Comparison: London & Crane

In both "The Open Boat" by Stephen Crane and "To Build a Fire" by Jack London, the authors used naturalism. In both stories, we see nature as an indifferent force acting on the lives of human beings. In "To Build A FIre" the phrase "it certainly was cold' was repeated many times. It is ironic because London was trying to put emphasis on the fact that it was actually cold. In "The Open Boat" in the scene with the gulls, "the gulls sat comfortably in groups." This is ironic becuase the gulls are sitting comfortably in groups; however, the four men on the boat aren't sitting comfortably. In both these cases we see the character's are challenged by forces beyond their control. In both stories, there are men in the wild trying to face the forces of nature. Hence, we see the use of naturalism. In London's story, the man is out in the wild alone, and he realizes when the situation gets really bad that he wished that he had the company of someone. In Crane's story, during the night, the correspondent wakes up and sees a shark roaming around near them. He wishes that someone else would wake up so he wouldn't be alone. Both these writers have studied the social conditions of humans and realized that we as humans want other humans to be around us when we're afraid.

Reaction to Huck Finn overall

Overall, I thought that Huckleberry Finn was a great novel. I liked how it showed me that there are actually people out there who have good morals. Jim, i thought was was the most moral character out of everyone in the book. He cared so much for Huck, even though they weren't related in anyway. Huck was also a good character. He learned so much throughout the novel as a whole, and he's a really smart kid. The way that he made up lies in seconds was amazing. It has to do with the streeet smartness that he had. And i did notice that when he had to make up lies to people that he didn't really like, he was able to make up good, convincing lies. But like when he had to make up lies to Joanna, she wasn't really convinced about it.
I also think that this novel shouldn't be banned from the school cirriculum. This novel has a lot of morals and lessons learnt in it. Just beucase it uses the 'n' word so many times just doesn't mean that it should be banned. It's the quality of a novel that matters, not the quantity.

Changes after chap.31

Chapter 31 is a very significant chapter in the book. In this chapter, Huck makes the decision that determines the fate of both him and Jim. Through his time that Huck has spent with him, Huck has 'unlearned' what society has taught him. He learns that Jim is an actual human and has feelings like white men too. In this chapter, Huck makes the decision of going and saving Jim. It shows that Jim is more important to huck than it is going into hell. We see that huck has learned his moral values and knows what is right. Another important change after chapter 31, is that now Tom is back. In the first part of the novel, Huck was the one in charge. Between chapter 16 and 31, Huck encounters the Grangerfords, and the duke and king. The majority of the time in this section, the duke and king are in charge. And now, from chapter 31 and beyond, Tom is the one who is in charge. We see Huck as a narrator again, as he is obeying Tom's decisions in their plan in trying to set Jim free. In the previous section, Huck had to obey the duke and the king.