Stephanie Kelley

Steven Remollino

ENG-1302-0531N

25, April 2013

Racism in Huckleberry Finn

            Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, whether admired or not, has

altered the psyche of the American culture indefinitely. Mark Twain’s creation has

tickled the morals of American culture both in his and the modern era. Many readers

delight in the anti-racist and morally righteous purpose of the book. While on the other

hand, many find the book shockingly demeaning and hideous for blatant racism. Since

1884 the book has been banned in numerous institutions. Today, critics continue to argue

whether The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn attempts to criticize and remedy the

absurdities of human nature including racism, or is a book unfit for the classroom

because of it’s dehumanization of blacks.

Enough people believe that The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is unfit for

schools because of its racial subordinations, that it has been banned in many schools.

Critics argue that the explicit use of the term “nigger” throughout the book is major

evidence of the books racism. Sharon Rush points out that the “N” word is used over 200

times throughout the book (Rush 37). Rush asserts that children aren’t as able to deal

with word “nigger” because it creates racial pain in unstable minds. Furthermore, the

term inspires black humiliation and belittling (Rush 37). “Nigger” imposes black

inferiority (Rush 28). Because the word carries these connotations, black audiences are

readily offended (Lew 16). One must consider everyone when contemplating the

censorship of the book. Therefore, the black American’s concern for the word is

imperative to the censorship of the book (Cox 89). James Cox even believes that the book

is satirical in nature; however, he holds that the satirical quality of the book can’t justify

the contents in it like the “N” word. Many critics agree the book blatantly offends people

with the use of the “N” word (Cox 104)

            Critics also condemn the book for its portrayal of Jim. Sharon Rush argues that

Jim, the runaway slave who joins Huck, lacks independence because he is too busy

playing a stereotype. Rush contents that the book surpasses historically accurate fugitive

slave stereotypes because the community offers a $300 reward for Jim and a $200 reward

for Pap’s capture pertaining to Huck’s staged murder (Rush 42). Rush finds this shocking

because the community knows that Pap is violent and beats Huck and Jim is a passive

slave; therefore, Pap should have the higher price on his head. This inaccuracy initiates

Jim’s lack of independence throughout the book (Rush 43). Other Critics agree that Jim’s

character doesn’t really resemble that of a grown man (Lester 202). Critics believe Jim’s

character is made to resemble the childlike attitudes of Huck and Tom. Jim’s humanity is

negligible because of his childlike attitude. In addition, Jim doesn’t care about drifting

deeper and deeper into the south which defies common rational and portrays Jim as

ignorant (Lester 202). Jim also portrays the “stereotypical good nigger who lacks self-

respect and dignity” because he forfeits his freedom to help the doctor and Tom near the

end of the novel (Lest 203). Even before Jim mindlessly tosses away his freedom, he is

portrayed as a play toy for Tom and Huck to abuse (Lester 204). Furthermore, Jim’s

humor, created from his ignorance, makes him have a “minstrel identity” which is

degrading (Cox 92). On another note, some critics argue that Jim is too saintly throughout

the book. Therefore, Jim’s overly moral character subtracts from his humanity (Cox 93).

            The relationship between Huck and Jim has also been scrutinized for alluding to

black inferiority. Jim is shown time and time again to fellow Huck. This concludes that

Jim doesn’t have a mind of his own and is inferior to Huck (Smiley 3). Critics argue that

Huck denies the legitimacy of his relationship with Jim because he sees Jim as “nigger”

and himself as a “nigger-stealer” (Hurt 1). Also Huck’s willingness to go to hell for Jim

isn’t sincere because he already said he’d go to Hell in chapter one. Matthew Hurt also

maintains that Huck’s obligations to the white community and his own self-esteem is

heavier than his commitment to Jim (Hurt 1). Toni Morrison suggests that the book is

hard to read because Huck and Jim’s relationship is in secrecy (Morrison 108). Other

critics assert that Jim doesn’t exist with integrity of his own (Lester 201).

            Furthermore, critics criticize Huck’s actions for upholding white supremacy and

down playing Jim. Throughout the book, Huck becomes involved in many privileged

situations and forgets about Jim’s wellbeing (Lester 200). Hurt deems the book racist

because when Huck is at the Granderfords he never wonders about Jim. Before the

Granderfords Huck and Jim were with each other on the river for weeks, then suddenly

they separate and Huck never considers Jim (Hurt 1). Moreover, Hurt suggests that

Huck’s struggle to do the morally right thing is predicated by his desire to save himself

(Hurt 1). For example, Huck is desperate when talking to Aunt Sally and reveals his true

character- a racist. Huck apathetically says “only a nigger [was killed]” which illustrates

that he doesn’t recognize a “nigger” as a human. Hurt declares that Huck could have

easily said no one was killed (Hurt 2). Some scholars maintain that Huck’s actions

provide the audience with misleading impressions. Julius Lester argues that because

Huck likes his freedom from responsibility and restraint on the river that the book is

corrupt with a misleading concept of freedom. Lester maintains that Huck’s concept of

freedom is juvenile and misleading to the audience because the absence of responsibility

and restraint isn’t freedom at all (Lester 206). James Cox promotes that Huck’s desire to

be good in society puts Jim in jeopardy. As far as plot goes, Huck’s seemingly sincere

apology to Jim usurps their attention and they pass Cairo. Huck’s action here destroys

Jim’s chance at freedom (Cox 94). Overall, many critics persist that Huck isn’t

antislavery or else he wouldn’t have the dilemma to save Jim in the first place (Rush 40).

             The ending of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn further advocates that the

book is racist. Rush declares that the end of the novel renders Jim to a poppet. Rush

embellishes the idea that Jim’s purpose in the end is to humor Huck and Tom’s game

(Rush 41). Other experts challenge the happy ending of the book. Experts maintain that

the ending it too much of a stretch, attempting to fit into an ideal happy ending for white

readers. Experts question why an old white lady would free a black   man  suspected of

murder (Lester 203). In addition, many scholars argue that Jim’s tradeoff for freedom,

family, and self-respect for Tom’s forty dollars illuminates the shallowness of blacks and

their worthless sacrifices for the white man (Bell 138).

             In addition to the character’s actions and messages of the book, many scholars

propose that The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is unfit for the classroom because of

inaccurate historical content. Rush criticizes the community for wanting to capture Jim

over Pap who is more likely to have murdered Huck. This implies that free blacks are

automatically labeled as criminal when free (Rush 43). Other experts agree that Twain

lessens the actual brutality of slavery in American minds by comparing Jim’s slavery to

Huck’s parental slavery (Lester 201). Therefore, some experts conclude that the book

compels readers to be more humble about slavery (Lester 201).

            Other scholars condemn the book racist because they suggest Twain himself is a

racist. Twain’s hometown Hannibal was racist and had many slaves (Lester 200). In

addition, Twain writes the book well after slavery which some scholars assert conveys

Twain’s moral dilemma with expunging all of the white supremacy traditions, which

were still common in his life (Lester 201). Furthermore, Julius Lester theorizes that

Twain writes with Huck’s naïve perspective to illustrate his own qualms about blacks’

legal status (Lester 201).

            In addition to the content of the book and Twain’s background, many experts

believe that the book is unfit for schools because of the effects it will have in the

classroom. Jane Smiley professes that the book clouds white minds by promoting white

supremacy (Smiley 4). Smiley also ascertains that The Adventures of Huckleberry

Finn inspires classroom discussions for racism and history which are set low and aimed

in the wrong direction (Smiley 8). Toni Morrison upholds that for black students to

appreciate the book it requires complacency and shame (Morrison 104). Furthermore,

reading the novel in the classrooms creates “emotional segregation” within the classroom

(Rush 35). Some critics guarantee that the disrespectful and segregating emotions that the

book creates stay with students through adulthood and worsen the nation’s race relations

(Rush 35). They maintain that the book doesn’t affect our physical behavior towards

humans, but spiritually and morally it is deleterious on the mind (Lester 200). Many

critics further conclude that obviously there are a large number of people offended by the

book, and therefore, it shouldn’t be forced onto the youth (Cox 88).

            On the contrary, many critics and scholars believe The Adventures of

Huckleberry Finn is radical for its time. They suggest that the book is satirical and strives

to defy racism. For its satirical quality and morally superior significance many critics

glorify the book in the classroom. While many scholars believe that the use of the “N” is

racist, others argue that the word resembles the place and time of the novel. Many critics

maintain taking the word “nigger” offensively downplays the intentions of the book (Cox

88). Furthermore, many critics challenge the racist aspects of the “N” word in the book

because it is set up to undermine the application of it. Twain uses the “N” word to show

the irony of what it stands for (Smith 112). Thus Twain shatters the meaning of “nigger”

by showing that it doesn’t describe blacks (Smith 114).

            While the portrayal of Jim is said to be racist and dehumanizing by some, other

scholars claim that the portrayal of Jim constitutes the book as anti-racist and

praiseworthy. Bernard Bell believes Jim’s humanity is established by his instinct for

freedom and fatherly characteristics (Bell 130). Jim is depicted as a loving father because

he wonders about his family and is attached emotionally and caringly to his deaf daughter

(Nichols 211). Other experts argue that Jim is portrayed as a humane being because he is

a loving man to Huck, his family, and even to strangers like the Duke, Dauphin, Tom, the

doctor, and the Phelps (Nichols 211). Cox argues that Pap’s purpose was to open the way

for Jim to be the center of sympathy. When Pap leaves, Jim has the chance to show his

fatherly figure (Cox 92). Contrary to other critics’ belief that Jim is ignorant and passive,

many other scholars view Jim as loving, witty, skilled, and humane (Smith 111). Some

scholars challenge the idea that Jim doesn’t speak up throughout the book. They assert

that Jim voices his concerns for freedom, family, and morals. For example, Jim persuades

Huck to apologize, questions Huck and Tom’s game at the end, and is stern in his

opinions (Chadwick-Joshua 3). Some scholars suggest that Jim has a tranquil attitude

with the Duke and the King to demonstrate that Jim is assessing and dismissing their

egregious cruelty (Chadwick-Joshua 4). Likewise, many scholars derive that Jim achieves

success in life by capitalizing on opportunities. Jim cleverly fosters some money out of

Huck when Huck is eager to know the whereabouts of Pap (Lew 18).

            Contrary to other scholars, many scholars presume that Huck and Jim’s relation is

equal, if not dominated by Jim. Morrison suspects Jim is Huck’s solace and peace.

Morrison maintains that Huck is mended from society’s cruelties by Jim’s affection

(Morrison 105). Other experts support that Huck and Jim share a relationship strong in

brotherhood and a dream of freedom unique to American culture. The novel makes a

desire for both freedom and brotherhood (Cox 92). Scholars also protest Huck’s

ambivalence towards Jim because Jim is a figure Huck’s heart can’t forget. Time and

time again Huck’s decision is persuaded by Jim (Cox 98). Overall, many scholars argue

that Jim teaches Huck morality and is superior in character to Huck (Lew 17).

            Opposed to other scholars’ assumption that the ending is racist and careless, many

suggest that the ending concludes the novel and defies white supremacy. Bernard Bell

admits the ending dehumanizes Jim and is a tragic flaw. However, this tragic flaw is

symbolic because it represents the tragic flaw common to American culture. The ending

is realistic due the end (Bell 135). Although many critics argue that Huck’s racist reply to

Mrs. Phelps confirms that Huck is racist, others contend that Huck replies to Mrs. Phelps

question with a seemingly racist answer because it is part of his lie to acquaint himself

with Mrs. Phelps. Huck is pretending to be conformed into society’s standards (Nichols

213). Many critics argue that Twain loved Jim and Huck so greatly that he sacrificed

Tom Sawyer for them (Cox 100). Furthermore, Huck’s acceptance to Tom’s plan is

nothing against Jim, but rather due to an oath Huck made to Tom at the beginning of the

novel (Chadwick-Joshua 2). Moreover, many experts suggest that Twain lets Jim have

the last act of moral righteousness by helping the doctor at the end (Chadwick-Joshua 6).

            Whereas many critics maintain that Huck’s actions are racist, others believe they

are actually humanitarian. The majority of critics admit that Huck’s society is clearly

racist; however some critics believe Huck is forthcoming to defy this aspect of society

(Bell 124). Huck shows sympathy for Jim early in the novel by promising not to turn him

in (Bell 130). Many critics concur that Huck’s dilemma with slavery and recognizing Jim

as an equal doesn’t deem the book racist. Huck is a realistic radical and humane person

compared to his education, time, place, and class (Bell 132). The times when Huck’s

actions are somewhat racist, they are ironic and deceptive. Huck’s racism mocks the

stupidity of it (Chadwick-Joshua 1). Also critics argue that Huck isn’t the one who comes

up the idea to play with Jim at end, it is Tom. Furthermore, some scholars note that Huck

would rather free Jim than worry about his own conscious (Chadwick-Joshua 2).

            Many scholars also concur that the historical content of the book is accurate. The

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn realistically depicts the hypocrisy of the antebellum

culture (Bell 125). The book doesn’t let the horrors of slavery become distorted

(Chadwick-Joshua 8). Furthermore, many experts maintain that Jim’s superstitions aren’t

racist, but accurately illustrate slave culture (Smith 108). Scholars conclude that all

people were aware of black inferiority in the late 1800’s; Twain is aware of this

inferiority and specifically writes the book to encourage equality (Smith 108).

            Despite many scholars belief that the book would be disruptive in the classroom,

other critics believe the book is beneficial when taught in the classroom. Morrison

charges that the removal of the book from schools will suggest that there is a flaw in the

book and the reader will assume Jim is the flaw. This assumption will ruin Jim’s presence

in the book (Morrison 107). Other scholars maintain that the book is vital to American

“aspirations and values” (Nichols 211). Also when taught in the classroom, teachers

reveal the truths of slavery in the time period (Nichols 213). Furthermore, experts argue

students will see that Jim doesn’t match the stereotypes of slaves (Lew 20). Moreover,

the book addresses the concept that justice and freedom are always in jeopardy (Nichols

210).

            I believe The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn isn’t racist and should be taught in

the classroom. I am aware that there are racist aspects of the book; however they are

pertinent to debilitate the overall theme of racism. The book has a unique quality of

humor and satire that I consider genius. Certainly the term “nigger” is offensive and has a

racist connotation like many critics suggest. However, I believe the numerous usage of

the word throughout the book is meant to enrage the reader. The enraged feelings that one

receives from “nigger” in the book adds to the extinction of the word. When Huck replies

the Mrs. Phelps question “Anybody hurt?” “No’, Killed a nigger”, I believe the use of

“nigger” is meant to arouse the readers qualms and anger towards the word. Furthermore,

I agree with critics that Huck is attempting to synthesize into the southern culture in an

effort to save Jim in this instance. The satirical genius is undoubtedly deceptive, however,

obvious used to undermine slavery.

            The comparison between Jim and Pap unmistakably highlights the anti-racist

component of the book. Pap, Huck’s biological white father, is uneducated, abusive,

alcoholic, and rash. While Jim becomes Huck’s adopted fatherly figure and is

uneducated, however, is caring, loving, protective, and humane. Huck runs away from his

own father, and meets up with Jim who is a runaway slave and chooses to bond with him.

Twain compares Huck’s slavery to his white father equally horrid as Jim’s slavery to

Miss Watson because they both end up running away. This represents that slavery is

unjust in any form and shouldn’t be tolerated. 

            Furthermore, the book is a book. Not every detail is realistic because that’s the

majestic quality of a book. However, for the most part the book is historical accurate. It

reveals the society’s pressure and conscious on how blacks should be treated. Although,

Huck goes against that to construct what Twain thought society should be like;

assessment of people based on their character. Also I believe the book can be interpreted

anyway one wishes to read it. However, if one acknowledges the humor, irony, and

satirical value of the underlying symbolism I believe the book is distinctly anti-racist.

Therefore it is crucial that the book be taught in schools to allow students to grasp the

humor, irony, and satire.

            Apart from being anti-slavery, the book inspires morally genuine conversations in

the classroom. The book requires one to think deeply and on a higher level because of

Twain’s satirical mode. The book also discusses important concepts of brotherhood,

freedom, conformity, hypocrisy, and morals. The books concepts are illustrated by

Huck’s struggle to accept them. This is a relevant topic in the classroom because many

students coming-to-age experience the same thing.

            In conclusion, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain is a

controversial novel which titillates the fundamentals of American culture. Issue such as

racism, conformity, freedom, and corruption are some of many contemplated in the book.

Many find the book perverted with racism and dehumanizing qualities inappropriate for

the classroom, while others treasure the radical and satirical value of the book which

outdates slavery and spurs reverie within the classroom.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Bell, Bernard. “Twain’s ‘Nigger’ Jim the Tragic Face behind the Minstrel Mask”. Satire or

Evasion? Black Perspectives on Huckleberry Finn. Ed. James S. Leonard, Thomas A.

Tenney, and Thadious M. Davis. Durham, Duke University Press, 1992.124-139.

Chadwick-Joshua, Jocelyn. “Whah Is de Glory?: The (Un)Reconstructed South.” The Jim

Dilemma: Reading Race in Huckleberry Finn. 115-135. Ed. Thomas J. Schoenberg and

Lawrence J. Trudeau, Detroit: Gale Publishing Co., 2005. Web, 21 Feb. 2010

<http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?&id=GALA

%7CH1420064559&v=2.1&u=22054acld&it=r&p=LitRC&sw=w>.

Cox, James. “A Hard Book to Take” Modern Critical Interpretations. Ed. Harold Bloom, Sandra

P. Alkines, and Don S. Finley. New York, Chelsea House Publishers, 1986. 87-108.

Hewitt, Douglas. “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” Notes and Queries. 43.1(1996):114+.

Literature Resource Center. Web, 21 Feb. 2010. <http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?&id

=GALE%7CA18339934&v=2.1&u=22054acid&it=r&p=LitRC&sw=w>.

Hurt, Matthew. “Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” The Explicator. 64.1 (2005):41+.

Literature Resource center. Web, 21 Feb. 2010. <http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?

&id=GALE%7CA141296415&v=2.1&u=22054acid&it=r&p=LitRC&sw=w>.

Lester, Julius. “Morality and Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” Satire or Evasion? Black

Perspectives on Huckleberry Finn. Ed. James S. Leonard, Thomas A. Tenney, and

Thadious M. Davis. Durham, Duke University Press, 1992. 199-207.

Lew, Ann. “Teaching ‘Huck Finn’ in a Multiethnic Classroom.” The English Journal, Vol. 82,

No.7. 21 Feb. 2010. <http://www.jstar.org/stable/819787>.

Morrison, Toni. “In Defense of Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” Social Issues in Literature:

Race in Mark Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Ed. Claudia Durst Johnson and

Elizabeth Des Chenes. Farmington Press, Greenhaven Press, 2009. 103-109.

Nichols, Charles. “A True Book-With Some Stretchers” Huck Finn Today. Satire or Evasion?

Black Perspectives on Huckleberry Finn. Ed. James S. Leonard, Thomas A. Tenney, and

Thadious M. Davis. Durham, Duke University Press, 1992. 208-215.

Rush, Sharon. Huck Finn’s “Hidden” Lessons Teaching and Learning Across the Color

Line. Oxford, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006.

Smiley, Jane. “Say it ain’t so, Huck; second thoughts on Mark Twain’s

‘Masterpiece’…” Harper’s Magazine. 294.n1748(Jan 1996): 61(7). GeneralOneFile.

Gale. Alachua County School Board. 22 Feb. 2010

<http://find.galegroup.com/gps/informark.do?&contentSet=I

ACDocuments&type=retrieve&tabID=T003&prodID=IPS>.

Smith, David. “Romanticism, Religion, and Racism.” Social Issues in Literature; Race in Mark

Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Ed. Claudia Durst Johnson and Elizabeth Des

Chenes. Farmington Press, Greenhaven Press, 2009. 110-116.

Smith, David. “Huck, Jim, and American Racial Discourse.” Satire or Evasion? Black

Perspectives on Huckleberry Finn. Ed. James S. Leonard, Thomas A. Tenney, and

Thadious M. Davis. Durham, Duke University Press, 1993.