So...
You all have some experience reading academic writing. What do you think?
I for one found T.S. Eliot's essay the easiest to read. I enjoyed his analysis of Huck and the River as symbols and I found his easy acceptance of the ending a refreshingly positive way of interpreting a bad ending.
DeVoto didn't do much for me. Additionally, his writing jumps from a thousand and one places, so the thread he is trying to follow about Huck Finn is difficult for the reader to follow, too.
Cox was intriguing; however, every piece of criticism is about the ending. Get over it already. Yeesh.
Let me know what you thought, in general. Reading pieces like these is neither easy nor commonplace. Air some of your thoughts and help enlighten us all.
Happy Thinking,
Mr. B
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
To be honest, I wonder if these guys get the same kick out of writing literary analysis as I do killing terrorists on my Xbox. Their input, however, does make me think about things I never would have thought of on my own. Eliot's essay on the river in Huck Finn, for example, helped me to understand the novel much more, and helped me to understand other novels in general. The entire story was based around the river, but I never gave the river a second thought until after I read his essay. Unlike Eliot's fluidity and succinctness, De Voto's essay was too complicated for me to follow. I spent more time trying to stay awake than figuring out what he was saying. I do enjoy reading academic pieces for their insight, but the writer of such a piece would need to know his audience, comprised of average people reading the novel who dedicate their lives to something other than in depth analysis of 19th century American literature.
ReplyDeleteThe three essays by Eliot, DeVoto, and Cox helped a little in the interpretation of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, but not much. DeVoto's essay was extremely difficult to follow. He seemed to jump from topic to topic without any real transitions. When I finally realized what he was talking about, he was on to a new subject. Cox's essay was a bit easier to understand, but still did not help much. Many of the point he mentioned (or at least the ones I understood) seemed obvious, insignificant or redundant. Eliot's essay was the easiest to follow. His points were clear and simple, but this meant they did not inspire much thought. Some of his ideas seemed apparent while reading the story, but it was still helpful for him to explain them.
ReplyDeleteReading these pieces aren't at the top of my priorities or even something i would consider enjoyable. However, these essays strengthened Steinback's effectiveness in writing Huck Finn; Once I read these short pieces I appreciated some of the smaller aspects Steinback included within his story. Things that may have seemed pointless or a waste of a chapter, (this I seemed to think numerous times throughout reading Huck Finn) then seemed to be a more important points I didn't realize the first time while reading. I thank Eliot, DeVoto, Cox, and others who take the time to analyze and word their views on novels like The Grapes of Wrath. Their commentaries may be difficult to understand (DeVoto), make hidden points (Eliot), or seem neverending(Cox); but still appreciated for their alternate viewpoints and intelligence.
ReplyDeleteI think that these readings helped contribute to a better understanding of Twain's book, but they are just opinionated analyzations made by other people. We have to have our own understanding and viewpoint of this book, and not be told what this book was about or what it means. What it means to Eliot, Cox, and Devoto is not the same as what it could mean to us. Or maybe it is? Even so, these articles about Huck Finn helped me understand it a little better and realize how great this story actually was.
ReplyDeleteOkay bear with me this is the 4th time I've tried to answer this blog. I found the essays very helpful, and helped me understanding Twain a little better after reading Huck Finn. I found Devoto the hardest to read, and the most boring. Elliot I found the most helpful, and the eaisest to understand, even though I did have to read another essay to completely understand his beginning fully. Cox's essay was a one note essay to me, all about the ending, it was a little dry. All in all the essays did contribute to a better understanding to the book, and the meanings that Twain wrote in them.
ReplyDeleteI found myself asking the same question Nick did. Is literary analysis fun for these guys? Regardless, what they said made sense, for the most part. As Mr. Bruno said, Eliot's essay was far easier to read and understand than DeVoto and Cox. His explanation of the importance of the river was simple and it really made it easier to understand the book. The ideas that DeVoto points out are fairly simple and obvious, and he seems to jump around alot, making it hard to read. And I have to agree with Mr. Bruno about Cox. Enough with the ending of the book, we get it, you don't like it.
ReplyDeleteI think we can all agree that Eliot's essay was the easiest to read and follow, but I'm going to have to disagree with a few of you about Cox and DeVoto. While Mr. Bruno points out that most criticisms are about the endings of novels, aren't the endings typically what make or break a novel? How many times have you read something that you thought was great until you got all the way to the end just to find a poorly written ending? Didn't that just kill the whole thing? I believe this is a valid reason for critics, including Cox, to write entirely on the ending of a novel. As for DeVoto, while he was hard to follow, I feel that once you got past his complicated writing patterns, he made a few important points.
ReplyDeleteJust to add one more thing :)
ReplyDeleteWhile DeVoto had his valid points, he definitely could have been more effective in getting them across, that's for SURE.
I believe that all of the authors had good points about their views on Huck Finn. I believe that T.S. Elliot's piece was especially intriguing. His view of Huck Finn was vastly different than that of Cox and DeVoto that it was able to show you an altogether new view on the ending of Huck Finn. While DeVoto's article has many pieces of criticism, the way in which he presented them took away from the arguement. Cox was blinded by his views. He was not able to look past the monstrous mistakes of the ending to be able to express a valid opinion.
ReplyDelete