Thursday, February 10, 2011
Twain and Verisimilitude
As Born to Trouble suggests, Mark Twain was criticized by his contemporaries for his coarse, "low-brow" portrayal of life in America. Twain prided himself on depicting every day life accurately (a term often used to describe this realistic portrayal of daily life is "verisimilitude"). In what ways are questions of Realism tied to questions of language?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In "Huck Finn", Twain uses a variety of language and sentence structure that reflects the social position of his characters. Huck, for the most part, uses proper English. The other white people in the novel, such as Huck's father and Tom Sawyer, also use grammatically correct English when they speak to one another. On the other hand, Jim's dialogue is grammatically atrocious; he speaks in very broken English with many abbreviations. When reading the novel, it is often difficult to understand what Jim says. His language reflects his lack of education, while Huck's language reflects the opposite; white people at that time were educated, and therefore knew how to speak correctly, while black people were not. Because of how Jim speaks, we assume he is unintelligent because he lacks the ability to understand simple stories (such as the facts of the Solomon story). This reflects the reality of the time period. Black people were viewed as inferior, and therefore did not receive an equal education to whites. Though Twain's characterization of Jim is regarded as controversial because Jim is portrayed as unintelligent and foolish, his language accurately portrays the time period the novel is set in. Blacks were not educated, and therefore could not speak in the same ways that educated white people would; to have Jim speak in the same manner as Huck would be inaccurate and ruin the tone of the novel.
ReplyDeleteContinuing off of Emma’s point, African Americans at this time period were oftentimes, most times not educated traditionally. Some slave owners occasionally taught their slaves some basic knowledge, but to have a strong foundation in the proper speaking of English was an anomaly of this time period in the Deep South. Twain’s portrayal of different social classes and members of those social classes may seem like a “low brow” as critics have stated, but Twain is more accurately and more really capturing the social structure of the late 1800’s. Questions of Realism can language are thus founded—do the dialects of the different characters in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn categorize the reality of the time? Yes! It was a reality, although I did not live at this time period, but from basic U.S. History teachings, in the Deep South an African American’s language would be hindered because of their inability to receive a proper education. On the contrary, for someone who was Caucasian, it was quintessential to receive an education. To deny that the dialects are a portrayal of Realism would be like denying the fact that very discriminatory social classes existed during the pre as well as the post-Civil War era.
ReplyDeleteNow seeing the portrayal of these social classes today, as blacks inferior in their education to whites, may seem startling or offensive to some people—but it is truth. Not to in any way discredit the knowledge of people who are offended by the language in the novel, escecially the use of the ‘n’ word, but to be offended by language such as in this novel is directly correlated to a lack of knowledge of Twain’s purpose. The specific ‘n’ word is offensive, but it is true of that time, just as dialects were true of that time.
Returning to my point in the beginning, the language of Huck Finn is Realism for it is accepting that our country had a serious crisis (to say the least) in terms of social class and order. Maybe it seems prejudice for a person to read about an uneducated African American of the 1800’s, but would it be real and truthful to read a novel set in the 1800’s where an African American slave spoke perfect, classic English? The sad, but honest truth is no. It would perplex a reader who has even a slight glimpse at the history of pre and post-Civil war to read a slave’s dialect crafted in perfect English. The Realism in the language of Huck Finn is what defines this novel’s ability to so acutely capture an era that our country has tried to completely block out. Twain’s very apparent dialects make it literally impossible for a reader to deny the social injustices that Twain is trying to shed light upon.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThank you Emma and Claire. For those who have not yet posted, if you feel like the early birds caught all the worms (feeling cheesy this afternoon, you can see), consider diong some brief research about American Realism and Mark Twain's role in the literary movement. The Norton anthology is a good place to start.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wwnorton.com/college/english/naal7/contents/C/topic.asp
The critics of Huckleberry Finn in “Born to Reason” have a skewed idea that a realistic depiction of the difficulties of life is only acceptable if those difficulties are no longer real, but in the past. Do they believe all pain and hardship will someday disappear? Pretending a word doesn’t exist, ignoring it, only gives that word more power and meaning. I found the group of parents that met to talk of censorship in schools so hypocritical. They think the n-word is acceptably used by “the brothers” but is insulting when said by a white person or read in a book written by a white man. The people in the parent group feel so strongly about censorship, yet they want to make exceptions that apply to only one cultural group, exceptions that only apply to themselves. The critics frustrate me a lot, especially the mother of Raquel. When she speaks of the censorship issue she sounds eloquent, controlled, and well researched- you almost cannot help listening to a person who sounds so level-headed. Yet, every word she speaks is in support of taking away her fellow citizen’s freedom of speech, an essential part of the American experience. She uses rhetoric to “brainwash” those who hear her comments-make the public believe that losing their freedom would only be beneficial to them and American society. This woman seems to exemplify what we read in our RA, how you speak is not necessarily indicative of your reason or intelligence.
ReplyDeleteEven though satire is an exaggeration of reality, I feel in many ways Huck Finn is still very realistic. Twain chronicles the language patterns and accents of the South, the geography of the land, his book, at times, seems to go at a slow pace reminding readers that not every part of an “adventure” is as exciting in the real world. It’s when these characters being made fun of fit so well into reality that it exposes how ridiculous the world can be. Actually, I think these over exaggerated characters are the most important way Twain uses realism. His characters depict how people are viewed not how they truly act. History books are based in fact and this book is an interesting break into perception. For example, Jim may be the smartest man in the book, but his clown-like nature is exactly how the paternalistic white people saw their slaves. How people see things is just as important as they really are; just because it’s not true doesn’t make it any less real.
Everyone before me basically summed up what i was going to say. The early birds did in fact catch the worm!
ReplyDeleteTwain is definitely a realist author. He portrays exactly what life was like in the time period he is basing his novel. Not only does he do this in the social aspect, but he also does it through his dialogue and language. Another reason he is a realist author is because he actually did show the "low brow" of life. Most authors tried to stay away from revealing the truth about what was actually going on. That is what makes this book so strong and the reason it is taught in high school. Yes the language might be difficult to understand and the words might be offensive, but it's the truth and we cannot hide from it. If people argue saying it shouldn't be taught then they are arguing that history, or real life shouldn't be taught. Are we going to turn our backs away from reality? It's impossible to live in a world that's perfect. Twain uses his language and writing to show this real world, not the perfect one that had been depicted in so many novels before. He was one of the first to actually speak out and the ways he did it were so unique. He makes Jim's language horrible and sometimes it is very difficult to understand, but his readers need to realize that he is making a point. The blacks were treated horrible then and they were not given an education because they weren't worthy. Twain portrays this through Jim's dialouge. He portrays his realism through language, but also through his depictions of the harsh reality of life. Nothing is perfect.
That was basically all the same things that everyone else said, but I think those are the main points.
I agree with the ideas stated previously. However I think it is also very interesting to look at different ways in which Twain satirizes white superior citizens of society. Twain (as seen in chapter 14), uses examples in which the cruelty of superior society becomes blatantly honest. Like the biblical allusion to king Solomon, the collective unconscious can easily recognize the cruelty in "cutting children in half". As educated Whites read TAOHF Twain felt it necessary for them to be provided with the simplest of information. In doing so Twain satirizes White superior's education as he depicts messages through allusions that both educated Whites like Huck, and uneducated Blacks like Jim can easily understand. Therefore although the use of the “n” word is extremely offensive to many people I don’t agree with those who characterize Twain as a racist author. Twain’s novel uses these offensive words, and depictions of Jim’s intellectual understandings in order to satirize contemporary society, and its blasphemous beliefs of white superiority. Twain's entire novel is ironic as he "makes fun" of white superiors while he himself is in fact a wealthy white man. However this shows Twain's true dislike of the cruelty and ridiculousness of white superiority, as he consequently makes fun of those who match "his type". Twain's intentions when using the "n" word are obviously not malicious and his satirical sincerity is extremely recognizable in his dedication to illuminating the hypocrisy and cruelty that is present in contemporary society.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Liz when she discusses Twain's use of satire as a device to further his realism in Huckleberry Finn. Twain chooses to satirize high society, the society born with values of romanticism, thereby indirectly satirizing romanticism itself. To elaborate on the King Solomon example, Twain uses Jim (a very "real" character both in language and stature) to satirize the romantic values of the past:
ReplyDeleteWhat does I do [when dealing with a baby and dollar bill held in contention between two women]? Does I shin aroun' mogs de neighbors en fine out which un you de bill do belong to, en han it over to de right one... de way dat anybody dat had any gumption would? No, I take en whack de bill in two...das de way Sollerman was gwyne to do with de chile"
Twain juxtaposes two values in dealing with a problem. Jim's approach provides a reasonable and practical way to deal with the problem of a bill and a child claimed by two women. Twain parodies Solomon's efforts through the story Jim tells; and in doing so implies that the "romantic" ideas that governed the past are no longer practical. Twain much favors the realism that Jim spouts, exhibited clearly through his use of satire.
Due to the fact that I am one of the last people responding to this question, I feel as if my post will be a bit redundant, however, I will try to stray from what has already been talked about.
ReplyDeleteI would quickly like to agree with what Amanda talked about in her blog response. I also believe that the parents that were discussing the use of the n-word in literature such as TAOHF and other novels that are required reads for their district and their school systems were completely hypocritical in stating that the n-word is not offensive if people of color, or as Amanda quoted the documentary, "brothers" use it towards one another, however it is offensive if people of the white race use it, in this case in the novels that they are trying to ban. I think that this in it of itself is an aspect of the concept of the n-word that Twain was satirizing in the novel. A woman from the documentary claimed that blacks use the n-word to refer to one another this day in age in order to lift themselves from the negativity of having been looked down upon by those who used that word to describe them and to make this word their own. However, if someone claims that a word is seriously offensive and brings about emotional stress towards a student in the classroom, this word should not be used anywhere, even between men and women of the black race. If this word brings about the harm that the mother in this documentary claims that it has brought upon her child, no one should be able to justify their reason for using it in context of only black men and women.
I think Twain was satirizing this aspect of society; society's unfailing attempt at separating men and women into their races and keeping them confined to this characterization. Furthermore, a black man or woman can claim that the n-word is offensive if it is used in a novel such as Huck Finn, which was written by a white author who was a strong abolitionist, and yet it is not offensive when another black person uses it. This separation of the use of the word by black people and white people is the exact reason why there is a skewed perception of the meaning of this word. The word itself has meaning because it was an aspect of America's past, and was extremely specific to America itself because of the institution of slavery and the collective moral opinion that whites were superior to blacks. Mark Twain's intent in using this word so often in his novel is to shed light on the ridiculousness of those in the time period of slavery who believed in racial discrimination and of white supremacy. He is evidently not using it to offend anyone of the black race, for Twain is actually condemning those members of the white race who used this word. I think that this is the most important aspect of this book that is overlooked by many men and women who claim that it is offensive and should not be taught in a classroom setting. Personally, I believe that a classroom setting is the only way in which this book can be taught because this way ensures that children can understand the satire that Twain is employing in order to display the belief in racial discrimination as wrongful and immoral.
It seems that everyone agrees on this topic, and have definitely addressed many valid points! I, too, feel that in order to achieve Realism, the events in the book must be "real" (no surprise there!). In TAOHF, Twain is extremely successful in depicting reality during the time of slavery in America. I definitely agree with the point that Emma said: "Jim's dialogue is grammatically atrocious; he speaks in very broken English with many abbreviations." It is the truth and historically correct in America that African Americans were not educated, they were not even given the oppurtunity. Therefore, they had a hard time speaking in the more eloquent manner that whites talked in, for example, Huck. In Born to Trouble, the group against using the word "nigger" in TAOHF was very upsetting to me. While I understand that today the word has a connotation that is viewed as extremely offensive and derogatory, it is the truth that it was used in the past to describe slaves. The word is not a substitute for "slave" however, because with the word "nigger" comes the connotation of the disrepsect that African Americans faced along with the harsh sentiments felt towards them. Therefore, the word can in to way be substituted. If TAOHF is regarded as a historical, Realism novel, then the word must be used.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most important points I recognized in the movie was the one from the only African American male scholar that we were introduced to. He said how the problems associated with the word are already present, so the use of the word will not create any problems. Maybe they will surface, but they will not be created. For that reason, it is best to expose ourselves to the harsh realities of history in order to be informed and introduced to the pain that came with racism in America rather than simply ignore it and become offended.
I have to jump on the bandwagon and say I agree with everything that has been posted thus far. The word "nigger" has its historical context and it may be dark and hard face but we must in order to better understand how the effects of that word have lead to situations of today. But I would like to look at language as only part of realism. Realism of course spans over many topics besides language such as violence, social class, actions, etc. And much like people who call out people who get offended by sexual content being displayed in the media while violence can be found anywhere I find it ridiculous that the people against the use of "nigger" in Huck Finn would chose to only focus on that. I f they are going to complain it should be all or nothing, why is it ok for The Sun Also Rises to feature scenes of bull fighting and The Great Gatsby to reference sex to these people but that word is taboo. If they think that Huck Finn will encourage the use of the word "nigger" why are they not also upset that the two examples I just gave may encourage teenagers to take part in cruelty to animals or sex when they may not be ready? This language is only part of realism and if they have a problem with one aspect of it they should also have problems with other aspects or just keep it to themselves. On another note I felt like in that main woman against the use of the word "nigger" we saw a lot of white guilt. She was trying so hard relate to and seem like the white person who completely sympathizes with black people that she completely revealed her lack of grasp on reality thinking she knows how black people felt when they hear that word. But maybe if she would look at more things that gave the word historical context her attempts wouldn't seem so fake.
ReplyDeleteHi guys, sorry I’m posting so late.
ReplyDeleteI think we had along the lines of the same ideas, and I think an important question portrayed in this documentary is whether or not Twain should be considered a racist, or a realist.
His surplus use of the word "nigger" is not only seen as perverse in the eyes of some readers, but extremely offensive. However, as Connor pointed out, "this language is only part of the realism" of this time period. I think as one of the speakers on the documentary pointed out, the word itself is not hurtful. What is truly hurtful is the fact that it still sparks up such a reaction to this day. This shows that we have not come as far in breaking the barriers of racism as we thought we had. When we read the book The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, we are not criticizing black people, but the racism of the time period. If we are so stuck on criticizing that very word, we will not be able to step back and objectively evaluate this time period and how far we have come as a nation.
I also do not believe that Mark Twain was a racist. If we look closely at the character of Jim, we see that as the book progresses, he becomes a real person, and gains a sense of humanity in the eyes of naïve little Huck. If Mark Twain was truly a racist, Jim would remain portrayed as if he was an animal, in the eyes of a kid who has no sense of morality. However through knowing Jim, Huck seems to gain a sense of morality, and even love for Jim, which seems to be a strong statement against slavery.
I just wanted to add some thoughts. Absolutely, the documentary is implicitly asking if we think Twain is racist, but the question about the presentation of daily life also has to do with what exactly it is that offends us--are we offended (or are those who are offended) because Twain's language is so true to life, not only in the 1840s, but as one of the men interviewed in the film said, what's still going on now.
ReplyDeleteI think the question of whether Twain is a racist is an almost impossible one to answer because it brings up questions of historical reletavism. Whose terms of "racism" are we using in that kind of an accusation against Twain? Just the fact that Jim seems human does not mean Twain is not a racist, but an interesting way to back up an argument in either direction would be to read with excruciating attention to detail and observe how Huck's perspective changes and how Twain uses Huck's perspective to say something else--to portray a perspective other than Huck's.
Determining absolutely whether Mark Twain is a racist is impractical. Even if we do decide that the use of the word nigger or the portrayal of Jim as a foolish black man is offensive, it is a shaky conclusion to declare the author of such a book a racist. The true feelings of any author can be separate from the deeper meaning of his works. Just because Huck Finn stands on one side of the racial argument does not mean Twain stands there as well. Huck Finn might be racist, but Mark Twain only made it that way so it would sell. As we saw in the movie, Twain's wife often edited Huck Finn to make it more socially acceptable. Remember there is a big difference between Mark Twain and Sam Clemens. The beliefs of one might not be the beliefs of the other. It is too complex of a question to be answered. The best thing to do is to determine what message about slavery and blacks Huck Finn conveys and stop there. Anything further is unnecessary.
ReplyDeleteCombining the ideas that came before me, could it be said that the realism in Huck Finn is diminished by the satirical nature of the novel? The hidden tones of irony, parody, and sarcasm undermine the realistic image of the South. Yes, Jim has grammatically incorrect dialogue to mirror his lack of education. And this is very realistic. But Twain's satire ruins it. When the reader realizes that Jim is actually quite logical, Jim's character becomes less realistic and more romantic. Jim becomes heroic throughout the story. (I will probably have more evidence for this idea after I finish the novel.) But what I am trying to say is that the realistic nature of Huck Finn is lost when the reader realizes that Twain is mocking and criticizing that reality. And through this satire, Jim and Huck aren't real images of southern life. They become romantic heroes. Huck's decision to choose to go to hell rather than betray Jim is not a something that happens every day. It is a once in a lifetime moment.
So while everyone else kind of agreed with each other. I think I have to disagree. Huck Finn is not realistic. It is Romantic.