After a brief debate about the appropriateness of using a pen name in a court of law, the defense began its examination of Twain, during
which the author argued that the novel reflected his experiences growing up in Missouri. Twain said that the novel, while containing racist language, was a “reflection of its time” and ” was more important as a critique of following social norms than as a historical document.” Twain argued that Huck’s journey was one followed by young people, regardless of their time in history or geography.
Twain also contended that in his personal life, he was demonstrably non-racist, associating with and befriending abolitionists.
He said that he believed that “modern students were well-equipped to read the novel” and understand its themes.
The cross-examination began with a surprising charge of racism–against American Indians. The prosecuting attorney had Twain read a long passage from one of his works, “The Noble Red Man”: “He is ignoble–base and treacherous, and hateful in every way. Not even imminent death can startle him into a spasm of virtue. The ruling trait of all savages is a greedy and consuming selfishness, and in our Noble Red Man it is found in its amplest development. His heart is a cesspool of falsehood, of treachery, and of low and devilish instincts. With him, gratitude is an unknown emotion; and when one does him a kindness, it is safest to keep the face toward him, lest the reward be an arrow in the back. To accept of a favor from him is to assume a debt which you can never repay to his satisfaction, though you bankrupt yourself trying.”
The prosecution followed with another quotation by Twain, in which he wrote, “I am greatly troubled by what you say. I wrote Tom Sawyer & Huck Finn for adults exclusively, & it always distressed me when I find that boys and girls have been allowed access to them. The mind that becomes soiled in youth can never again be washed clean.”
The defense continued to hammer on these themes–racism against American Indians and the unsuitability of the novel for children–throughout a contentious cross-examination that was repeatedly interrupted with cries of badgering the witness by the defense.
The defense’s closing argument was a powerful statement about the need for teaching students the kind of novels that will make them uncomfortable, and by extension, think. Attorney Kate argued that American liberty depends on giving students the right to freely explore ideas, and that Huck Finn uniquely explores the culture of its time.
She concluded by contending that Mark Twain was not a racist, and that the defense had never proven it. Alluding to his lifetime commitment towards better treatment of African-Americans and his 1897 text “Following the Equator”, she claimed that there was no evidence to support the idea that Twain was a racist presented in the trial. She concluded her speech to a scattering of applause from her side of the courtroom.
The prosecution’s closing was delivered by Kara, who argued in a brief statement that “even witnesses presented by the defense” had conceded that the novel made some students uncomfortable, and it should therefore, be banned. She questioned the idea of education occurring when students felt uncomfortable in the classroom, suggesting that the book be made available in libraries, but not required as a part of the curriculum. The prosecutor framed this as a “reasonable solution”: to protect the rights of students to read the book and respect the rights of those who did not want to be exposed to it.
She also closed to a scattering of applause.
The verdict in the trial is expected on Friday.
