INTRODUCTION
Mark Twain’s “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” is a timeless classic of American literature, celebrated for its rich characters, vivid settings, and insightful commentary on the society of its time. One of the most intriguing aspects of this novel is its ending. T.S. Eliot famously lauded the last fifth of the book as “the perfect ending,” while literary critic Leo Marx deemed it a “stupendous failure.” These divergent opinions about the novel’s conclusion have sparked vigorous debates among scholars and readers. This essay seeks to analyze the merits and drawbacks of each viewpoint and ultimately provide an evaluation of which perspective is more compelling.
Perfection: T.S. Eliot’s Perspective
T.S. Eliot, a prominent 20th-century poet and critic, believed that the final section of “Huckleberry Finn” was nothing short of perfection. His opinion is grounded in his appreciation for the way Twain concluded the story, capturing the essence of Huck’s character and the thematic undertones of the novel.
Character Growth and Authenticity
One of the primary reasons Eliot praised the ending was the portrayal of Huck’s character growth and authenticity. Huck Finn’s journey down the Mississippi River is a bildungsroman, and it culminates in his decision to reject society’s norms and escape into the unknown, with the novel’s famous closing line: “But I reckon I got to light out for the Territory ahead of the rest because Aunt Sally, she’s going to adopt me and sivilize me, and I can’t stand it. I been there before.” This ending, according to Eliot, was the culmination of Huck’s personal and moral development throughout the story. Huck’s choice to “light out for the Territory” instead of accepting the conventional path of civilization showcased his growth and independence. Eliot saw this as the perfect ending because it was true to Huck’s character and allowed the novel to maintain its authenticity.
Maintaining the Novel’s Themes of
Eliot also appreciated the way the ending reinforced and encapsulated the novel’s central themes. “Huckleberry Finn” explores themes of freedom, individuality, and the struggle against societal expectations. Huck’s decision to escape to the Territory encapsulates these themes perfectly. It highlights his quest for freedom and his resistance to societal constraints. Furthermore, it reinforces the idea that the Mississippi River is a symbol of both freedom and confinement, a central theme in the novel. By ending the story with Huck’s determination to avoid being “sivilized,” Twain beautifully tied up these thematic threads.
Open-Ended Conclusion
Eliot appreciated the open-ended nature of the conclusion. It does not neatly tie up all loose ends, allowing readers to contemplate what lies ahead for Huck. This open-endedness invites readers to engage their imagination and ponder the potential adventures and challenges that await the young protagonist in the Territory. It’s a testament to the novel’s depth and complexity that the conclusion encourages readers to consider the story’s broader implications.
Failure: Leo Marx’s Perspective
Leo Marx, a noted literary critic, offered a contrasting viewpoint on the ending of “Huckleberry Finn.” He believed that the final fifth of the novel was a “stupendous failure,” and his argument revolves around the perceived unresolved issues and the potential for a more impactful conclusion.
Huck’s Morality and Twain’s Ambiguity
Marx argued that Huck’s moral development, which is central to the novel, remained somewhat unresolved. Twain portrays Huck’s growing awareness of the moral injustices of slavery and the hypocrisy of society. However, the novel ends with Huck still engaging in deception, allowing Tom Sawyer to continue with his misguided plan to free Jim, even though they could have simply informed Aunt Sally of Jim’s true identity. This ambiguity in Huck’s morality left Marx dissatisfied, as he believed the character’s growth should have culminated in a more definitive moral stance.
Social Commentary and Unresolved Issues
Twain used “Huckleberry Finn” as a platform to comment on the social issues of his time, particularly slavery and racism. Marx argued that the novel’s ending did not effectively address or resolve these significant societal problems. By ending the story with Huck’s escape to the Territory, the novel left behind the issues of slavery and Jim’s quest for freedom without a satisfying resolution. Marx’s perspective is that the novel fell short of its potential to offer a more poignant social commentary.
The Role of Tom Sawyer
Marx took issue with the continued presence of Tom Sawyer in the closing chapters. He felt that Tom’s elaborate and unnecessary schemes regarding Jim’s liberation detracted from the story’s thematic weight. Tom’s childish antics and adherence to romantic adventure fiction conventions, even in the face of the stark realities of slavery and injustice, undermined the novel’s social critique and left a jarring note in the final section.
Reconciliation: A Balanced Perspective
Both Eliot and Marx present valid arguments, and the question of whether the ending of “Huckleberry Finn” is perfect or a failure is open to interpretation. To reach a balanced perspective, we must consider various factors.
Character Complexity
The open-ended conclusion, as praised by Eliot, does indeed preserve the complexity of Huck’s character. Huck is neither a saint nor a sinner; he is a product of his environment, grappling with the moral dilemmas of his time. Twain’s decision to leave Huck’s moral growth somewhat ambiguous aligns with the novel’s realistic portrayal of a flawed, evolving protagonist.
Societal Commentary
While Marx makes a valid point about the unresolved societal issues, it’s important to recognize that “Huckleberry Finn” is not a didactic novel, but rather a work that invites readers to grapple with the complexities of its themes. Twain does address the moral and social injustices of the time, but he leaves the resolution somewhat open to interpretation. This approach encourages readers to reflect on these issues and recognize that societal problems often defy easy solutions.
The Role of Tom Sawyer
Marx’s criticism of Tom Sawyer’s presence in the final chapters is well-founded. Tom’s antics do seem out of place in the context of the serious issues being discussed. However, Tom’s character is consistent with Twain’s overall satirical approach to various elements of society. In this sense, his inclusion serves as a reminder of the absurdity and romanticized notions that can cloud people’s judgment, even in the face of glaring injustices.
Conclusion: Finding a Middle Ground
The debate over whether the ending of “Huckleberry Finn” is perfect or a failure is an excellent example of the subjective nature of literary interpretation. The novel’s conclusion, with Huck Finn deciding to “light out for the Territory,” has been lauded for its authenticity, thematic resonance, and open-endedness by T.S. Eliot. On the other hand, Leo Marx criticized it for its perceived ambiguity regarding Huck’s morality and its lack of a more definitive resolution to the societal issues addressed throughout the novel.
Ultimately, the strength of “Huckleberry Finn” lies in its ability to provoke discussion and reflection. It is a novel that refuses to offer easy answers to the complex moral and societal dilemmas it presents. Twain’s portrayal of Huck’s moral development is purposefully nuanced, reflecting the complexity of real-life ethical decisions. While the novel may not provide a neat and tidy resolution to all the issues it raises