Just a few thoughts from one who has read and reread this book many times (although not recently). Not saying my ideas are right or better than anyone else’s.

Jim and Huck both belong to groups perceived as “less than” in the society of their day (and Twain’s day): Jim an enslaved person and Huck a poor white who was homeless and (believed to be) an orphan in Twain’s previous book, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. In spite of Huck’s poverty and low status, he was envied by Tom, a slightly younger boy who had a big imagination fired by popular adventure literature of the day. All of the other boys followed the lead of Tom, although we have no real reason to think he was actually smarter—but he had some charisma, whether or not it appeals to readers today.

Tom was also an orphan, but he lived with his aunt and 2 cousins, and had a much more secure life, which in his mind was boring.

Tom and Huck were rewarded with a large sum of money for what they did in “Tom Sawyer.” This motivated the Widow Douglas to adopt Huck and take him into her home to try to “civilize” him. Huck at this time was probably about 14. Huck found it a strain to have to conform to the activities and expectations of civilization such as wearing shoes, staying clean, learning to read, etc. the Widow’s sister, Miss Watson, is a constant thorn in his side. Huck is well-acquainted with Jim, who is Miss Watson’s slave.

Huck’s alcoholic, abusive father, believed to be dead, shows up and claims his son because he has found out Huck has money. Huck sees that the only way to escape his father is to fake his death and take off. When he encounters Jim, who has decided to make a move to a free state, the two decide to team up.

They have somehow ended up going south instead of north when they finally end up in Arkansas at the home of Tom Sawyer’s aunt and uncle, who are expecting Tom for a visit (wonder why Aunt Polly must have thrown up her hands and sent him away!). Huck pretends to be Tom.

Naturally, when Tom arrives, his romantic imagination instantly fixes on the adventure of the imprisoned man wasting away like the Count of Monte Cristo and his other literary idols. All of the dramatic play-acting he convinces Huck and Jim to go along with doesn’t really make sense, except in Tom’s mind. Huck actually thinks it’s all crazy—but he goes along and follows Tom, the ringleader of adventure. He’s not the first person to leave common sense behind and follow a charismatic leader. Poor Jim endures because he has no choice.

Finally the truth comes out when Tom >!breaks his leg!< and it’s learned that Miss Watson had already granted Jim his freedom. So all of Jim’s suffering while locked up was needless—and at any time, Tom could have revealed the truth. Tom isn’t painted very positively in this, although it doesn’t seem that Huck is as critical as he might have been!

Huck ruminates on the whole episode in the final chapter. He has grown a lot in understanding and maturity but he hasn’t fully grasped the meaning and consequences of what he has learned. And while he has escaped the Wisow Douglas and her civilizing efforts, it looks like Aunt Sally may be taking the Widow’s place…

I think in some ways this is the story of society: the tendency to follow a charismatic leader, even when some of their ideas are questionable at best; our ability to classify others into stereotypes when we don’t know them; the divisions that exist in society even when people interact on a daily basis; the rights of parents/ employers/ owners (in that time, but remember slavery has existed on various forms as long as “civilization” has existed) vs the rights of children or slaves; looking at every situation from a legalistic perspective—and in Huck’s case, the fact that life and learning isn’t a clear and straight progression but has many barriers, detours, and even regressions on the way. One can’t only move forward according to one’s own code, but is influenced by others for better or worse.

Twain doesn’t really convey a super clear message in the book, I will agree. But I do think he has released some ideas that a reader can meditate on. That’s better, in my mind, than directly telling the reader what to think.

I have found that each time I read it, I have new questions in my mind and new thoughts to process. IMO, that’s a sign of a good book.

I agree that these 6 “lessons” can help anyone in everyday life and in developing friendships. Respect for the other person, admitting you were wrong on something, sweetening advice by truthfully mentioning positive traits the person already has—these are all great points.

It doesn’t mean you can never debate a point with a friend or relative—although I agree that arguing rarely causes anyone to change their minds. But consider time and place, and don’t tell your friend they are stupid for taking their position if you sincerely hope to convince them of anything.

Likewise, if you’re advising your teen or adult son or daughter about budgeting, try to come up with something they’re already doing that’s positive before “helpfully pointing out” places where they’re “wasting money.”

Yes, the advice can be utilized superficially for the purpose of selling or simply using others. But if it’s done that way, the “friendships” and “influence” won’t last for long. But all salesmanship and influencing aren’t negative. In order to put ideas into action and move any kind of social change, there must be leader(s) who can sell their ideas and motivate others to join them in their cause.

I would definitely contact them and explain the problem. I’ve found that Amazon frequently throws one book into a much larger box with a few air pillows floating around inside, and the DJs get wrinkled, corners bumped, etc. They’ll definitely let you return it for free if it was a new book, but they might even replace it without asking you to return it.

If you buy from a third party seller (Marketplace) you should still be able to do a free return and be refunded if you return within 30 days. But if I’m doing that, I always check to make sure the seller does free returns.

Even the tragedies have characters or dialogue that is comic relief or clever wordplay. The basic story of Romeo and Juliet is well-known, and the script isn’t as long as some others. Many filmed versions have been done, but I love Franco Zeffirelli’s 1968-ish version.

The only drawback with watching the performance is that the actors’ accents can be hard to understand once in awhile. But thanks to the miracles of modern technology, you can stop and replay those!

NTA but I do agree with providing 2-3 different choices and maybe doing a short blurb about each one.

Not sure if this will read Holocaust to you, but I will put in a plug for Herman Wouk’s The Winds of War and War and Remembrance. W&R was issued in a book club edition as 2 volumes, and WW is a fairly thick book. WW is basically a prequel to W&R, and W&R can be read as a standalone. These are novels and really give a global overview of WWII, although the Holocaust is of course a major element.

I’ve read the whole trilogy several times, and despite the length it’s a pretty fast-moving story with a cast of well-drawn characters. My sister isn’t a big reader although she’s a WWII buff, and she liked it a lot. IMO Wouk’s writing can be a little clunky, but again it’s a story that is gripping and is based on actual events, although the main characters are fictional. Historical personages make cameo appearances: FDR, Harry Hopkins, several naval admirals and Army generals, Hitler, Churchill, and Stalin (possibly a few more I don’t recall). The historical characters for the most part have dialog that is documented.

IMO the story and writing provide lots of material for discussion, and the whole storyline about Hitler’s plan for a Final Solution is eye-opening.

These books were published in the 1970s but should be easy to obtain in paper or electronic format.

Back in the day I used to read in the bathtub—but now I take showers, so no reading. Unluckily I’m also too nearsighted to easily read without my glasses! IMO the generally steamy environment isn’t great for reading books made with paper, even if you don’t drop the book in the water.

Good luck!

😂🤣😂

As far as disease-causing germs: very, very few pathogens will survive on a dry surface like a book/ pages to transmit diseases. If the book appears clean and has no visible (or smell-able) mold, and no evidence of insect infestation, it’s fine to touch and handle.

If it’s moldy I would search for an electronic copy and read that. Keep any moldy book away from your other books, as it can spread.

Same with insect-infested books. There may be some helpful techniques for getting rid of them, which you can Google.

However, for a book that’s in the public domain like this one, if you’re worried about it, just get a new paper or electronic copy and read that one.

IMO all of these are fine—but can definitely be overused very easily. If such a phrase recurs more than a couple of times in a medium-length novel or more than once in a short story; or if several of these examples are sprinkled throughout, it’s a sign that the author is overly fond of cliches (and I’m guilty of that!)

A good editor will help the author spot these and encourage either more creativity or something more stark and understated in some cases. Certainly IMO when an author wants to convey emotional distress, these descriptions help to convey the character’s state of mind. So it’s very tempting to use familiar phrases that are likely to come off as trite instead. Not easy!

One of my favorite childhood books!

Jake can’t truly be with the woman he loves (Brett) because of his impotence as a result of an injury during WWI. Brett may love Jake, but she knows she couldn’t be faithful to him because he couldn’t satisfy her sexually. Both of their lives were destroyed by the war in different ways. Jake’s friends have also been damaged by the war, in different ways.

There are activities they can still enjoy, but never again in the same way. Their innocence is gone.

The bulls and bullfighters are important to the story, too. But I’ve only read the book once (although recently) and don’t feel like I got everything from it that was there.