery rant down the throats of late 19th century readers. I think the satire involved is used to make a much greater point than what we have previously seen.
ReplyDeleteI don’t know really to begin with this because I am slightly overwhelmed by all these new claims when we have barely gotten into the book. These large general claims about what Twain is attempting to do with this novel is too much for me. It’s a topic that I don’t think is ready to be debated. I do see the parallels in Twain breaking some conventions with Huck, and Wilde’s breaking of convention, but again, one cannot extrapolate that these are for the same purpose. Allow me to present a theory: Huck’s breaking of social convention is not Twain’s commentary on these social conventions, but is used to set up Huck’s own self-discovery as he embarks on this adventure. I don’t know if Twain has any intention on making a social commentary. Maybe this development is for Huck’s own growth. Maybe we’re supposed to learn something from Huck’s own personal growth. It’s all too early to tell.
ReplyDeleteFrom what we've read, I've gotten the impression that Huck certainly lacks the standard moral compass and rarely acts in accordance with the norm willingly. Yet out of all the characters so far, it seems he has the most fulfilling life. I assume Twain is pointing out how the conventional approach to life often robs it of its fulfillment and excitement. How can any of us not be somewhat jealous of aspects of Huck's childhood and his ability to just take off down the Mississippi?
ReplyDelete