Lauren P's Response

Lauren can't access the blog, so she's emailed her response, and I'm posting it here on her behalf.

My Literary Criticism
After reading and annotating the criticism, I went back and read though all the comments I wrote to myself. I realized that Sloan's analysis of Twains parable and my first impression of the parable were pretty different. At first I compared the Solomon story directly to Huck's life, Huck the baby and the two mothers the widow and Pap. I then went back and tried to get Jim's side,"En mine you, de real point is down furder-it's down deeper"(Twain 78),my thoughts ended more like Sloan's. The one thing I really agreed with is when Sloan said "The deceptively humorous tone of the passage and Jim's deceptively simplistic reasoning conceal a serious message" (Sloan 3). This is clearly a serious subject for Jim when interpreting it in comparison to slavery and freedom. In the text Huck doesn't understand Jim's interpretation, so naturally Jim gets defensive. "Doan talk to me 'bout Sollermun, Huck, I knows him by d e back"(Twain 78). In the story, I began to wonder if, in Jim's eyes, Huck represented society. Maybe that's why Jim got so defensive, not because he was angry with Huck or his knowledge (or lack there of), but that he was angry by society's willingness to continue slavery. In my opinion Jim's response to Huck telling him, "But I tell you you don't get the point"(Twain 78), can be 'blamed' on the widow and Pap because they never instilled the fact that slavery is wrong in Huck's mind. Here, Twain is really starting to distinguish between Huck's heart and mind. His caretakers have taught him practically all he knows in life and his mind goes with the general society. But, if Huck knows that black people are slaves and that it is wrong for them to run away, why does Huck associate himself with Jim? Huck's starting to make up his own mind about things, even though "...the two reach an impasse that is never resolved"(Sloan 3). After forming my opinion, in short, Jim is right and Huck is wrong, Sloan wrote,"Neither Jim nor Huck really understand the King Solomon passage, which seems to be Twain's intentions..."(Sloan 4). This short passage threw me for a loop. I don't know if I necessarily agree with Sloan, but because of this opposing idea his criticism is successful, in my eyes because it made me think.

Reena Patel's post - I don't necessarily agree with your interpretation, but when applied to the story, it makes sense. It's cool to see what you got out of Sloan's piece compared to what I got. We focused on two different things and if we were having a discussion in class our responses could be connected and intertwined with each others.

Michele L.'s post- You hit on certain parts of the Sloan piece that I defiantly agree with. One example is the reoccurring theme of the halves. I didn't catch it the first time though either. Maybe your like me, Now that you've read this criticism are you keeping your eyes open for anything that has to do with fractions in the book? I'll try to remember to bring it up tomorrow in class so I can get more of your thoughts on the meaning behind that.

Thanks again! Lauren P