She also says that throughout Twain’s writing that if readers look they can see his growth, and argues that “if the African Americans of Twain’s time could recognize the extraordinariness of whites who dared question the prevailing social structures, can’t we as contemporary readers do the same?” (2) This question brings up an interesting point. Our generation favors thinking that we have reached an enlightened time where overall, most people are pretty acceptant of each other, therefore shouldn’t we, as readers of our generation, be more appreciative of his courage to speak out against the injustice that was taking place?
Smiley on the other hand is not Twain’s biggest fan. At one point in her article she even goes as far too says that “the villain here is Mark Twain” (Smiley 1). She says that “no matter how often the critics “place in context” Huck’s use of the word “nigger”, they can never excuse or fully hide the deeper racism of the novel…” (2). This goes to show her opposing viewpoint to Chadwick’s and suggests that one reason she would be against Huck Finn being taught in school is that its author is a racist.
The book’s so called “greatness” is another reason that Smiley questions it being taught in schools. She argues that the real reason the book is being taught is because “the critics of the Propaganda Era laid the groundwork for the universal inclusion of the book in school curriculums by declaring it great” (4). Essentially, according to Smiley, the only reason it is still being taught is because a bunch of dead guys said it was “great” 100 years ago, a point that many readers can sympathize with. She argues that “to invest (the novel) with “greatness” is to underwrite a very simplistic and evasive theory