Talk:Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

Vandalism?

The "cover artist" in the infobox says "TAYLOR". I'm not familar with the original cover artist, so I was wondering if it was vandalism.--Glimmer721 ^talk 17:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

The McGuffin

The "McGuffin" that propels the novel along is: Huck and Jim float down the river to free Jim. That's it. That's what keeps the narrative moving. Along the way we have a bunch of character sketches that make fun of white people and then the Tom Sawyer ending. The book is mostly about white trash, not black people. "Huckleberry Finn" is a genre type, like "Don Quixote", Voltaire's "Candide" or Homer's "The Odyssey". A travel tale. It has it's roots in the classical literature of antiquity. And the use of the word "nigger" back then did not have the inflammatory rhetoric connotation that it has now, instead the word loosely meant "servant", nor did the word provoke violent reactions. So the "n" word in the book has to be read with regard for the Zeitgeist of the times. In the Vietnam War, for example, North Vietnamese were called "gooks" or "zipperheads", while now the terms are frowned upon. Yet we are free to use these terms in our war novels about Vietnam because it's "literature". So the use of nigger in "Huckleberry Finn" is not a unique situation, nor is it cause for censorship. 209.77.229.70 (talk) 04:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not entirely clear on what this has to do with improving the article? Could you please clarify? Thanks. Doniago (talk) 13:34, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

"Huckleberry Finn" was my favorite book growing up--I read it four times. What disturbs me is all the emphasis on some perceived, misconstrued "racial" issue. "Race" did not occur to me at all when reading it--to me it was a series of great character sketches, mostly dealing with white trash folk, propelled on its way by the McGuffin. The novel is about white people, not black people. If Jim was deleted from the novel it would be a fanastic novel about a bunch of white folks (like "Tobacco Road" or "God's Little Acre")--and depicting these white folks in their natural habitat is where the genius of the novel lies. (To me, the King of France and the Duke of Bilgewater are the highpoint of the novel.) The current emphasis on race detracts from the novel's genuine literary merit. I don't want to see the novel hijacked to promote some racial agenda. The article could be improved by concentrating on its outstanding literary merits, leaving the race issue as a sidebar. Hope that clarifies it. And the novel is about freedom, all right, but it's about Huck's freedom--getting away from the Widow Douglas and Miss Watson, running away from home, not having to go to school and instead having a great time floating down the river on a raft--every boy's dream. Have any of us ever experienced this real freedom? Probably not, we're indoctrinated to be mindless automatons in a large corporation called the USA, Inc. We're all slaves from the cradle to the grave. 209.77.229.70 (talk) 00:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Although 209 might be right about saying nigger it remains that post 1960s readers especially take offense at it. They judge any use of the word by whites as necessarily racist, i.e., as clear evidence of racist meaning and intent, a sort of hate speech. (My own POV is that they are expecting too much purity from a friend who exposed the petty selfishness and ignorance of the white Southerner while elevating the essential humanity of the black man; Jim is far and above the most noble and mature character in the book. But I'm not a source, so I can't put my POV in the book. I wonder if any verifiable source has ever said what I just said: if not, forget it.)

The objection to Twain's use of nigger in the mouths of the white trash (including his own hero Huck) parallels the objection to the title of the short illustrated children's book Little Black Sambo which impressed me as a child, because of the hero's bravery and ingenuity. If he was an Indian boy, then that explains why there were tigers. If he was a black boy of the US South, it's even more anti-racist, as courage and ingenuity are human qualities antithetical to the notion of the "sub-human" African who deserves no better treatment than slavery.

I understand the objections of modern critics, but contrariwise I found Twain's book (plus Sambo) the two most accessible and impressive anti-racist tracts I've ever come across. Each puts life into the idea of human equality, even more than Abraham Lincoln's saying: "Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." --Uncle Ed (talk) 01:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Film 1985

Link for add. info. : http://www.answers.com/topic/the-adventures-of-huckleberry-finn-tv-episode 1985's Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is the only filmed version of the Mark Twain classic to cover every episode in the original novel and not merely such familiar vignettes as the "King and the Duke" business. Presented in four parts, Finn opens in 1844, with young Huck (Patrick Day) being kidnapped from the home of the Widow Douglas (Sada Thompson) by his brutal, drink-sodden Pap (Frederic Forest). Huck escapes by faking his own death and rafting down the river in the company of escaped slave Jim (Samm-Art Williams). Part two offers the seldom-dramatized scene in the novel wherein an abolitionist is lynched; part three recounts the Shepardson/Grangerford feud; and part four culminates with the chicanery of the King (Barnard Hughes) and the Duke (Jim Dale) and the capture of Jim. Featured in the huge cast are Lillian Gish, Geraldine Page, Butterfly McQueen, Richard Kiley, and Eugene Oakes as Tom Sawyer. Originally clocking in at 240 minutes, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was first telecast in February and March of 1986 on PBS' American Playhouse; it is currently available in a 105-minute videocassette version. ~ Hal Erickson, Rovi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.203.249.73 (talk) 17:07, 4 March 2012 (UTC)