HFPP Paper Blog

I know that I will not agree with the school board; Huck Finn should be kept in the curriculum.

I know that I will not focus strictly on the issue of race; not only is that too simple of a topic, but if that is the only defense for reading or not reading Huck Finn, the argument would never end because people can never agree about race.

I think I'd like to focus on childhood and how Huck Finn accurately represents children, even though the book is fairly old and was written in a different time. Comparing Huck to today's students could help show that children are the same despite time period, race, class, or any number of things. Which I guess would help lend to the topic of racial equality in the book and racial equality of today and how they differ or are still the same.

Or I could focus on how Huck defies the barriers set for him by his elders and society, and how he never actually conforms. It could help students develop their own individuality and sense of self while still having them engage in a literary work from the past. 

Most importantly, I need to focus on the fact that although the ELA classroom has changed through the use of technology and teaching methods, that students themselves haven't changed. They are still capable of being educated and interested in the same things students of the past were educated and interested in. Steps simply have to be taken to intertwine the modern classroom setting with works from the past to help enhance the learning experience. I could talk about integrating film into the unit, or the reenactment/exploration of scenes, or some sort of short video experience (youtube) that somehow incorporates Huck Finn.

Huck Finn and Night of the Hunter

1. a) Huck Finn shaped my viewing experience of Night of the Hunter by creating a lens in which I watched the movie with the intent of finding connections between it and the book. In the movie, I noticed how The Pastor was an irresponsible father figure, similar to how Huck's father was irresponsible. Both had an interest in money that belonged to the children. Consequently, Huck, John, and Pearl all realized that the money was too much responsibility for them to handle. Huck decides to give his money to the mayor because he doesn't want to have to deal with his father. John hits The Pastor with the doll full of money when he's at his breaking point, saying he doesn't want it anymore and that it is "too much". Pearl tells The Pastor where the money is after much interrogation. All these things point to the fact that children should not be left to control large sums of money.

    b) Both works address the topic of responsibility of adults. Huck Finn has an irresponsible father, and the role of a good parent is taken up by The Widow. This is to show how Huck's father was supposed to act and how he fell severely short of the standards of a good, responsible parent. In Night of the Hunter, the kids' father decides to steal money from a bank in order to give his kids a good life that doesn't involve them roaming the streets. However, the ends don't justify the means in this case, and the money ends up causing lots of problems for the children later on. Their mother doesn't do a much better job, because she invites a murderer into their house and marries him. The Pastor is not a good father-figure either, because he only wants to take the money from the children, and doesn't really care about their well-being (he starves them, lets them get dirty, etc.). The only proper adult figures in the film are the old couple who worries after the family, and Uncle Berdie, who helps John fix the boat him and Pearl use to escape with. And even then, all three of them aren't good parental figures either because the old couple is misled by The Pastor, and Uncle Berdie drinks too much.

3. I don't know if I'd teach Night of the Hunter with Huck Finn. Although I can see the merits of doing so, I don't believe that the two are the best match. Both works are fairly old, so if I had to teach Huck Finn, I would probably pick a newer movie to pair with the book in order to keep students' interest. I'd probably pick Matilda or some other movie about a child with an inappropriate family, and have students focus on how parents should act with their children, and what was wrong with how the parents in the book and film acted. I could also make them focus on things like greed and magic, which are prevalent in both works.

The Ending of Huck Finn: Rascist?

Essentially, I think the answer to this question is no. Upon reading the ending of the book, I was not struck by its racism, although it is present. What I focused on more was the pure childishness of the two boys. Huck and Tom both acted very childishly throughout the whole ordeal of freeing Jim. The two of them scared Tom's relatives half to death, stole and ruined a lot of their personal property, and put Jim through a lot of trouble, all because they were pretending they were prisoners trying to break out of jail. This is a dangerous thing because the boys can't tell real life and make-believe apart, which will cause a lot of heart-ache and distress for Tom's family in the future.

Tom, especially, is severely childish because he knew the facts about the situation the whole time. Not only did he suggest the whole notion of the three of them being prisoners that had to break out, but he's the one who suggested they break Jim out the hard way, rather than just letting him go free. And the whole time, he knew that Jim was already a free man! He could of told his aunt how Jim was already free, or he could have easily gone with Huck's plan of just letting Jim go, and everything would have worked out fine and would have been very easy. But no, Tom had to have his "finesse", and so he put Huck and Jim through all that trouble to "break out of prison".

The worst thing about it is that people were hurt by the boys' decisions. The aunt was extremely distraught for days, afraid of everything that moved. Huck had to lie for extended amounts of time, pretending he was someone else. Jim had to go through all the trouble of following Tom's directions because he didn't know any better, and then proceeded to be caught again and treated worse than before. And Tom got himself shot, which seemed to have become infected judging from the way he acted afterwards.

I can see the racist elements within the ending of the story, but I believe that the ending Mark Twain created was meant to do more than purely show the power race has. It was meant to show how imaginations can run wild and end up hurting others. It was meant to show the naivety of children. It was meant to show Jim's trust in the boys, and how his trust may have been misplaced. And I'm sure it was meant to do a lot of other things, as well.

Why English?

Huck Finn should be taught in an English class rather than a History class because it is a literary novel, not a historical textbook. It is a subjective novel, and therefore is better suited for English;  more objective texts should be taught in the History class. Huck's story has themes of acceptance and equality that are not widely felt by others of his time, making the novel inappropriate for a history text. Usually, history texts represent the majority of opinions felt at the time period instead of the minority, like Huck.

Another reason Huck Finn should be taught in English rather than History is because of the literary elements  present throughout the novel. Things like literary themes, new language, deeper readings, and symbols are things present in Huck Finn that just never would  be covered in a History class. Other things unrelated to the history of the novel, like the relationships between parents and children, as well as friendships; would also not be covered in the History class but would be paramount to the understanding of the novel itself. The basis of the novel revolves around individual relationships, which would make it useless to a History class which focuses on the big picture.

The last reason Huck Finn should be taught in English classes is because of the controversy about the novel. By giving the novel to the students to read, we allow them to make their own decisions about the novel. Rather than relying on the opinions of others, students should be making their own opinions.

Jim's Take on King Solomon

Rich vs Poor

Many siblings vs Only child

Stupidity vs Intelligence

Lawful vs Unlawful

Shallow reading vs Deep reading

Misunderstanding vs Understanding

Simplicity vs Complexity

Huck and Jim as Friends

At the end of Chapter 15, Huck plays a mean trick on Jim. He tells Jim that the ordeal with them both being lost in the fog and separated was just a dream, and Jim believes him for a while until he sees the damage to their raft. He becomes very upset about it and tells Huck that friends don't do that to each other. Huck, in return, apologizes and vows never to do that again to Jim. He says he would "kiss his feet" if it would make Jim feel better about it.

This chapter shows the beginning of Huck's and Jim's true friendship. To Huck, slavery and color of skin don't matter. Jim is still a person in Huck's eyes, and deserves the same amount of respect as he would give Tom Sawyer. In return, Jim views Huck as a friend instead of a slaver or a boss. In each other's eyes, they are equal.

In Chapter 14, I thought it was interesting that Huck was talking to Jim about King Solomon and how he solved the dilemma about the two women claiming ownership of a child. The fact that Jim thought King Solomon was unwise because he would cut a child in two because of his upbringing is a very smart thing to remark on, even though he doesn't have the right idea about the moral of the story. This shows that Jim has more intelligence than society would give him credit for. I also thought it was interesting that Huck tried to convince Jim that French people don't speak English through the Socratic method. In one of my other classes, I'm reading The Republic by Plato, and the way Huck tries to convince Jim is exactly how Socrates tries to convince his companions on justice. Maybe this suggests that Huck would make a good philosopher, or at least has more intelligence than the widow gives him credit for.

Huckleberry Finn and Poverty/Class

The influence of poverty and class within this novel, at first, seem very obvious. Huck Finn, an impoverished child, struggles through trying to fit into the norms of regular society when he doesn't believe in the standards. The norms of society include proper dress, suitable living environments, ability to read and write, and abstinence from smoking. Huck Finn doesn't understand why all these things are necessary, when he lives perfectly comfortably dressed in his rags in the woods.

Huck's father, also impoverished, represents a more reluctant kind of poverty. Instead of enjoying his stature in society, as Huck does, he almost always complains about how the government is corrupt and messed up in some way. He wants the mayor to give him the money Huck gained because he feels he is entitled to his son's wealth, being his father. He only uses the money he finds for alcohol, so Huck makes sure he can't gain the money.

The subject of slavery plays heavily into class and poverty as well. Slaves are viewed as the lowest form of society in Huck's time; even Huck's father talks disdainfully about slaves. However, slaves are also worth a lot of money. Jim tells Huck that he is worth $800, so he is technically rich. But he does wish that he had that money in it's physical form and he would never need any more than that.

Why is reading Huckleberry Finn through the lens of poverty or class important for understanding the novel? I don't really know just yet. I do know that this lens will help me associate this book with other books that have poverty and class as a theme, so I will be able to help my students see the comparisons as well. This lens can also help me understand the intricacies of what Mark Twain was trying to accomplish with the novel.

Thinking Before Reading: Huck Finn

If you were in eleventh grade honors English in my high school, you read Huckleberry Finn. Unfortunately, I was not in eleventh grade honors English. From what I heard from my friends about the book, it was a hard read with excessive use of the word "nigger". Many people told me they didn't like the book, at all.

However, when I was a kid, I had seen many shows that depicted the story of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn. I enjoyed those stories a lot, so I'm surprised that not many people enjoyed Huck Finn. But I suppose the story of Huckleberry is different than Tom's story.

When I read, I expect to be challenged, at least a little, by the language of the story. I'm not sure how much I will enjoy the story itself, but I hope its more than my friends in high school did. Hopefully the fact that I'm not reading it until college will help. I know I enjoyed Catcher in the Rye a lot more than others back in high school did because I read it in college and, therefore, understood it better.


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-20044663.html
This article talks about the use of "nigger" in Huckleberry Finn. While some teachers in the article believe that the word is necessary to create the proper effect, others believe it's unnecessary and used too often. The book has been banned from some schools specifically because of the use of "nigger". One publisher in Alabama changed the word to "slave" so that schools that banned Huck Finn can have enroll it in their school curriculum again without having to worry about offending students or parents.

However, censoring Mark Twain has stirred up controversy of its own. Some scholars believe that Mark Twain used "nigger" with the intention of shocking readers and making them think about the meaning and consequence of the word. Others believe that the word is used to replicate the speech of the time period. Those who believe that the word is used simply to replicate speech seem not to mind the edited version of Huck Finn.

Myself, I'd prefer to read the book the way it was intended. Whatever the author's intention was, I want to experience it that way. I disagree with censoring Huck Finn. I don't believe any author's language should be changed just to fit in society's standards. Books can be controversial. This makes them more interesting and causes readers to think about the content.

Reasons to Vary Reading

"Don't Confuse Reading for Pleasure With the Study of Literature"

This section of Carl Jago's chapter, "Seven Guiding Principles for Literature Teachers," states that teachers much teach students to differentiate between classical novels and novels that they read for fun. Jago states that students must read more than classical literature in order to proclaim that they have, indeed, studied literature. And while I do agree that students should read classical literature, as it opens up many different scenarios for adventure, I don't necessarily believe that there has to be a differentiation between classical, typical, study of literature and studying literature through "fun" novels. Books are books, regardless of the time period or subject matter. Themes that existed in the 1400's still exist in literature today, and all authors take inspiration from past authors. If a student is reading, they are learning how to read and will learn about the world through reading, regardless of whether the book is classical or not.

I believe that, with the right set of students, "fun" reading will lead to the study of classical texts on its own, without direction from the teacher.For me, I began studying classical literature (outside of my high school classes) because my friends, who either had different teachers or were enrolled in different English classes, would recommend classical books to me that they had read that they enjoyed. Typically, they would discover the literature through their English classes, but occasionally they would just pick a book up because they heard about it through other students or just found interest in the subject of the text. Meaning that I didn't need the assistance of a teacher in order to discover classical texts that I enjoyed and understood.

But I know this isn't the case for every English student. Some students don't understand the intricacies of the classics. Some don't have interest in reading novels from the past. Some simply just don't enjoy reading. And for those students, why not simply stick to "fun" novels? While I don't completely agree with the statement "read something rather than nothing," I do believe that every student can enjoy reading if the student discovers the right book. Reading many different types of literature is very important for becoming an educated English student and an overall educated person, but in order to read a variety of books, students need to first enjoy reading. In order to get students "hooked" on reading, they must first read books that appeal to them. And if that kind of book is a "fun" book, then so be it. After they have found a genre of book they enjoy, the teacher can then suggest classical books with similar themes or genre that the student could enjoy. This, I believe, is the proper approach to getting a student involved in worldly reading, not simply by forcing classical literature down students' throats. If forced, the students will not care enough to learn from the books they are told to read.

"Reading Literature Requires Language Study and Builds Vocabulary"

Jago states, "For me to invest instructional time on a text, I need to be convinced that the book will be worth students' time in terms of complex, engaging content." Yes, yes, YES. The point of reading any sort of book is to learn vocabulary, create more complex sentences, and broaden the mind to new themes and ideas that will allow for more developed thinking. Why teachers pick texts that don't accomplish any of these goals is beyond me. Throughout my reading career, I have learned many new words that help broaden my vocabulary and enhance my ability to speak to others intelligently through the books I have read. If students are given only simple books to read, they will never become more developed conversation partners and, more importantly, will never become any more fluent in the English language than they were in, say, the third grade.

This inability to speak properly not only 'dumbs down' conversations in society, but it will lead to many self-worth problems throughout the individual student's life. I've met many peers who think of themselves as dumb or not capable of learning simply because their vocabulary has never been broadened and they have never been challenged to try to do things that are difficult for them to accomplish. They will carry this feeling of inadequacy for the rest of their lives, because they have finished school, have jobs, and now have no reason or ambition to challenge themselves any farther than school may have forced them to do.

Not only are teachers meant to challenge students so that they do well in school and on tests, but teachers are to challenge students so that they continually challenge themselves outside of school. Having school as a difficult affair that offers assistance through teachers encourages students to challenge themselves throughout their lives with the assistance of their peers, elders, or many sources of information available to the public. Without the challenge school is supposed to offer, individuals are left with a fairly easy, simple lifestyle that leaves them feeling unaccomplished and, often, dull and uninteresting. School is necessary to give people the incentive to learn more than what is necessary to 'get by'.