The following review appeared 5 June 1994 on the Mark Twain Forum.
Copyright © Mark Twain Forum, 1996. This review may not be published or
redistributed
in any medium without permission.
Reviewed by:
David Tomlinson <tomlinso@norfolk.nadn.navy.
mil>
U.S. Naval Academy
Commissions are donated to the Mark Twain Project
Tom Quirk's essays on Huckleberry Finn make even an academic suffering from
essay
overload experience nirvana. He handles the form with such ease and grace,
that
the journeys are every bit as interesting as the intended destinations.
In the introduction, Quirk maintains that the essays are "specimens of
a familiar
scholarly inquiry and humanistic criticism." He is right, of course;
but many offerings
which use the scholarly conventions and a humanistic approach fall far
short of the
Quirk's mark. His success depends not only on his keen insight but also on
an approach
which treats his readers as companions rather than ill-taught pupils and on
an a
critical perspective which aims clearly at understanding Twain rather than
trying
to belittle or supplant him.
He can claim,"Only once, and then only for a moment, did I ever feel
that I really
knew how Mark Twain's imagination worked;" but Quirk comes far closer
to that goal
than most. He is able to see how events might have led Twain to imagine or
interpret
his characters to bring them to life. In this enterprise, Quirk is both
convincing and
inspiring.
Of the half dozen essays included in the book, only one is new. That
essay, "Huckleberry
Finn's Heirs," examines the work of Ring Lardner, Willa Cather and
Langston Hughes
searching for debts these authors might have owed to Huckleberry
Finn.
At first glance, Lardner seems the most similar. Quirk's examination
leads to
a different conclusion. While Twain brings Huck and Jim to life by
treating them
with respect and love, Lardner, who also depicts characters from the lower
rungs
of society, laughs at them, putting himself in the peculiar position of
ridiculing the children
of his imagination. Willa Cather and Langston Hughes, neither of them much
like
Twain on the surface, do each exhibit some facets of Twainian creativity.
"Is Huckleberry Finn
Politically Correct?" has, by its very title already commanded
attention on the Twain
Forum. Quirk, early on, concedes that he does "not intend to answer
the question
[his] . . . title poses." If he does not spend the whole essay
answering that provocative question, he does assert that "by and large
we prize Huck
for its incorrectness; it is an incorruptibly incorrect book in nearly
every particular."
He assumes quite rightly, I think, that few will contest that judgment.
Having
disposed of that point in the first page and a half, he then considers the
more difficult thesis that "our response to works of the imagination
has a great deal less
to do with political or social realities as such than with an imaginative identification
with heroism, courage, nobility, and so forth." It seems a pedestrian
point to make
until Quirk begins to make it.
His examination has everything to do with the way in which we, as critics,
approach
Samuel Clemens himself. Quirk deplores the ink wasted in trying to make a
Clemens,
who may have had racial attitudes unacceptable today, into a sensitive guy
of the
1980's or 1990's. Rather than protect the writer's reputation on untenable
grounds, Quirk
says he is "far more interested in protecting Twain from the charge of
being a sensitive
guy." He believes that what makes Huckleberry Finn
work is not Twain's views on race, his antisentimental, anti-Southern or
antiaristocratic
views but his imagination. It was an imagination which created characters
who were
and are real, characters for whom we have human sympathy and feeling. He
created "Jim not as a representative of the Negro, the oppressed, or
the wretched, but as
Jim." It is this magic of creation which leads us after more than a
hundred years
to read and enjoy reading the novel.
The most dated of the essays is "Nobility Out of Tatters: The Writing
of Huckleberry Finn.
" Appearing four years ago, the essay does not account for the
finding of the first
portion of the Finn
manuscript. After the discovery, Quirk decided "that perhaps it is
better (and certainly
more honest) to let the essays stand the way they were written instead of
trying
to repair the damage." Admitting that "many of the points I make
. . . having specifically to do with the composition of Huckleberry
Finn
are simply untrue" in light of the discovery, Quirk amends what he
had already written
by summarizing the most important changes in thinking the manuscript
requires in
his introduction to the book.
"Nobility Out of Tatters" remains a magnificent essay in spite of
the few necessary
alterations because it seeks to show "how Twain's achievement in the
book outran
his qualifications to write it." Stunningly, Quirk is able to
demonstrate how Twain
produced human characters from lifeless words, and in doing so, he performs
that most valuable
office of a critic, bringing renewed appreciation.
Another essay, "Huckleberry Finn
and Twain's Autobiographical Writings," makes a similar point from a
slightly different
perspective. Twain creates a flat character in Huck but breathes life into
him as
he comes to understand the boy as social pariah, as a creature blessed with
freedom
and as a person of moral integrity. It is Huck, he argues, who helps Twain
understand
his own moral ambivalence toward the Civil War; and it is in "The
Private History
of a Campaign That Failed" that Twain is able to resolve that
ambivalence twenty
years after the war ended.
In "The Realism of Huckleberry Finn,
" Quirk argues convincingly that the book and the boy are real, not
because they
uphold the conventions of literary realism but precisely because they
present the
reader with conflicting emotions and actions. Huck is sometimes a realist,
sometimes
a sentimental soul, often merely a confused person. Twain's book achieves
greatness because
it flouts programmatic realism and confronts us with the ambiguities and
confusions
of life which are the nature of reality.
What Quirk argues for in most of the essays is a kind of irreducible
complexity of
Huckleberry Finn.
That irreducibility is precisely what he champions in "'Learning a
Nigger to Argue':
Quitting Huckleberry Finn.
" Neither the relationship of Huck to Jim nor that of Twain to Jim is
without difficulties.
Indeed, Quirk asserts that "part of Twain's problem with finishing
his book . . . was his indecision about what to do with Jim." Part of the
difficulty of composition may have been with whether Jim should have been of
fered as a sacrifice to a
lynch mob.
Even more explosive is Quirk's assessment of what words Twain wrote last in
the novel.
They are not the words which appear at the end of the book but rather the
ending
of the King Solomon episode where he has Huckleberry say, "You can't
learn a nigger
to argue. So I quit."
What this ending means, according to Quirk, is that Twain experiences
despair with
Jim's intellectual limitations. It also throws the warm glow of
relationships at
the climax of the story in doubt.
Quirk's essays are not of the ivory tower kind. That is, his provocative
ideas are
the kind meant to spark classroom discussion. I intend to use my
well-marked copy
of the text to do just that.
Contents
Introduction
Nobility out of Tatters: The Writing of Huckleberry Finn
Life Imitating Art: Huckleberry Finn and Twain's Autobiographical Writings
"Learning a Nigger to Argue": Quitting Huckleberry Finn
The Realism of Huckleberry Finn
Huckleberry Finn's Heirs
Is Huckleberry Finn Politically Correct?