Huckleberry Finn Ending Controversy

Mark duet is astray regarded as one of the greatest writers in the hi tosh of the United States, having spun more memorable and iconic tales in his own creative and unique style. Held spirited in this power as a great American legendist, braces flirted with the creation of a universal masterpiece in his novel The Adventures of huckabackleberry Finn. How ever, critics resist on whether or not bitstocks be given with Huckleberry Finn sincerely reaches the stature of a masterpiece, and that disagreement stems from the course the author chose for his conclusion. T. S Eliot finds bitstocks final result to be true to his style and the rest of the novel.Leo Marx finds that the ending abandons the apparent goals of the novel, leaving the work short of excellence. Twain ventured into the arena of splendor by combining two timelessly classic elements, and casting them as the central characters of his work. According to Eliot, Twain uses the character of the Mississippi River to relate to all nature, and he uses the title character of Huckleberry Finn to relate to the boy of mankind. Twain uses the former to steer the story and the latter to experience it. He engages the reader with his signature, easily accessed register and builds a strong foundation from these two universal elements.The sole(prenominal) true question is the payoff can the strength of the beginning be carried by means of to the end? This is where debate ensues, for Twain seemingly departs from the path he has set(p) through show up the novel to bring the story to resolution in a manner consistent with Twains writing, tho not so much with the established course of this novel. Critics, such as T. S. Eliot, see the storys ending, filled with the game-like attempts of the Tom Sawyer to free Jim, as a way to bring the reader back to the feelings of the beginning of the novel. It is a position with which I cannot disagree more.Instead, it is the view of Leo Marx that I see as the best dissection of the ending of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, one filled with flaws, significant enough that they bet on the significance of the entire novel. (Marx 291) Marx points out that the beginning of Hucks excursion with Jim has one specific goal, the goal to get Jim to liberty. This is make clear when Huck discovers the Duke and the Dauphin pee-pee sold Jim, causing Huck to say After all this long journey . . . here was it all come to goose egg, everything all disordered up and ruined, because they could have the heart to erve Jim such a trick as that, and make him a slave again all his life, and amongst strangers, too, for forty afoul(ip) dollars. (199) Marx states Huck knows that the journey will have been a failure unless it takes Jim to immunity. (294) However, at the end of the book we discover through Tom that Jim is already free. The meet of this revelation threatens the entire purpose of the journey, and diminishes the events along the way. Possibly the most(prenominal) cross aspect of the ending is Toms plan to free Jim from the barn. alter with humor and games, the freeing of Hucks close friend is made into a joke.This comes after the fact that (1), Huck has made his journey waste the river a quest for Jims granting immunity, and (2), Hucks growth in stature (as characterized by Marx, p. 296) has elevated the tone of the story beyond farce. dickens of the most prominent examples of this growth Hucks decision to go to hell rather than let Jim be sold back into slavery, and his heartbreak felt for the Duke and Dauphin while seeing them run out of town, tarred and feathered, by the waste townsfolk are trivialized for the sake of a few laughs at the end. We entrust that we have experienced a metamorphosis of Huck.Starting as a open and ignorant child, skeptical about the ways of society, we are lead to suppose that Huck finally has a grasp on what it means to be human, as well as a mature blending of his innate(p) suspi cion of human motives with his capacity for pity. (Marx 295) Hucks participation in Toms scheme not only sacrifices the character growth that seemed a central theme of Twains story to that point, but alike seems to represent a mishandling of the conflict identified by Marx the variation between what people do when they behave as individuals and what they do when oblige into roles imposed upon them by society. (Marx 300) Huck is well aware of his goal freedom for Jim. The relapse of his character without equal awareness is inexplicable without explanation from the author. As Marx points out The conflict between what people think they stand for and what sociable pressure forces them to do is central to the novel. It is present to the mind of Huck and, indeed, accounts for his most serious inner conflicts. He knows how he feels about Jim, but he knows what he is expected to do about Jim. 300) The idea of freedom in the minds of Huck and Jim are different from the simple definition of freedom, for freedom in this book specifically means freedom from society and its imperatives according to Marx (p. 303) The freedom sought by Huck and Jim is freedom both in the unfeigned sense of existence free from slavery, and in the figurative sense of being free from societys expectations. However, given Hucks in question(predicate) decision to go along with Tom, Huck gives into social pressure formerly again.He has given in to they ways which we were lead to believe he had vote out he has given into the one convention he set out to escape from in the first place. It is with the appearance of Tom, that Hucks quest for freedom no longer seems so important, even though he was previously willing to go to hell for what he had so diligently fought for along the way. The idea, the goal, is devalued for no clear reason. Such a remainder of character cannot go simply unaddressed by the author.With Huck switching back into the childish role we observed in the beginning of the novel, we also see yet another character simultaneously regressing, Jim. The tedious, degrading actions of the boys, in an effort to free Jim, are at first noted by Jim as such. However, he quickly becomes inexplicably submissive and accepting of what the boys are doing to him. This bears no resemblance to the Jim presented to the reader when the two companions were on the river. Twice Huck plays concrete jokes on Jim, and twice Jim calls him out as being disrespectful, hurtful, and inconsiderate.And now, with freedom ever so close, the reader is expected accept that Jims passion for freedom and intolerance of nonsense has too vanished along with the maturity of Huck. Exactly how Twain expects this to be believable by the readers is questionable, unfortunately an answer is never offered. Instead, Twain seemingly dismisses the growth of his protagonists and resorts to the easy western comedy style from in the first place in the novel. In the view of Eliot, this picture to the int roductory feel of the novel is a perfect example of great literary form.Instead, this return is nothing more than the apparent defeat of our seemingly maturing protagonist. Eliots pipeline that this return is of great form causes Marx to note in rebuttal, A unified work must surely manifest coherence of meaning and clear discipline of theme, and this regression of character fails to do either. With the ending of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn being so clear chronicled by Marx as a failure to complete the initiated theme, it is left only to see Eliots argument for the greatness of the ending as an argument refuted.As clear as Marxs chronicle, it is equally clear that Huck Finns besetting problem is the disparity between his best impulses and the behavior the community act to impose upon him (Marx 304). It is this disparity that needs resolution in order to have a proper ending to Huckleberry Finn. It is the transformation of the character, Huck Finn, through progression, not regression that would make the book a pure work of excellence.