Critical Analysis of Huckleberry Finn

5050 Words11 Pages

Critical Analysis of Huckleberry Finn

In outlawing reading for motive, moral, and plot, the notice

proleptically--if unsuccessfully--attempts to ward off what in fact

has become an unquestioned assumption behind most interpretations of

Huckleberry Finn, namely, the premise that the text affords a critique

of its extraliterary context by inveighing against the inequities of

racism. In Mark Twain: The Fate of Humor James M. Cox analyzes why

such readings of the novel are problematic. His contention, anomalous

with respect to Mark Twain criticism in general, is that the novel

mounts an attack against conscience, specifically the conscience of

the moral reader. He locates this attack in the last ten chapters of

the novel--the famous Phelps farm episode--and maintains that the

discomfort and disapproval readers feel about Tom's cruelty toward Jim

stems from their own identification with Tom:

If the reader sees in Tom's performance a rather shabby and safe bit

of play, he is seeing no more than the exposure of the approval with

which he watched Huck operate. For if Tom is rather contemptibly

setting a free slave free, what after all is the reader doing, who

begins the book after the fact of the Civil War? . . . when Tom

proclaims to the assembled throng who have witnessed his performance

that Jim `is as free as any creature that walks this earth,' he is an

exposed embodiment of the complacent moral sentiment on which the

reader has relied throughout the book. And to the extent the reader

has indulged the complacency he will be disturbed by the ending.[2]

Cox proceeds to move his argument to a more general level by showing

how ...

... middle of paper ...

...t encrypts Pap into the plot--to

Huck and Mark Twain, respectively. Such a distribution is, however,

problematic, given that Huck is a fictive construct of Mark Twain

(himself a fictive construct of Clemens). But regardless of the names

we assign to the two forces in the novel, their copresence reveals

that the metaphoric projections of morality and the metonymic

extension of plot are founded in the same narcissistic impulse that

creates unities through exclusion. To this end the novel uses irony to

forestall the progress of the plot even as it insists on its

propulsion. If the novel's critique of morality finally depends on the

organizational efficacy of plot, the notice at the beginning of the

novel issues a command whose guaranteed transgression is what enables

such a critique to be leveled in the first place.

Open Document