“Playing
God” and Changing Fate
In
Mark Twain’s novel Pudd’nhead Wilson,
characters are consistently trying to tamper with their fate by making drastic
life changes. At the very beginning of the novel, we witness Roxy make the
biggest change of them all. Out of fear that her beloved son will undoubtedly
end up “down the river” as a slave, she switches her son with the son of her
master. Her hope is that her son Chambers, now known as “Tom” will live a life
of success and happiness because of her sacrifice. We all know that in reality,
“Tom” grows up to be an ignorant pain in the ass, consistently bringing trouble
upon himself, his “family”, and the town of Dawson's Landing.
Upon
discovering Roxy’s secret and realizes he is actually a “black” man, “Tom” also
meddles with his fate. He steals, murders, and changes his identity in multiple
instances in order to get what he desires. The irony in all of this meddling
with fate is that in the end, every character that tried to alter their fate
failed. “Tom” ends up being sold “down the river”, and Roxy ends up working in
Dawson’s landing without her son. To me this raised the question: can ones fate
even be changed?
Obviously this
question goes far beyond Pudd’nhead
Wilson and can’t truly be answered. However, after reading the entirety of
the text, it seems that Twain would suggest that you cannot alter your fate. The
only person who came out of this novel with a desirable ending seems to be
Pudd’nhead Wilson. He stuck to the cards he was given, and didn’t try to alter
what life handed to him despite 20 years of ridicule. I think that this conveys
you can’t really cheat life because in the end, it will catch up to you. In the
instance of Chambers, the question of fate is very unclear. He played out the
cards that were handed to him, but they were tampered with before he received
them. Yet he still ended up right back where he started from. Upon further
inspection, it is difficult to figure out what message Twain was trying to
convey with the use of fate. Was he merely saying ones fate cannot possibly be
altered? Or was he taking a stab at those who try to “play God” and cheat life
unfairly?
Works Cited
Twain, Mark. The Tragedy of Pudd'nhead Wilson. New York: New American Library, 1964. Print.
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/mark_twain_2.html
I think that this topic is interesting because in real life Twain tried really hard to alter his fate and become famous. Regarding the text i think that Twain is taking making fun of the characters that try to "play God". Not only do the characters who are playing God get their ultimate fate but they are also made out to be fools at some point of the story. Twain has these characters dressing up in strange outfits and caught in several lies. I think you raise interesting question on what Twains intentions really were.
ReplyDeleteI would ask which characters, specifically, Violet, you're referring to that "play God" and end up fools? In general this is hard to conclude: consider how in "The Man That Corrupted Hadleyburg," the "stranger" plays God with all of the characters and wins. What he wins, of course, is unclear, given that the characters he chooses to initiate his plot end up dead at the end of the story. It's hard for the reader to cheer for such a win. But if we're limiting the topic to _Pudd'nhead_, Emma's examples are good ones. My question for Emma would be: is it true that Chambers ends up "right back where he started"? In status, perhaps so, but otherwise, his character seems permanently altered. It's not as neat and simple as to say that "nothing" happens to these characters as a result of these efforts. The attempt to change one's "slave" or "master" status seems futile, but the case of Chambers suggests that other significant, perhaps unplanned, changes occur. Thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI think that the only character that tried to "play God" and change fate was Roxy, and as a result she caused much pain and suffering to herself as well as those whose fates she altered. Because of her actions, Roxy suffers a very sad and demeaning relationship with her son, and she is even sold down the river by him. "Tom", ends up being sold down the river at the end, which is incredibly ironic because that was the exact situation that Roxy tried to avoid by switching the babies in the first place. I also feel that Chambers got a very short end of the stick, because at the end of the story he doesn't even fit in or feel comfortable with who he is anymore.
ReplyDeleteHey Emma, this post really got me thinking about Twain's stories of the good little boy and bad little boy. I think that Twain isn't necessarily poking fun at people trying "play God" but more so to that if something can happen, it will happen. He does however point out the hipocracy of identity in "Pudd'nhead Wilson" that racial identity is what strongly defined ones fate in the Antebellum period.
ReplyDelete