Critical Criticism Of Pudd Nhead Wilson

The Critical Analysis of Pudd’nhead Wilson

Samuel Langhorne Clemens, most publicly recognized by Mark Twain, was born on November 30th, 1835. He was the son of John M. and Jane L. Clemens. Twain grew up in Hannibal, Missouri, which provided the setting for two of his greeters works The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer. From 1840 until 1849, Twain attended school regularly. After leaving school, he continued his work in a newspaper trade, first as an apprentice and then as a full time newspaperman and printer. After holding several different positions, by 1862, Twain occupied a full time position as a reporter and feature writer on the Virginia City Territorial Enterprise. In 1863, he started to use the pen name of “Mark Twain”

Spangler emphasizes is his major point towards Twain’s writing Pudd’nhead Wilson, when he said “the key to such analysis is the idea of property” (29). He suggested that the basis of Twain 's writing is the fact human beings may be sold as property. He supported his point by using Tom as an example in where he initiated as property and ended in the same situation. Throughout his criticism he shows a tremendous sympathy for Tom and Roxy as a slave, he even justify some of their actions claiming that the concept of a human being as property was responsible for their actions. To Spangler the profound scare that Roxy had for her baby to be sold down to the river was a justify response to make her switched the two babies. He applies the same justification to Tom saying that the distortions of reason, feeling, and morality result from economic motives. He suggested that Toms economic situation was the reason why he committed his

At the beginning of his critic, he make a valid explanation about Twain 's presenting negatively the integrity of the salves. He used Tom and Roxy characteristics to make up his point and suggested that Twains presented both characters to be morally corrupt. He suggested that even though Twains personally disagree with slavery, he did not demonstrate so in his writing. His critic appears to have a fundamental rationality. He did a good job presenting his critics about Twains perspective in