The Canonization of a Racist Novel

by Abby Wickman
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is
considered by many American readers as the
quintessential American novel. Thus, many can
easily come to the conclusion that Mark Twains
novel has been canonized. However, critics such
as Jonathan Arac, have criticized the
idolization of the novel in American culture,
arguing that the work has attained immunity
from criticism and questioning. The real
unfairness of the Huck Finns canonization is not
the status or esteem that the work gained from
its place of high regard in American minds, but
rather, the selective disregard of the role and
nature of Twains character, Jim, in evaluations
of the novel as a whole. As Morrison wrote, if
we release [Huck Finn] from its clutch of
sentimental nostrums about lighting out to the
territory, river gods, and the fundamental
innocence of Americanness [and] incorporate
its contestatory, combative critique of
antebellum American, we will be left with a
more complex and canon-worthy novel (310).
Huck Finn possesses merits as a classic work of
American satire and folklore, and provides a
material by which to critique the society that
Twain is writing within. However, the novels
overall portrayal and final depiction of Jim is
that of someone inferior to any of the novels
white character thus, reinforcing the racist
beliefs that the novel itself attempts to
comment on and critique.
Therefore, the solution is the undeification of Huck Finn by granting readers the
freedom to reevaluate the benefit of its
canonization a reevaluation which is only
made possible through criticism of both the
parts and whole of the novel. For example,
Morrison critiques the humiliation of Jim found
within the novels end, and argues that the

ending would not have been written for a white

version of Jim, because it would not have been
possible for two children to play so painfully
with the life of a white man (regardless of his
class, education, or fugitiveness) once he had
been revealed to us as a moral adult (309). It is
not sufficient to portray the development of
Jims complexity as a character, to reveal a
bond between Huck and Jim through their own
society on the raft (Twain 124), and describe
Hucks decision to go to hell for Jim (201). In
light of the books ending, Twains overall
depiction and manner of conveying issues of
race and racism do not deliver anyone from
slavery. Rather, Twains methods, while
providing valuable insight and commentary on
the African-Americans situation, perpetuate
racism and only participate in a flawed system
of interacting with African-Americans.
Arguments have been made for the
satirical value of Jims mistreatment
(particularly at the end episode involving Tom
Sawyer), and furthermore, for the equally
searing satire Twain employs on several of his
other characters black and white alike.
However, as Arac argues, that this idea claims
that exists two kinds of discrimination
happening within a reading of Huck Finn a bad
kind from Twains Southern, antebellum white
society, and a good kind practiced by readers
with a sufficiently sophisticated
understanding of which aspects of Twains
world he is actually criticizing (451).
Finally, we may determine that the
novel is racist from the way its inherent racism
manifests itself through the repeated use of the
N-word. Arac has several complaints against the
novels use of this word, stating that one of the
major effects of Huckleberry Finn is the licensing
and authorizing of the continued honored
circulation of a term that is both explosive and
degrading (447). Furthermore, Arac argues

that the term is indicative of an inadequacy of

vocabulary, agreeing with critic Richard Poirier
that the word is a limiting artistic feature of
the fictional world Twain has constructed (Arac
450). Though Hucks intentions in using the Nword may not be insidious, Arac writes that his
continuing usage helps keep it alive and ready
to be exploited by those who benefit from the
way of the world that denigrates blacks (452).
Before readers and Americans can
address the canonization of Huck Finn, they
must accept the racist nature of the novel, as
well as the cultural and social implications that
have resulted from the past avoidance of its
racist messages. As Morrison wrote, the book
may indeed be great because in its
structureit simulates and describes the
parasitical nature of white freedom (310). As
readers ask themselves if such a book belongs
in the canon, they will also find themselves
answering, yes. Just as dictators and historical
villains are referred to in history books, so can
a racist book be canonized. The eradication of
Aracs idolatry does not require morally perfect
works of literature that would be cultural and
historical denial. However, Huck Finn must be
recognized as racist for the act of recognizing
it as a racist work is also recognizing the smear
of slavery and racism on Americas history and
heritage. Not only does there exist a moral
obligation to recognize the racist nature of Huck
Finn, but such an acknowledgment provides a
fuller novel (Morrison, 308).
Works Cited
Arac, Jonathan. "From Huckleberry Finn as Idol
and Target." Adventures of Huckleberry Finn: A
Case Study in Critical Controversy. 2nd ed.
Madison: University of Wisconsin, 2004. 435-56.
Print.
Morrison, Toni. "Jim's Africanist Presence in

Huckleberry Finn." Adventures of Huckleberry

Finn: A Case
Study in Critical Controversy.
2nd ed. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin's,2004.
305-10. Print. Twain, Mark, Gerald Graff, and
James Phelan. Adventures of Huckleberry Finn:
A Case Study in Critical Controversy. 2nd ed.
Boston: Bedford of St. Martin's, 2004. Print.