Category: the meta no one asked for

The Count of Monte Cristo, again 

Part 5 in what I had originally intended to be four parts 

The plot 

Or,

Edmond Dantes; If God didn’t want me to do this he’d have killed me by now

Who we are to analyze and revenge ourselves upon in this section:

Baron Danglars, a former junior officer to Edmond Dantes who masterminded the plan to have Dantes imprisoned.

Now, appropriately Danglars is the last of the major players to meet his end, and would have the most brutal end by Monte Cristo ‘s designs had Villefort not fucked the pooch *so badly*. I maintain that what happens to Villefort is insanely brutal, which Monte Cristo agrees with. Monte Cristo is so repulsed by how horridly the Villefort family is ruined he debates if he’s perhaps made some error in the insane, decades long revenge planning. So much so, he ultimately treats Danglars with mercy. Eventually.

So, what do we do with a problem like Danglars?

Danglars rises from cargo master working with Dantes to being a very successful banker, though he lies about how successful. Edmond begins by asking Danglars for unlimited credit, which both exposes his inability to do so despite his purchased barony and title, but also ultimately causes people to divest from Danglars, particularly because of a foreign policy scheme which Edmond manufactures by bribing a telegraph operator to give false information on political upheavals and advancements. Danglar’s business is slowly eroded and he ultimately has to flee Paris–we’ll get to that in a moment–and is captured by friend of the plot Vampa who causes Danglars to increasingly barter away the rest of his fortune for safety.

Now there’s another anti Danglars plot involving his daughter Eugenie–great news, she’s a lesbian.  Eugenie is supposed to marry Albert but Edmond barely has to convince them not to get married. Then Danglars tries to make her marry Andrea Cavalcanti–great news Cavalcanti is one of Edmond’s plants *but hold on we’ll get there in a minute*. Eugenie has the best ending of anyone in the book, she runs away with her girlfriend and assumes a male identity to become an artist. Good for him!

Now that Cavalcanti kid. Sit down for this one, it’s the longest con in the book. and it’s going to be our transition to the final piece: what happens to the Villefort family.

Madam Danglars, who sucks, years ago had an affair with Villefort. She gives birth to a boy, Villefort buries it alive and tells her it was stillborn. Berttucio, thinking he could make a buck on Villefort sees him burying a baby alive and goes and takes it, assuming that Villefort was hiding some sort of money or holdings. Berttucio then ends up raising the child of these two assholes who is tantamount to evil. One day he beats up, ties up, and robs his caretakers and ends up in prison where his cellmate his Caderousse, the guy who failed to stop the plot against Edmond in the first place who I don’t think I’ve even talked about yet. He’s small potatoes. This kid. So Edmond tracks down this kid who is plot poison and he pays him/gaslights him into playing the role of Andrea Cavalcanti as part of a two man con with this other guy that’s pretending to be Cavalcanti senior, all so they can get him to marry Eugene and rob Danglars.

It comes out in huge fashion who this kid really is and that’s the impetus for Eugenie getting out of dodge while the parents are distracted with fallout. Sorry  we almost married you to your brother, also what?

let’s try to tie it all up with the Villefort plot….

The Count of Monte Cristo

And now, the plot

Or,
Edmond Dantes; If God didn’t want me to do this he’d have killed me by now

It might actually take me a few posts to simplify the plot because The Count Of Monte Cristo is, in actuality, several interweaving stories

Part 1: The book versus films

Whom we must be revenged upon:
Mercedes; Edmond’s betrothed who panic marries his rival
Fernand; Edmond’s love rival for Mercedes who posts the allegations against Edmond which lead to his imprisonment

Most films emphasize this particular revenge and minimize the revenge on Villefort which is arguably the stupidest move. Genuinely. What happens to Villefort is so much more intricate and interesting. By focusing purely on the love story which is not the center of the novel these films do absolutely no justice to how fucked up Edmond Dantes is. A huge bummer.

Commonly in film: Mercedes’ son Albert is kidnapped and miraculously saved by the mysterious Count of Monte Cristo. The count uses Albert to be introduced into society. Mercedes is still in love with Dantes, recognizes him, explains that she needed to marry Fernand because Dantes had gotten her pregnant, after a duel with Fernand, they all run away together, lovers and bastard son. Hooray.

INCORRECT. Chronologically:

The mysterious Count of Monte Cristo buys a slave named Haidee. She is the daughter of a disgraced Vizier and former princess in a Grecian court of Arab descent.
She worships him as her savior and he does not treat her as a slave but as a ward, often bringing her to social events to show off her beauty (allegedly)

Monte Cristo indeed arranges for Albert to be kidnapped, Albert is really cool about it. By the time Albert leaves, all of the smugglers are shaking his hand and they’re all buddies. He calmly is like ‘oh cool, you saved me? You didn’t need to but that’s chill of you. Let’s be best friends’ and Monte Cristo is like yeah sure.

Monte Cristo avoids Mercedes at all costs and is weird about Albert being like ‘man my mom is cool. You wanna meet my mom? I’d fuck my mom if we weren’t related’

Monte Cristo keeps introducing Albert to Haidee saying ‘man, she’s the best. Isn’t she great? Wouldn’t it suck if she had a tragic past related to your dad? Definitely not a past linked to me. Your dad does fucked up shit a lot. Didn’t your dad used to work for a Vizier in Greece when he was a sailor before he became super mega rich for no reason. Anyway, check out my hot daughter. Hope you don’t fall in love with her’

And Albert’s like ‘my mom is cool’. And Monte Cristo is like ‘yeah, yeah she’s great, shut up’.

Eventually it becomes unavoidable and Monte Cristo and Mercedes meet.
Mercedes is still in love with Dantes, is the only one to recognize him, explains that she needed to marry Fernand because she didn’t know what else to do and has lived basically in mourning her whole life having chronic nightmares of Edmond’s reported death. She and Fernand have a loveless relationship that both tolerate. Their son, however, kicks ass and is the only thing Mercedes likes about being alive.
Albert agrees he’s Great. And also check out how cool my mom is. Monte Cristo is like yeah that’s nice, kid.

Eventually through repeatedly introducing Haidee and Albert, Monte Cristo is like ‘hey, tell this kid your tragic backstory but leave out names’. Haidee tells about her father being murdered and she and her mother being sold into slavery and a bunch of horrible shit that happened to her because Fernand sold the family out to be made a rich baron.

Albert and Monte Cristo get in a fight about Fernand after some intermediaries confirm that Fernand was the one who let to Haidee’s enslavement and orphaning. Fernand is like ‘this is really fucked up of my dad, but you shouldn’t say that in public’ and Monte cristo says ‘idgaf, he did it and I will talk about it’
They call for a duel.

Mercedes begs Edmond not to kill her son, Edmond agrees but knows he will have to let Albert kill him to maintain all of his lies, and laments still loving Mercedes as the worst thing about himself. And then he’s kind of like ‘or do I? She seemed cool about me letting her kid kill me. Yeah, fuck her actually’.

Then, at the start of the duel Albert mysteriously says ‘Actually I’m not offended’ and Edmond realizes Mercedes must have confessed everything.

Albert calls out his father about being a piece of shit so hard that Fernand kills himself and Albert and Mercedes leave town to start new lives.

Everyone agrees how cool Albert is. Mercedes ages rapidly, like rapidly, from being all disgraced and what not. Monte Cristo says ‘yeah, that sucks, man. Guess I’m revenged since Fernand is dead’.

Monte Cristo and Haidee realize they’re the only people who get each other, because of all the wanting revenge, and run away together. Monte Cristo is on a boat with Haidee, sailing away like ‘wow. What a messed up time I’ve had.’

Now that alone could be one book. But it’s not! Because we have other people to hate and plot against…

The Count of Monte Cristo

Part 3

The Chateau de Monte-Cristo is the current home of the Dumas society. It is a Neo Renaissance building decorated in floral, angelic, and music motifs with a sculpture of a historical writer above each ground floor window.
A second building, a Neo Gothic pavilion commissioned as a writing studio by Dumas is comically named Chateau D’If.
The property includes multiple gardens. The Chateaux was designed by Hippolyte Durand and construction took place between 1844-47.
Though it cost him 500,000 Francs, in 1848 Dumas sold the entire property he’d just commissioned for only 31,000 after being brought to near financial ruin.
The property that Monte Cristo bought was so briefly lived in by the writer that other owners could claim more right to it than he could. It has been a private property, a school, after it fell into disrepair the owners attempted to reconvert it into 400 flats in the 1960s before the Chateaux were rescued by the Dumas society.
The Dumas society (Société des Amis d’Alexandre Dumas) was formed in 1971 to preserve the Chateau and Dumas’ legacy by collecting books, manuscripts, autographs, photographs and contributing to cultural activities within the Chateau. It’s currently operated by the society as a museum.


The Chateau de Monte-Cristo
Chateau d’If

The Count of Monte Cristo

Part 2

Alexandre Dumas was a guy™.
Let me elaborate.
Alex, can I call you Alex? I’m gonna. Alex was born Dumas Davy de la Pailleterie in 1802, a French novelist and playwright, who gained seemed to genuinely be living his best life.

His father, Thomas Alexandre Dumas Davy de la Pailleterie was the son of a French Marquis and Haitian slave woman who rose to the rank of general-in-chief, fighting in multiple of the French Revolutionary Wars and invasions into Egypt, Battle of the Pyramids, and more. From extremely humble beginnings, brought to France by his father for education, Thomas Alexandre was considered a paramount of discipline, structure, struggle and reward.

And Alex would have likely hated that I mentioned his dad first, but I needed him for contrast.

Alexandre Dumas was described by English Playwright Watts Phillips as “the most generous, large-hearted being in the world. He also was the most delightfully amusing and egotistical creature on the face of the earth.”

In 1830 Alexandre participated in revolutionary riots that ousted Charles X and installed Louis-Phillipe, the citizen king. This led to huge restrictions being lifted on censorship that really helped the literary movement of the time to freely portray classism in Europe. Alexandre also faced considerable discrimination for his African heritage which he responded to…sharply. Known for wit and being an incoming train of words, he established himself as the progressive paradigm.

Described as loud, talkative, jovial until he wasn’t, Alex’s salons were something of legend. He was a founding member of the Club des Hashischins, a group of prolific writers including Charles Baudelaire and Victor Hugo, who met monthly at a hotel in Paris to take hashish together.

Alex married actress Ida Ferrier in 1840, they had no children together. Alex did have four claimed illegitimate children and 40 known mistresses as part of a publicly open marriage, iconically the prolific Adah Isaacs Menken who was 33 years younger than him which launched her brief writing career though she sadly died young at 33.

He founded a production studio and art collective and remained on the edges of multiple revolutionary movements throughout Europe and Russia, ex-patting to Russia for two years.

Now, the production company is one I’m fond and not fond of because he was at times accused of plagiarism, particularly around elements of the Count of Monte Cristo. Auguste Maquet who was a known collaborator of Dumas’ accused him of plagiarism after Monte Cristo because elements of Monte Cristo were lifted and expanded on from the novel Georges, also by Dumas but which Maquet had contributed to. Maquet was ultimately granted more money by the courts but couldn’t get a by-line.

His works ultimately mean that he wrote over 100,000 pages and there are still lost works which occasionally turn up, he was a powerhouse of getting work done. And then rewarding himself for it.

Which brings us to the Chateau de Monte Cristo in part 3….

I like this picture of Dumas and Menken for how happy he looks

The Count of Monte Cristo

Part 1

Come on a journey with me
The journey is Im reading The Count of Monte Cristo on a whim.
It is 1276 pages and I have absolutely zero free time between caregiving, writing, and content what have you.
So we’re making it content.
So, first obstacle;
I have had an extremely difficult time attempting to download a book on tape of this, allowing me to “read” count of monte Cristo while doing other stuff.



I recommend looking up librevox or loyalbooks for public domain recordings!
You can access them on their websites or I like to look for specific recordings that have been uploaded to podcast addict!


I attempted at one time a recording of Ulysses by James Joyce, which may be another journey we go on this year, but it is so impenetrable to read out loud that every recording I found included some laughter or groans, which honestly was so charming.

So anyhow, I got caught up on Chateau D’If. For whatever reason my phone refused to download this 55 hour audio book past chapter 8.

Weird, right?

So, I’ve gotten creative and been switching between audiobook options because almost every platform I’ve found has some issues with Count of Monte Cristo.

And because I most likely have some form of ADHD, I have zoned out and spent a lot of time researching Alexandre Dumas as an individual and let me tell you, he’s a guy.

I mean, he was a guy™.

So next week will be my rant on Alexandre Dumas and I’ve challenged myself that the week after that will be a take down of the Count himself.

We’re having a Dumas month!

The Picture of Dorian Grey



Hedonism hedonism hedonism!

Dorian Grey often falls into philosophical and what’s called ‘decadent literature’. Decadence, broadly, refers literally to decay and so in that sense, The Picture of Dorian Grey is a perfectly decadent book.
The decadence movement boasted the superiority of aesthetics over logic and naturalism. Decadence, as a term, referring to the decay of societies as a result of the loss of cultural standard–Case in point, the over expansion of the Roman Empire. French writers such as Baudelaire exalted in being decadent writers, romanticizing the decline of Rome and scoffing at progressive cultural agendas. This is where that slipperly slope to Ayn Rand makes itself available.
In the Picture of Dorian Grey, Oscar Wilde challenges and stylizes decadence.
Oscar Wilde is of course extremely famous as a satirist, my favorite of Wilde’s is actually The Importance of Being Earnest, and I feel he can’t help but be silly with Lord Henry’s character. Lord Henry can, in fact, only make me think of Graham Chapman’s Oscar Wilde sketch. But I digress.
Dorian listens to Lord Henry’s hedonistic philosophy and determines that the only important quality in life is beauty, priding beauty over all things. Wilde tells us just what he really thinks of this in what he has happen to Dorian, the lives Dorian destroys, and the hideousness of Dorian’s aging portrait. Beauty is a mask and fleeting, and the hideousness of your actions will always catch up to you.

DRACULA



I may someday have to write an essay, perhaps create a video essay, about what a bad person I think Bram Stoker was and the unintentional cinematic phenomena of Dracula.

Like all Vampire stories, Dracula was about fear mongering and the zeitgeist of the time. In Dracula, Stoker tells a reverse colonialism story. Here is a person who comes from, by the estimations of Johnathan Harker, a backwards land. Harker is meant to introduce you to the character and culture of Dracula; Harker’s frequent disparaging tut-tuting of the eastern Europeans he encounters is meant to be the prevailing opinions of the time. And then, here, this cloaked and despicable figure who pretends to want to meld within British society and become a part of the western European culture –turns out he is actually an infiltration of backward eastern myth come to feed upon those most vulnerable Victorian White Ladies™ that minorities cannot get enough of. But don’t worry, white guys, we have a slightly better eastern European who’s more integrated into our society, Van Helsing, who can hopefully bridge the gap by killing the embodiment of eastern European mythos. and the

Does it not make sense that vampires have become so much more a sympathetic figure since 1897? Does it not make sense that so many retellings of vampire stories now within western culture focus on the suffering of the vampire? And is that not, still, pretty fucking condescending?

I like Dracula, he who has ruled so long that he would rule still. I hope he gets to eat everybody.

FRANKENSTEIN



I could write essays on Frankenstein. I could likely write books on Frankenstein. For February I’ve decided to talk about some classic horror novels and where better to begin than Frankenstein.

Here is my most recent take after my most recent reading of Frankenstein:

I feel bad for Captain Robert Walton. Here he is, lonely, an innocent, just doing some minor vanity expedition-ing to the North Pole. He’s a scientist, probably not a colonizer even if he is British, and he’s lonely. He’s real, real lonely. He’s been on this ship a while. His men are losing faith. His sister probably thinks he’s a loser. He just wanted to be a writer. He just wanted a friend. He just wanted to go to the North Pole so he could say he did something worthwhile with his life.
And then there he is! A friend appears! Walton’s prayers for companionship at the edge of nowhere miraculously —oh wait, It’s Victor Frankenstein.

Victor Frankenstein then spends, like, forever telling Walton all of the minutia of his life and crimes with such a minimal level of empathy or remorse except for the consequences Victor has received that you just want to quietly slip Walton a book on narcissistic abuse. Just as a head’s up.

Victor Frankenstein, who isn’t a doctor. He’s a med student who fucks around and finds out, yet somehow still thinks the world is unfair to him specifically.

And then! He dies! And Walton is just sitting there, having had the ultimate vicarious trauma experience, alone once again. And he thinks to himself, well, that was something. Ravings of a mad man I hope —oh, nope, there’s Adam burning Victor’s body that he stole. It was all real. Well damn.

I feel bad for Captain Robert Walton.

Robert Louis Stevenson

If “You take the boat at San Francisco, and then my place is the second to the left” sounds at all similar to “second to the right and straight on till morning”, it could be because the latter was written by JM Barrie as the instructions to Never-neverland, and the former was the instructions Robert Louis Stevenson wrote to Barrie while trying to coax him to visit Stevenson in Samoa.


Robert Louis Stevenson initiated a correspondence with JM Barrie, which some infer inspired a number of themes in Barrie’s masterpiece Peter Pan. By that time, however, Stevenson was already an accomplished, established literary force having published Treasure Island. His interest in Barrie seems to have been perfectly friendly and admiring, as he was the much more famous of the two at the time and had nothing to be cloying about.


Stevenson had initially reached out to Barrie and Barrie in turn smothered Stevenson with adoration. They frequently plotted meeting but Barrie’s devotion to his ill mother kept him from heading to Samoa, and Stevenson’s poor health (which initiated his move from Scotland in the first place) prevented him from visiting Barrie.


They never, technically, met.


Barrie often fantasized in his letters that they were secretly related in some way, stemming from the same ancient clans in Scotland, and now-infamously wrote in his letters “To be blunt I have discovered (have suspected it for some time) that I love you, and if you had been a woman ….” A sentence which Barrie did not finish.
The confession didn’t impact their correspondences negatively at all and they continued to be pen pals until Stevenson’s death. Stevenson’s half of their correspondences were published posthumously by Barrie. At the time Barrie suspected that his letters to Stevenson had been destroyed and that his half of their relationship would remain a secret.


Dr. Michael Shaw, a scholar in Scottish literature who discovered the ‘lost’ Barrie letters, published “A Friendship in Letters”. He notes the impact Stevenson had on Barrie and his development of Peter Pan, not just in his references to Treasure Island in script but allusions directly to Stevenson and their correspondences.
Stevenson, like Peter Pan, was the proverbial outsider to English society.


First, Scottish. Bad start to get ahead in England.
Robert Louis Stevenson grew up ill, often bullied, rebelling intensely against the strict Presbyterian upbringing of his parents who once regarded him and themselves as failures after Stevenson was found to be an atheist and participating in socialist societies. Stevenson was a conservative later in life and never fully reconciled his conflicting beliefs or his conflicting religious and irreligious beliefs.


Much of Stevenson’s mercurial fight with morality and political allegiance seems to be mirrored in arguably his seminal work, “Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde”.
The most annoying thing that comes with talking about Dr Jekyll and Mr.Hyde, personally, is when people allege that the potion which Dr. Jekyll takes transforms him into Hyde. Perhaps I’m being pedantic, but the literary theme of Jekyll and Hyde is that they are one in the same man, that the potion gives Jekyll permission to be Hyde, not that Hyde is an invention of some drug. Hyde is the invention of Jekyll. He is, already, wicked.


The Body Snatcher, a short story inspired by Burke and Hare’s crimes which were contemporary to it’s publication, follows a man employed by a surgeon to procure bodies who comes to suspect that his partner is supplying bodies in more ways than one. Again and again, Fettes is talked out of implicating MacFarlane in any of the suspected murders and keeps his silence.


Kidnapped, which details the young, orphaned David Balfour discovering that he may be the rightful heir to an estate, with his uncle promising to explain the story of his father to him in the morning, only to arrange for Balfour to be kidnapped with the intention to be sold into slavery in the Carolinas that night. Much as with Jekyll and Hyde and with the Body Snatcher, ‘what is moral’ is the central theme. Balfour is concerned primarily with pursuing his version of justice against his uncle and nothing else, namely, getting his inheritance.


He doesn’t even want to kill the guy for selling him into slavery. When they finally trick Uncle Ebenezer into admitting he arranged for Balfour to be sold, Balfour immediately uses it to blackmail him and receive a salary to be paid so long as Uncle Ebenezer lives.


Stevenson’s characters, overall, are not concerned with morality but with the pursuit of a personal goal. Jekyll seeks permission to be Hyde and experience the immortality that he denies himself; Fettes is complicit in multiple murders to assure his own financial stability; Balfour doesn’t seem to care about anything except getting his money.


Literary critic Leslie Fiedler refers to Stevenson’s heroes as “the Beloved Scoundrel”, characters to which personal justice is the only morality.


Which brings us at last to Long John Silver.


Barrie quipped that the only man Long John Silver feared was Captain Hook and often intimated that Peter Pan took place in the same literary world as Treasure Island.


Greatly impacting the modern image of a pirate, Long John Silver is technically the main antagonist of Treasure Island. I say ‘technically’ because Long John Silver is genuinely fond of Jim Hawkins and based on Stevenson’s mentor William Ernest Henley (Henley’s daughter, Margaret, influenced Barrie to use the name ‘Wendy’ in Peter Pan.)


Like many of Stevenson’s characters, Long John Silver has a great deal of duality. He is charismatic, hardworking, likeable, and gradually revealed to be a villain as well–his earlier qualities aren’t fully negated by his conspiring.


Much of Stevenson’s work asks the reader if they’re able to forgive or find likeable someone who does wicked things if it’s also true that they are not wicked all of the time.


Whatever that makes you think of Stevenson, he puts back on you.

Mark Twain

TW: discussion of race, safety

Mark Twain was so …low born? I guess is a nice way to say it. He had to seriously convince his wife and her family to consider him as a suitor. Eventually her family said they would consider him if he provided character witnesses. Which he did. And everyone vouched that he would be a terrible husband, to which his prospective father in law sat him down and said “Why does no one like you?”


That’s one of my favorite Mark Twain stories.


Mark Twain, or Samuel Longhorn Clemens, went by a variety of pseudonyms before Mark Twain stuck. He convinced people that it was something to do with riverboats, but actually the name ‘Mark Twain’ most likely comes from his drinking habits, informing barkeeps to mark his tab for two at a time.


Today Mark Twain is thought of as a prolific author and humorist but really, if you look at him within the time he lived, Mark Twain was probably best described as the first successful stand up comedian. He made his name playing to auditoriums: monologuing, telling hairy dog stories, and providing political commentary. In his 60s he completed a world tour, the first of it’s kind for this sort of act, and it was an act. Mark Twain was a performance character.


Later in life the lines apparently blurred. After his wife died he took to wearing collegiate robes as everyday wear because he was proud of his honorary degrees, as well as his famous all-white suits. Wife’s dead, need a costume, always disappear into a bit.


Apparently Mark Twain could be pretty insufferable, embarrassing his daughters by bursting into songs, especially minstrel songs, and 20 minute monologues, performing sets whenever company came over.


He grew up in the deep south, fled west to avoid conscription in the rebel army, and became a very sympathetic voice for the Chinese immigrant population in San Francisco where he first began performing as a public speaker. He stated that as a youth he had never considered if racism even existed as slavery and white supremacy had been so ingratiated into southern society; it wasn’t until moving west and seeing the treatment of the Asian population there that he was able to remove himself from the idea and view racism as an outsider.
So, all this to introduce, I reread The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.


I believe it was Toni Morrison, in an introduction she wrote to the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, who said that the book’s importance as a way of peering through the curtains into the historical view, the treatment of black folks in American society, the sheer fact that this book was considered remarkably sympathetic and funny at the time, makes it worth teaching.


But perhaps not to a class of predominantly white children, and not by a white instructor.


I spoke with a few people who discussed their discomfort with reading Huckleberry Finn at school under just those conditions, with a small white woman encouraging white kids to say the n-word and telling them that it was censorship if they didn’t. As an adult that sounds bizarre to me, but as a sixteen year old I seem to remember that experience pretty well myself.


Huckleberry Finn isn’t a great book. Plot wise. It’s not that interesting. Huck is a deeply abused, neglected child who runs away with an escaped slave who he has sympathy for—Huck has been so disabused that he figures he’s disliked and going to hell anyway, so there’s no harm in doing something that the other white folks disapprove of if he feels it’s right.


The most important piece of Huck’s character development, and the story arguably, is when he decides to trick Jim, sees that he’s hurt Jim’s feelings, and apologizes to him.


Apologizing would have been unheard of and including that bit, which has no plot value, gives the book all of its moral value.


Huck and Jim interact with teams of white randos who they have to protect Jim from, and then by chance Tom Sawyer turns up, puts poor Jim through some more hell, then laughingly calls it all off because Jim has apparently been freed the whole time and Tom thought it was more fun not to mention it.


Tom hasn’t got any character development in the book that’s from Huck’s point of view, in fact he is a much worse person here than he was at the end of the Adventures of Tom Sawyer.


Each person that Huck interacts with thinks they’re more clever and smart than everyone else, from the woman who calls him out when he dresses as a girl to the King and the Duke, and all of them are consistently wrong and bad at what they do. The humor is in Huck just affably moseying through situations where he should be caught but he isn’t because everyone else trips over themselves to prove that they’re more clever than he is. They underestimate him because of his poverty, his homelessness, his lack of education, and he is quietly the most intelligent character in the book.


I’m not black, I haven’t got any right to teach or preach on this, but I’d just make the observation that Huckleberry Finn is about safety. Perceptions of safety, true safety, and safety’s disregard. It is about escaping abuse, both Huck and Jim. The story ends fine supposedly because they are safe, Jim was allegedly safe all along—but the whole of the plot tells you that Huck was the one who was safe all along; his father was dead and no one was hunting him. Jim never was safe and he still isn’t.


There’s even mention of a freed slave who Pap hates and how he can’t believe no one’s picked him up and sold him yet, apparently needing to wait a time period before it’s legal to kidnap a freed slave.


Tom has no qualms lying, obviously, and it’s him who announces that Jim has been freed. We’re just meant to believe him when he’s done nothing good or helpful the whole book. We’re meant to believe that being freed will do something to change Jim’s traumas or the risk he’s under when the whole book tells us that that isn’t reality.
There is no safety for Jim, ever, at any point; only brief illusions of safety that can be undercut at any time if the white folks feel like it.


Huck declines to go back to being adopted and living in that ingratiated southern society, keeping on the river instead, because he is the only character who learns anything. He won’t backslide into that comfortable society where he could be safe but his friend can’t.


That’s his heroic journey.


I don’t remember my teacher in highschool ever putting it to us like that. Instead we were swept up in talking about what you can and can’t say, with her insisting that we shouldn’t even have that many qualms.


If you can’t teach the book right, you shouldn’t be the one to do it.

Look at that, I got through that whole thing without even mentioning The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. That’s probably why it isn’t the one we teach in schools.