Space for free thinking

During class last week, one topic that became unavoidable was in regards to Huck’s morality.  No one was really able to come up with a definitive status of his moral compass.  My personal opinion on this dilemma goes back to the way that Mark Twain writes.  He sets up his narrative in a style that creates dialogue and action without much explanation to follow.  He drops his characters into a world that is in the midst of political and social upheaval.  In such a setting, it would be easy to think that Twain’s own biases and opinions would seep into the text.  However, he is able to somehow suppress his own voice, allowing Huck to chronicle moments in his life rather than extrapolating on them.

By leaving some questions unanswered, Twain makes room for his audience to fill in the gaps for themselves, in my opinion anyway.  He is not intruding on their beliefs, but setting up events to let the reader infer further for themselves.  This is where close-reading becomes vital to the process of getting through Huck Finn.  By reading in depth, the reader can take the time to make the connections for that Twain does not offer upfront.  Of course, this idea, that everyone’s opposing opinions can somehow be equally meaningful, may rub some people the wrong way.  But the point is that Twain has forged a space in the novel where people are able to think for themselves, having a chance to grow and develop in thought as the characters do the same.   

Some incoherent thoughts

I think before I can attempt to answer the question of why we should read Huck Finn/what's the purpose of close reading a text I should share what initiated my passion for reading literature.

Ever since I was a child I've always had a huge imagination. My head was always in the clouds and I'd happily fantasize of day dreams over and over in my head. Though thoughts can be scattered as soon as they float in my ever racing mind and each re-visit to a fantasy would ultimately never be the same. I loved reading because I wanted to experience more than the reality I was simply growing in (as overdone cliche and stupid that sounds) because I was bored with it or knew my limitations. Every time I'd pick up a book (one that would interest me that is) I'd dive into the pages of the story and picture it all clearly in my head. I always cherished the ability to live vicariously through the lives of others, whether they be fictional or not. 

In others, reading was not only a source to pass the time, it was a place I could go, an experience I could... well... experience without actually experiencing. (And here I praise the duality of body and mind. WOO!)

Going off that, sorta, the first time I opened Huck Finn weeks ago it was so difficult for me to make sense of the world depicted by this wildchild who could barely write a paragraph without me doing a double-take of his poor grammar.Of course, I say poor grammar coming from a literate (at least I hope I am) 21st century 'Merican who's had the privileged of what we deem to be "proper" education of the use of the english language. It took me a good getting used to the voice of Huckleberry because it was a voice from a character I was not familiar with and used words in different ways I was used to. I think what really allows Huck to embody is own character is the language he uses. I've always admired and respected writers who write in the dialect of their characters. As soon as I got comfortable and could hear the voice of Huck clearly in my head the world depicted in Twain's novel became all the moire real and authentic for me because of it's presentation through his unique voice and towards the end of the novel I was entrapped in it that I didn't take into account the larger picture that everyone else gets out of Twain's work. 

There are multiple layers to reading and how we interpret Huck Finn. On one hand, we can concentrate on his character and his personal account on his adventures. On other we can look at all the issues that are embedded in the text whether they have been put there intentionally or not. It really is crazy when you think about the humor in this story and how it paradoxes the harsh severity of people. 

It makes me uncomfortable when we discuss the writer's intention because it's something that we will never know (unless as Jarrett suggested, they write it all out) and also because as I writer myself, I believe that the process of writing/creating takes such a powerful form itself that it becomes a being of its own. Given that, things that are deep or interpersonal or whatever about the writer are revealed on the page without their intentions.  

(I am having major difficulty expressing myself now so I'm really sorry if none of this makes sense to anyway)

Literature is Everyone's.

So honestly, I'm not even really sure why this question seems like such a pertinent one, or why authorial intent has become such a worry for people at this stage in the game. I think I got those worries Freshman year starting out the English major, but at this point I think I've either internalized enough of the rhetoric, or (hopefully) come to understand something about literature that pushes me away from any worries about over-close-reading.

So here's my pitch, as it applies to both Huck Finn and any other piece of literature we might worry about textual ownership for or close reading.

1. What's the purpose of analyzing a text at all, close reading or not?

I'd imagine that we aren't going to say that it's to find out what the author wanted to say. If we wanted to find out an author's thoughts, we could ask, and if an author wanted to express thoughts on an issue clearly, (s)he'd write a paper on the topic, not a work of fiction. At the very least, the author's intent doesn't seem to be what we're getting at when we read a text.

Perhaps then, we ought to think that there's something more, something deeper. What is it? I'd propose that analyzing a text can do (at least) two things for us.

2a. Understanding a context, functioning as a social mirror. Works of fiction are products of their socio-political climate. They reflect things the author is exposed to, sometimes things they're not even aware of. They can reflect social oppression or social progress. They can show us what an author experienced, or what an author thinks (s)he experiences in his/her life.

By reading Huck Finn, for example, we get a picture of a time and place as interpreted by Twain. Even if Twain's read on the time/place is factually inaccurate, either by his deliberate manipulation or by subconscious social influence, we still get an understanding of how people like Twain understand their social climate, or the social climate of the time they're writing about.

2b. Hearing critique, deliberate or accidental. Authors sometimes write about what they see. Sometimes they don't like what they see, or aspects of it. Sometimes they do. Nonetheless they provide us with arguments via their observations and biases that we can choose to agree or disagree with. We can flesh out whether their observations are accurate or not, and we can decide whether their arguments are coherent and well thought out.

3. So, I think we should conclude that literature belongs to the interpreter.

It belongs to whomever is interested in viewing and considering it. It belongs to whomever is interested in pitching an argument about it's meaning in the context of the society the work exists in.

Huck Finn is a window into 1884, 1835-1845, and into today. It gives us a read on our history, on race relations, on how we ought to think of them, how we might work to change or improve them, among other things.

appreciation and growth through close reading.

My first thought is simple: we should close read Huck Finn to understand it better.  There are always layers to a book and to a character, as there are with people.  The closer you look and more time you spend getting to know them, the deeper you can understand and appreciate them.  

It reminds me of how I really disliked one of many best friends when I first met her.  Upon first interacting with her I identified her as a crazy type-A personality.  We totally clashed. The more time I spent with her and the more time I thought about her actions and why she did them, I could tell all of the crazy shit she’d say and do was coming straight from her heart and her desire to help out and make other’s happy or comfortable.  I love her now, but not when I first met her.  It was only through increased interactions with her did I see her awesomeness. 

I find I have similar experiences with characters in books or books in general.  I usually don’t like them that much when I first read them.  Through discussion and the more time I spend thinking about them, I find I can get a better understanding of the characters or book in general.  That “better understanding” usually goes hand in hand with appreciation of the work and eventually liking it too.

If we like, appreciate, or understand a novel for reasons unintended by the author, I tend to agree with John Green—“you still win”.  If you can be a more productive member of society benefiting yourself and others from what you learned by close reading a novel, that’s great.  That could look like applying the discipline of persistence and analyzing texts closely to a job you get or learning to love a friend, among other scenarios. 

Thinking about Huck Finn...

               Answering this particular question of why it is important to read Huck Finn is a relatively difficult one. The first time I read Huck Finn I didn’t necessarily take anything from it. However, coming back and re-reading it again has begun to change my perspective. The reason why I think Huck Finn is important is because I see him as one the most human characters ever created. I think the fact he is confused, doesn’t necessarily know the right actions to take, and is lost in the world trying to form meaning for himself makes him much more real. Huck’s quote “You can’t pray a lie,” (200) stuck out to me the most as I was reading the last half. And after he decides to help Jim instead of giving him up is the turning point within Huck’s character. Every human goes through a time in their lives in which they have to make difficult choices that test who they really are. I think Twain created the character of Huck Finn for a human base that was instructed of all the societal norms, and under those he creates adventures for Huck to take a journey that changes the way he thinks and feels. However, I think this concept only works if we try to bring our own interpretation and feelings to the book as well, because I don’t disagree that Huck is a relatively simple character at times. I think that the reader must be a companion to Huck, and must truly feel Huck’s confusion in a chaotic and violent world. Huck doesn’t make leaps and bounds when you consider his “transformation” within the novel, but our journey of reading his gives the reader a much more personal connection to Huck, even if he doesn’t make any drastic changes himself.

-Jon

Making Meaning

Close reading literature is an incredibly rewarding experience.  It allows us to not only learn more about the work itself but also about ourselves.  I believe that writers always write with a purpose, and close reading helps us to discover the pieces of the work that when put together, lead us to the bigger picture.  However, we as readers give the work meaning, and sometimes our interpretation conflicts with the author’s purpose – ultimately we each create our own individual picture of the work in question.  Whenever I read, I always feel that I am vicariously experiencing the events in the novel.  Reading is a personal experience.  For instance, say that ironically we have all been to Maryland at one point in our lives and have stayed at the same hotel and have gone to the same beach, etc.  Did we all have the same exact experience?  Of course not.

Looking at Huck Finn in particular, there are numerous articles and essays which close read Huck Finn with a modern perspective.  We gain so much from doing so.  Literature is not trapped in the time period in which the novel was written or set, and our own opinions on literature should not be defined by those of the author.  By interpreting Huck Finn, we bring it closer to ourselves in the present day.  I think it also brings us closer to each other.  Again, it’s like asking someone “Wow, I’ve been to London – how did you like it?  Did you see the Tower of London?  What did you think?  I LOVED it.”  That’s exactly what we do with close reading.  We have our own experience with the text, and then often share this experience with others.  I’ll have to admit – I always find author biographies extremely useful when reading literature as so many writers dip into their own lives for inspiration.  But again, that’s how I like to experience literature.  I don’t think you can force someone to have a certain experience/close reading of a novel.  The purpose of close reading is to create your own purpose.   

Some stream of conscious on the English major issue- Blog 2

It’s fun? This is a super hard question to have an “answer” to. I have had the same dark thoughts that Rayna shared with us and have often wondered the importance of intent and my own interpretation. I think that if the author’s intention for the author’s novel is completely lost in the reader’s interpretation, then the work has lost a lot of its value. Of course the reader’s interpretation might seem like it has value to themselves, but I do wonder what “value” that interpretation has if it is completely irrelevant and even against what the author intended. For example, Professor Goldsmith mentioned one of the critical essays being about a homosexual/homoerotic theme in Huck Finn, and the possibly sexual relationship between Huck and Jim. What value would this essay have if Mark Twain were to come back alive and tear that argument down and deny every bit of it? I posted a link at the end of my blog to an article about the problems of using google to “self-diagnose” illnesses on google. Even thought this seems irrelevant, I find that this English conflict we are having might be reflective of this issue. The article states, “the study reminds people that if they try to get medical help from the internet, they are limited by their own biases as well as the haphazard nature of the web”. Just like we might be biased and haphazard when it comes to interpretation of illnesses, we might all be “misdiagnosing” or misinterpreting works of literature because of biases.

            Well….now this just led me to think of why our interpretations might just actually matter. Maybe it doesn’t have any actual value when it comes to the text and its meaning; however, our joined interpretations could indicate what our society is absorbed with at any time. Taking back into consideration the critical essay on the homoerotic themes in the novel, its conclusions could be meaningful…. even though zombie Twain denies every bit of it. I'm not quite sure when the essay was written, but I'm going to hope that my assumption of within the past 20 years is correct. If we look at our society, there has been a lot of growth and conversation about the gay community. All of our modern interpretations matter, not because it might expose a huge secret that Twain twined into his novel—but because our interpretations document our mindsets, beliefs, and understandings as a community of that time through the median of a specific text. I wonder, if we turned our attention towards all of the critical essays written about Huck Finn from the time it was written until now, would we be able to see what biased the society of each decade? What were they infatuated with? What did they care about? What politics or social movements influenced their interpretation? Because at the end of the day, what Twain wrote and why he wrote it is fixed. And him being dead makes it a little difficult to edit, add, or alter anything about Huck Finn…especially in his zombie form… because zombies struggle making coherent sentences. However, the way a novel is read and understood does constantly keep changing. Not because each generation gets smarter or superior in their literary detective skills, but because they have different focuses.

            Thinking about it this way, literature is so complicated and can be representational of multiple timelines. The novels written might expose and document the author’s mentality in accordance to their own social surroundings. While the critical responses to it the years following, document a timeline of the social responses that might correlate or juxtapose the author’s position due to what social values the author of the essay might be invested in. So to try and conclude to something and answer, “what might we gain from interpreting the novel,” we gain an understanding of what the novel might have intended and then learn from it, build upon it, and re-envision our social understandings within the context of that novel.

                  

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2177177/Beware-Dr-Google-People-use-internet-diagnose-illness-interpret-symptoms.html