GGG-Pa v. Twain, 1885

In Ron Chernow’s biography Mark Twain, I recently collided with a bit of ancestry.  Mr. Chernow cites:

“The Concord (Mass) public library committee deserve well of the public by the action in banishing Mark Twain’s new book, ‘Huckleberry Finn,’ on the ground that it is trashy and vicious … The trouble with Mr. Clemens is that he has no reliable sense of propriety …”

Harsh review, from … a great, great grandfather!?  Samuel Bowles III, the paper’s editor, was outspokenly conservative on literature’s role in shaping societal norms. Twain’s novel challenged his upper crust Northerner ideals, particularly the character of Huck, whose disregard for social conventions and authority struck him as dangerous.  There was also the matter of Jim, the runaway slave, portrayed as a human being with dignity, intelligence and emotional depth.

By 1885, the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments had abolished slavery and granted citizenship and voting rights to African Americans. Nice in theory.  Yet, those involved in abolitionist movements, including my predecessor Bowles, were still grappling with the full implications of racial equality in practice.

Twain once observed, “It’s not the size of the dog in the fight, it’s the size of the fight in the dog.”  140 years on, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn  —  one of the most important works in American literature yet banned from many high school reading lists nationwide —  continues as a foremost fighter for the resolution of our enduring social and racial divisions.

Tim Bowles
September 19, 2025