Friday, September 13, 2013

Essay: Why Every American should read The Adventures of Huckelberry Finn

Since it was first published in the United States in 1885, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has been surrounded by controversy.  The book was considered literary garbage during the last few years of Mark Twain’s life (11).   In 1910 it became known as a timeless American classic.   Thanks to praise from notable novelists such as Ernest Hemingway (3), and T.S. Eliot (5) the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn made the list of Great American Novels

  Today the book is under fire again because of its use of the infamous “N-word".   I read this book because I was curious about this argument.  As a black woman born and raised in Georgia I’ve been submerged in southern culture my whole life.  I remembered reading sections of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer in school. I eventually read the whole book.  Despite Tom’s bratty nature I thought it was a clever book and would gladly introduce it to any young boys who like adventure. 
 However, the companion novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was kept away from us in school.  It was almost blasphemous to even mention it, which we did whenever Tom Sawyer came up.  By high school the very existence of Huckleberry’s story was becoming a myth itself. 


After college, in 2010 I hunted down a copy in the local library and was given a weird look by the librarian for checking it out.  “Are you reading this for school?”  she asked me.  This furthered my desire to understand what was so dangerous about this book!  I read it once then, and again before typing this essay.  My perception of the novel has changed with age, but I enjoyed the story both times.  Now I encourage other people to read it despite of and because of the controversial nature of Mark Twain’s masterpiece.  

The reason readers turn their noses up at the thought of reading the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn vary, but they all center around racism.  Many people, black people especially, believe that Mark Twain was a racist.  Therefore his masterpiece must be as well.  It’s not that black readers shy away from the uncomfortable topic of slavery, but it’s believed that a white man writing about slavery so close to the Civil War could not possibly have been sympathetic or respectful to our ancestral history.  I’m here to tell you otherwise.  

   

  Was Mark Twain a raciest?

Now I can’t speak of Mark Twain personally.  I never met the man because he died in 1910, long before I was born.  But the use of the infamous “N-word”, as well as other dehumanizing terminology towards non-white people throughout the story has caused the novel to be shunned as racist rhetoric, and it’s author to be called trashy. 

This argument by Peaches Henry, scholar of the University of Texas and President of the Waco NAACP chapter, sums up the argument against the study of this novel in school. (12)  

“To dismiss the word's recurrence in the work as an accurate rendition of nineteenth century American linguistic conventions denies what every black person knows: far more than a synonym for slave, "nigger" signifies a concept. It conjures centuries of specifically black degradation and humiliation during which the family was disintegrated, education was denied, manhood was trapped within a forced perpetual puerilism, and womanhood was destroyed by concubinageIf one grants that Twain substituted "nigger" for "slave," the implications of the word do not improve; "nigger" denotes the black man as a commodity, as chattel.”– (9)

The above quote against the use of the word and the novel is the exact reason why I argue that this book should be read and studied by mature readers.  Yes, the “n-word” is degrading, demeaning, dehumanizing and ugly, and this book tells you exactly why that is.    Reading it in its original context illustrates exactly why we still hate it to this day. 

The book is set in 1835, 50 years before the novel was published in the U.S. in1885.   The Civil War that freed the slaves occurred somewhere in-between;(1861-1865).  (11)   

Twain uses language to paint a picture of this time and place in history.  The story is told from the first person perspective of Huckleberry Finn, a dirt poor boy who has been all but orphaned and lives a feral life in the woods off what he can catch, gather, and steal.  These are the words he knows for interacting with the peoples in his life.   Nigger isn’t the only dehumanizing descriptor used.   Huck casually notes bucks and wenches watching him.  There is talk of Injuns, and mulattoes and any number of terms for other people I may not recognize. Not once is a black person, or any person of color, referred to as a man or woman.  Not once is a black child called by his name.     To Huckleberry they are simply adjectives, but to us it’s a picture of what our ancestors lived with every day for two hundred years. 

 I do not agree with editing out the language from historical literature books less we accidently “white-wash” all of the diversity that existed in this time and place as television so often does.  Changing the language would change the story and affect its authenticity.  This novel is nothing if not authentic.   

I will agree however that the use of the n-word and other racial descriptors destroys the books usefulness as children’s literature.  In my experience any attempt to read this book in middle grades or high school classrooms would be a disaster.  The lesson is lost on immature minds.  

Both times I’ve read the novel in my free time.  I was not in a classroom setting reading aloud among a mixed group of my peers.  The result for me was being able to focus on and understand the story. I completely stopped saying the “N-word” in jest around other black people.  The word became more serious to me after reading it in its original context.  

Origins of two separate but parallel cultures.

Black readers may avoid this novel for fear that it disrespects the memories of our ancestors.  I recall being afraid to read about the character Jim, certain that he would be displayed as the “dumb nigger” trope you see on old black and white movies. 
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn shows the black slaves the way white people saw them at the time.   The slaves in the book are superstitious, suspicious and ignorant of the world beyond the towns and villages they lived in.  This may be counter to the romantic image we try to create of our ancestors today, but there was a purpose to it.  

We all know that the slaves were denied secular education.   They used their superstitions as a way to have some since of control over their lives.  Their beliefs in magic, witches, and other super natural things carried over from their long lost African heritage through the stories they told each other.  With these stories they created an entirely different world among themselves - one that white people gladly stayed out of because they didn’t understand it or believe in it.  


This was the origin of black culture.  The blacks talked differently, behave differently, and had totally different beliefs than the whites they lived among.  They developed a language and society that, while still overseen by white people, was separate from them.  This common story kept them strong and connected to each other despite the everyday fear and their uncertain futures.   

 

Good Slavery

Another concern people often express about this novel is that Mark Twain only writes about the “nice” white families with “house slaves” who were treated “well”.  He rarely if ever delves into the horrors of plantation slavery.  

This argument misses the point of the very issue Twain is addressing in the novel. People often said, and still say today, that some slaves were treated well and enjoyed their captivity.  Here Twain shows that there was no “good slavery.”  

Jim belongs to Miss Watson, a sweet kind old Christian woman.  She treats him well in that she doesn’t beat him like the masters down south might.  But when she finds herself in need of some cash she talks to a trader about selling him for eight-hundred dollars knowing he might very well end up in the deep south on a plantation.  She does not respect Jim as “a member of the family” as the argument suggests.  He is property.    Jim fears loosing contact with his wife and children forever - his real family.  So Jim runs away in the hopes of finding a paying job in the free states were he can earn enough money to buy his independence and his family.  

 

Huckleberry Finn   

At the beginning of their relationship Huckleberry has no empathy for Jim.  He cannot imagine the sadness and loneliness of Jim.  He, who has so much freedom, can not imagine the frustration of a grown man who has no right to his wife, his kids, nor even the clothes on his back.

“Here was this nigger, which I had as good as helped run away, coming right out flat footed and saying he would steal his children – children that belonged to a man I didn’t even know; a man who had done me no harm.  I was sorry to hear Jim say that, it was such a lowering of him.”  - (1). 

  This is the main source of tension in the first act.  Should Huck turn Jim in?  Not for the three hundred dollar reward but for the morality of it.  Huck can only imagine the harm he’s caused to his white neighbors whom he is financially wounding by helping a slave escape.

                  Huckleberry, and all the other white children, have been taught to think of ‘niggers’ as different than human.   To the children, the slaves are treated like family pets – pets than can occasionally be sold for money and should not be expected to think for themselves.  As a result Huckleberry is shocked to learn that Jim has such hopes and dreams as running-away and seeking his own life.  

“It most froze me to hear such talk.  He wouldn’t ever dared talk such in his life before.” (1)

Twain shows that this actually puts a burden on the morals of these children, who are raised to be good Christians, but are asked to ignore the hypocrisy of adult behaviors.


Through Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer we see that southern children had few freedoms when it came to thoughts and ideas.  Everything for them was black and white.  Were they going to heaven or hell?  Were they good or were they bad?  There was nothing in between.  Generations of being taught that they, as good Christians, were responsible for the herding, domestication, and upkeep of an entire race of people resulted in them being blind to those people as human beings.   
Huckleberry, our protagonist is not like the other children.  He was been raised outside of civilization, apart from the rules and norms of Christianity.  He is a simple boy guided by his instincts.  In this way he is truly a free thinker and comes up with his own moral code. It’s those instincts and morals that can see the humanity in Jim.  Within the same chapter as the above quotes, Huck decides not to turn Jim in despite his belief that it’s the right thing to do.  

“-what’s the use you learning to do right when it’s troublesome to do right, and ain’t no trouble to do wrong and the wages is just the same?” (1)

 Halfway through the story it’s already clear that to Huck home is a raft, on a slow moving river with Jim at the helm and trouble at their backs.  By the end of the story Huckleberry is willing to risk going to hell to save Jim from slave hunters.  

              
      Jim

The first time I read this novel I found Jim's ignorance pitiful, almost laughable as it’s often used for humor in the novel.  His not knowing what a king is, and his not understanding the concept of foreign languages made the idea of him going off unaided to find his fortune as a free man seem impossible.  

“Is a Frenchman a man?  Then why don’t he talk like one!” – (1)


Now a little wiser I read the chapter with the good-natured humor Twain probably meant by it.  Jim reasons about the same way my grandfather used to.  

My grandfather grew up as an illiterate sharecropper in southeast Georgia.  He raised six kids working as a handyman and janitor during the Civil Rights Era.  He was a practical and down to earth man.  He had no use for metaphors and fables.   I hear his voice when Jim speaks.  Jim doesn’t need to know about kings and foreign languages to make it in the world - just like my grandfather didn’t need to understand dinosaurs to build the house he and his family lived in.  

  What Jim has in abundance is what we call “common sense”; even Huck occasionally acknowledges this.  

“Well he was right; he was most always right; he had an uncommon level head for a nigger. – (1) 

Though that statement is condescending by twenty-first century standards it is important to know that Huckleberry prizes common sense above most other forms of intelligence.  This endears Jim to Huck. 

Jim never tries to command respect from Huck but he does manage to make Huck feel remorseful for his actions in a way Miss Watson and the other adults have not been able to do.  He makes Huck think things through without trying to teach or control him. 

While Huckleberry had no malice towards Jim, he had to do the work himself to undo the brainwashing of his society. He is forced through his situation to see Jim as a person and a friend. 


By the end of the book Huckleberry has more in common with Jim than he does with Tom Sawyer.   Though Jim has no authority over him, Huck slowly begins to feel friendship towards him.  The result of this is gradually seeing their situation through Jim’s eyes.   They are both fighting for their freedom.  If one fails then they both are lost.  

Don’t get me wrong. I hold no delusion that this will be an overall change in Huckleberry.  This feeling of kinship probably will not extend to any other black people Huckleberry may encounter in the future.   Jim is part of Huckleberry’s tribe now, but in Huck’s mind Jim is probably just “one of the good ones”, or his “black best friend”.  Is Huck likely speak out against the institution of slavery as whole?   Is Huck going help other run-aways in the future?  Does Huckleberry learn to respect Jim as he would a white adult man?  Why is it that in 2021 black Americans are still trying to dispel this illusion of “other-ism” in our quest for equal respect? 

 

It’s not all so serious!

I don’t want to spoil the whole story.  Most of the above summery is only from the segments of the first half of the book.   My goal in writing this essay is to encourage those skittish about reading this masterpiece to give it a try.  I want to assure you that it is not the usual torture tale stories from this era tend to be.  

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is just that, an adventure!  Jim and Huck are fugitives on a hand-made raft trying to escape society.  The wilderness and the river are filled with conmen, bandits, hunters, and murders.  Our heroes run into many of them!  Everyone they meet might mean safety, riches, or death!  And each encounter changes Huckleberry’s outlook on people, religion, and the world in general.   



In Conclusion 

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is a wonderful, complex, and exciting novel.  Anyone interested in geography, history, or language will find this book just as interesting as someone studying how to write a good story full of tension and drama.    
         In 1863 Samuel Langhorne Clemens signed his name as Mark Twain for the first time.  The pseudonym is a riverboat term meaning “two fathoms deep” connoting water barely navigable (11).   This name is very appropriate for an author of such a book that on its surface appears to be a simple story of an outcast in the 18th century south; such an accurate window into such a controversial time must in itself be very hard to navigate.

         The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was published during the Jim Crow south and humanized a black man as one of the main characters.  Yet it wasn’t erased from history.  It’s still being talked about today.  

I hope readers understand that this story is a mosaic of origins.  Each tile displays a reason for why things are the way they have been.  Zooming out shows the full picture of southern culture.  Time moves slowly in the south, and we shouldn’t forget where we’ve come from or how far we’ve come to improve ourselves.  The fear and disrespect Black Americans deal with daily in twenty-first century is directly related to generations of our ancestors living separate lives right next to each other.  We still seem to be speaking different languages, and seeing different meanings behind symbols, gestures and political movements.   

  Just like Huckleberry, white America had to shake itself out of centuries of brainwashing to see the cruelty of slave culture.   There were many people who saw the light through their religious beliefs as illustrated in Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin - another controversial book I encourage every American to read.   But for most slave owners it took a war and interference from the federal government to make them relinquish their human property. This is why I respect that Mark Twain doesn’t use Christianity as the crutch for morality in this novel.  Huckleberry helps Jim fully expecting to go to hell for it.  Huck comes to his own conclusions as a free and independent thinker.  

 

I encourage black American readers to have pride in how far our ancestors had to come.  Jim may not have had a secular education but he was smart in the ways of survival.  He had ambition and drive just like so many real people who took that leap and started from absolutely nothing in a world that hated them.  And they survived! 

It is important to acknowledge the struggles of the past as black and white cultures are still outgrowing the shackles of four hundred years of American slave culture (13).  I hope one day the peoples that have molded The South into the rich tapestry of diverse histories that it is will have enough respect for each other that this book won’t be so controversial in the future.  However, it will always be a really good story about two guys on an epic adventure that everyone, black, white or otherwise, should read. 

END




References


1.  The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain 1884 Bantam Dell, New York, NY



2.  Sparknotes

https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/huckfinn/summary/


3.  Ernest Hemmingway on the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-nov-14-la-ca-mark-twain-20101114-story.html



4.  https://freebooksummary.com/ernest-hemingway-on-huckleberry-finn-1395


5.  T.S. Elliot on The Adventures of Huckelberry Finn


6. https://buzzography.wordpress.com/2018/02/27/ts-eliot-on-huck-finn-and-mark-twain-and-more/


7.  https://genius.com/Ts-eliot-introduction-to-huckleberry-finn-annotated?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=1ca748ef5161975d09fcb1439a23cfcd8753bb9e-1623846446-0-Aep2WJZeLkc9db_gnahp8giy-NYiaiRnzoDAq2b37-Z2g7NZVW-yHPR8OgMrTDInr-t_y-I9MEz9piCQT1WuHEYMX6CoTSnU9nN5WICkjVNRQjkliedVueNbnU88C1wYD4uoq8yXLc_myu1U8t2dK0gsLXCWaLVKN4xELB95503Ce28867Bry3NJ0R1LfuyLdXRJ4xpnSaf8KJOY681ICGCSbHo7SbrnFpWM7OPi92vDXN2bHbdOVENRUgYEWVwOWE2FlGNNMW0RgpNmUjZA3B7K2nl4K5NqQpwqQBWlwVeSHVN02BRoTJTRAAGC80ejO0sWTfRrMDnoyaXfdf9_fN2hFR14NMwwknJlJKRmCGSmKHgqAvrk7zXFNoXNgti3OW8WMTo_MN076fCGHlDChhhRZ2wOQKuVEqK0dA7EWwOu3OH09dB4vTP3RA36K_Q60EbOH4k3BIcjJcD4LbS9GNHTTX7FOG67CZwQjLcYQHaF82GyRaDK1CBJCFA0Ga-FzweJA4nZwUfLDLizzmysNP4



8.  https://homepages.wmich.edu/~acareywe/huck.html


9.  https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/teachers/huck/essay.html


10.  https://www.historynet.com/civil-war-facts


11.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Twain


12. https://waconaacp.org/


13. https://www.britannica.com/summary/


https://www.thoughtco.com/mark-twain-about-slavery-in-huckfinn-740149


E. W. Kemble (1861–1933) - illustrator, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons


https://medium.com/@jameslewishuss/huckleberry-finn-the-epic-of-american-literature-d43336461ff9


Mark Twain, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons


https://dcc.newberry.org/?p=14412


Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Essay: Uncle Tom's Cabin



            UncleTom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe is on my reading list of most influential novels in American History.  It has been given credit for having caused the American Civil War.  I was curious as to how a single novel could have such a profound effect.  After reading “The Jungle”, which I discuss in a separate entry,  I was curious as to how Uncle Tom’s Cabin was more successful than St.Clair’s novel published a fifty years later.    Here I explore how a single novel is given credit for starting a war, and why one book was more successful than the other. 
             
            The Facts:  How a book might have caused a war
            In the 1850s the country was divided through economic differences.  The North functioned with factories and cheap wages for foreign workers, while The South functioned with farms and free labor  from slaves.  This was just the way things were.  Many people in the northern states, political or not were known to give shelter and aid to slaves who for one reason or another had escaped to the territories of the slave states into the sanctuary of the free states. 
            No doubt this frustrated many plantation owners in the border slave states.  Slaves were very expensive after all.  In a time when fifty cents could buy a meal, a healthy slave in good working condition could be worth five hundred dollars or more.  This is probably what led to the  Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. This dictated that any runaway slave caught in the free states was to be returned to his owner immediately.   As a result any runaway looking to guarantee his freedom had to now make it all the way to Canada. 
       Harrette Beecher Stowe was already an established author and vocal abolitionist by the time the act was up for a vote.  She’d befriended runaway slaves and participated in conversations with no doubt hundreds of people over the fairness of treating slaves like sub-humans.  The Act of 1850 drove Stowe to write Uncle Tom’s Cabin – based off the all the stories and encounters Stowe had witnessed personally in some way. Originally, the stories of Tom and Eliza and everyone they encountered were published in short installments in abolitionist newspapers all over the country. They detailed the different reasons slaves had for running away.  They showed how kind masters sometimes had no choice but to treat their slaves like property instead of human beings, and how it’s the inhumanity of cruel masters created a cycle of mistrust and mistreatment causing human beings to behave like animals.  Stowe’s story brought the taboo topic of slave ownership into a nationwide controversial conversation.  Though shouting match maybe more appropriate.    

           Nine years after Uncle Tom’s Cabin was published the country was boiling hot over the issues surrounding slavery.   The south felt their rights, their economy and their way of living were at stake.  Abraham Lincoln ran for office on the anti-slavery platform anyway.  When Lincoln won the election in November 1860 with only 40% of the vote the South began to pull away starting with South Carolina.  By March seven states had seceded and were forming the Confederate States of America.  
            When they met, Lincoln was heard referring to Harriett Beecher Stowe as “the little lady who caused the great war.”




      The Question of Effectiveness:  Uncle Tom’s Cabin vs. The Jungle
            Ultimately, slavery was abolished in 1864 and Stowe died knowing her goal had been reached.  Upton St.Clair would tread a similar path, but only a fraction of his novel was giving the attention it deserved.  St.Clair died still fighting for the issues he believed in hoping future generations would carry on his cause.  What made Stowe’s novel more effective than St. Clair’s? 
            I discussed The Jungle in an earlier post and pointed out how even though St. Clair’s depictions of the conditions in the factories during the 1900s triggered the creation of the Food and Drug Administration, the book’s other issues (housing scandles, women’s health, sexual harassments, health care, child care, education, the conditions of the poor ect.) were largely ignored.
            Both stories sought to enlighten the public topic they’d choose to over look, and force great social change.
            Both stories took from real life to create character-based plots situated around events the authors had in some way personally experienced.  The characters were therefore relatable, even to a modern audience.  Both stories were gripping page turners. And both stories had heavy moral themes.   
            One complaint about Uncle Tom’s Cabin was that Stowe introduced too many characters to make her point.  But in my opinion each character, and every conversation told showed some angle of the story she wanted to tell.   
            I can’t personally relate to the plight of slaves and slavery, having never been or met one myself, after reading this I understood how frustrating it must have been to feel so helpless (both on behalf of slaves and masters who tried to be good and do the right thing) these people of the past must have felt.  Stowe illustrated very well how powerless it must be to not even own the children you’ve created or the cloths that cover you. 
            But the Jungle was a story I could directly relate too even in this day and age.  St Clair was shouting about the atrocities of the wealthy over the poor, and the unstable financial foundations our nation was growing, on 23 years before the Great Depression.  And yet this book is still relevant today. 
            So where did Stowe go right?  Where did St. Clair went wrong?
I speculate three main differences.


             Popular Religion vs. Unpopular Politics
            St Clair was a socialist. During his time Socialism was a kin to communism in the eyes of most Americans.   The heavy handed socialist tilt the book takes near the end of the story likely turned loyal readers away from what was otherwise a riveting novel. 
            Stowe was a Christian, and so was about ninety percent of her American readership. Stowe scattered Christian ideals throughout Uncle Tom’s Cabin.  The Shelby family taught their slaves how to be good Christians and assured them that doing so would make like easier on them.  Their son was teaching Uncle Tom how to read the Bible for himself when he was sold off their plantation. 
            The book reads almost like gospel throughout, where the Lord’s favor falls on those who repent and give themselves over to Christ.  Uncle Tom, with the hardships that he gradually endures becomes almost Jesus himself, changing hearts as he is moved from place to place.   Through conversations with white people in her book Stowe addresses the Christian morals of her readers, questioning how they can call themselves the children of God and turn a blind eye to the plight of their brothers and sisters in Christ. 
            The story actually helped me to understand how African peoples were brought to be such strong devout Christians.  Though the story become very preachy in parts Stowe keeps her story moving - un-like St. Clair who brings the plot to a near stand-still once the topic of Socialism is introduced. 

          Focus on one topic verses Focus on the system as a whole. 
            As I mentioned St. Clair attempted to tackle every area of working class reform he could think of.  The story was breath taking, dramatic, descriptive, and at times enraging. Every facet of Jurgis’s life was affected by the greed and carelessness of the upper-class.  The Jungle called for reform in health care, housing, labor, food and drug administration, unemployment benefits and so on.  While these were all good points his goal was to change them all at once.  That heavy handed objective may have been a little over ambitious. 
            Stowe had one focus: end slavery, slavery is wrong, and all 350 pages of Uncle Tom’s Cabin pushed for just that.  She showed slavery from the point of the view of the indebt master who wants to be a good Christian but must pedal in human lives to survive; the nice but short sighted master who hasn’t considered the fate of those under his care, the cruel lonely man who wants nothing more than to make others submit so he can feel in control, as well as well as house slaves, the field slaves; the runaways; the loyal slaves; the overseers; and those in the free states who don’t believe the issue was any of their business.  She touched on every area to dive home a single ideal.  
       Stowe, like St. Clair, had a talent for creating relatable characters in her books.  Therefore her tackling one focus from multiple angles, rather than multiple points from one angle as St. Clair had done, insured everyone who read her book found a character that spoke directly to them. 

        Know your Audience
        The Jungle was written during a time with racial and social classism was common, accepted, and normal.  But the book called for an audience who feel sympathy for a low wage earner from a foreign country.  Many of the people who would sympathize with Jurgis at this time probably couldn’t even read the story themselves, and even if they could they were not in a position to do anything about it.  Those who could wouldn’t have cared very much.  They would not have considered that the things this poor Lithuanian man was going through had much to do with them. 
      I believe this is why St. Clair’s graphic depiction of what was going on in the factories where food is made for consumption by all the classes, was the only part of his book at gained the reaction he wanted.   The rest of his book was pure entertainment, not a fog horn warning of the Great Depression that it was meant to be. 

            Stowe knew her audience better.  She aimed for the people who could do something about the situation of slavery.  Uncle Tom’s Cabin was a book meant to speak to tight lipped whites of the free states who knew slavery was wrong but didn’t want to talk about it, and the nice Masters of the slave states who actually saw their slaves as human beings but lacked the foresight to consider the future of their property.  She told the story of pretty, Christian slaves who were honest and hard working while also showing, as by comparison, what had become of the poor mis-treated retches in the Deep South under cruel hands.  She played on their heavy Christian values made them question their own mortality. 
            In comparison had Stowe done as St.Clair would later do, she would have written only from the perspective of the unfortunate slaves who were sold from good families in the north to cruel plantations in the south.  Her story would have fallen on hard hearts, and would have appealed only to those slaves who could not read it. 
            St. Clair would have been better off making his main character into an Upper-class English man who due to corruptions in the government slips into the lower middle class bracket is unable to climb back up again due to basic failures system that prevent the poor for having fair competitive chances.  

            And they all lived happily ever after . . .
            A good ending can make or break any story.  Though many modern writers and readers will scoff at me for mentioning this, Americans historically love happy endings.  Even if a story has an unhappy ending we crave at the very least closure, where everything is wrapped up nice and neat.

            St Clair misses the mark on both ends.  In “The Jungle” we watch Jurgis go from a happy, healthy, family man with goals and dreams to a poor, lonely retch.  The women are taking care of him.  He still can’t find decent work, and now he’s devout disciple of the church of socialism.  To American readers this is not a pleasant image to close out the book with it therefore has not point at all.  Socialism doesn’t make Jurgis’s live better.  All it does is give him a tool with which fight with, and a club to be a part of.  Perhaps, St. Clair would have had better results by showing how Jurgis’s over health had and standing in life was improved by Socialist programs – which granted would have been difficult since no such programs existed at the time.
            At the end of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, despite the necessity of the martyr, a majority of characters find happiness. After hearing the story of so many mothers ripped from their babes, an entire family is restored and live free.  Stowe even furthers her point that these good Christian people had to leave their homes in America in order to find happiness elsewhere in the world. These endings leave the reader feeling good, but still understanding the plight of the rest of the unfortunates is still real and serious.  They make people want to retell the story to others.  

        Conclusion
        Stowie’s book was better received because it used a theme her audience could accept, and she only tried to solve one problem at a time.  She didn’t try to tackle everything that was wrong with the economics of slavery, only that slavery was an unnecessary evil that threatened to the souls of every Christian in the country.  Also she didn’t write her book to entertain the slaves; she wrote it to educate the slave owners and free thinkers.  And lastly, despite the horrors of slavery her book presented she still brought it to a satisfying and pleasant ending, which is just good politics for an American writer. 
            So if one wants to push for great change in a story, pick a focus, use a theme the majority can accept, and aim for the readers who can do something about it.    Also don’t forget to leave an ending that is memorable and satisfying.