James by Percival Everett
Jun. 12th, 2025 02:20 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
m_oonmoonI was a little hesitant to start this book because it's a retelling of Mark Twain's Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, a book which I've unfortunately never read before. If you're also on the fence about starting this for the same reason as I, then I think I can tell you with confidence that you need not worry. I think James can stand on its own and is still just as entertaining without any prior knowledge of the source material. I do think that there is another layer to what you can get from the book if you know the original and can compare the two. For instance, I've read that Jim in the original book reads like a caricature and that the story is very much written for a young, white boy who has a lot more to learn about the world. In James, Jim is transformed into an erudite man. The story and tone is no longer as juvenile. However, I think that isn't enough reason to pass up on this book if you haven't read Twain's work.
This book is being touted as a 'funny' book but while it can indeed be funny, the hilarity is tempered by the horrifying reality of James' situation. His adventure is absurd, ridiculous and horrible, making it almost unbearable to read. Everett's writing style is smooth, yet I found myself unable to read this book straight through because, to put it simply, it made me sad that James had to go through all that simply because of the color of his skin.
One thing I found impressive was how gradual the tone of the novel shifts. It starts out light and slowly builds up in tempo and emotion as James' anger solidifies.
The novel then rewards us with an ending that feels hopeful and satisfying (or as much hope and satisfaction as we can get given the setting of the story and the knowledge that in this modern age, black people are still marginalized and slavery is merely repackaged as prison labor).
I really liked Everett's choice to make James a scholarly man who has debates with bigwigs like Voltaire and John Locke in his dreams. Personally, I think that is what sets it apart as a simple retelling of a well-known classic. I was less sold on the idea of Jim as Huck's biological father. I didn't know that it was necessary but it did pave way for this memorable passage:
Was it simply to provide a basis for Jim and Huck's bond? Was it because Jim acted like a father-figure to Huck in the original novel and Everett re-imagined it as a literal thing? I mean, we already have Norman, a white-passing black person who made the choice to embrace his black side. Was it necessary for Huck to be the same? I'm still trying to ruminate on this but I don't think it takes away from how good the book is. At most, it's purpose confused me.
Over all, I really liked this and it might even make it to my favorite books of 2025.
This book is being touted as a 'funny' book but while it can indeed be funny, the hilarity is tempered by the horrifying reality of James' situation. His adventure is absurd, ridiculous and horrible, making it almost unbearable to read. Everett's writing style is smooth, yet I found myself unable to read this book straight through because, to put it simply, it made me sad that James had to go through all that simply because of the color of his skin.
One thing I found impressive was how gradual the tone of the novel shifts. It starts out light and slowly builds up in tempo and emotion as James' anger solidifies.
I didn't believe I could survive another flogging. By survive I meant that I might not have stood for it. I felt more fully the anger I had cultivated for twenty-seven years or so.
The novel then rewards us with an ending that feels hopeful and satisfying (or as much hope and satisfaction as we can get given the setting of the story and the knowledge that in this modern age, black people are still marginalized and slavery is merely repackaged as prison labor).
I really liked Everett's choice to make James a scholarly man who has debates with bigwigs like Voltaire and John Locke in his dreams. Personally, I think that is what sets it apart as a simple retelling of a well-known classic. I was less sold on the idea of Jim as Huck's biological father. I didn't know that it was necessary but it did pave way for this memorable passage:
I was reminded that he was just that, a boy. He could have gone through life without the knowledge I had given him and he would have been no worse for it. I understood at that moment that I shared the truth with him for myself, I needed him to have a choice.
Was it simply to provide a basis for Jim and Huck's bond? Was it because Jim acted like a father-figure to Huck in the original novel and Everett re-imagined it as a literal thing? I mean, we already have Norman, a white-passing black person who made the choice to embrace his black side. Was it necessary for Huck to be the same? I'm still trying to ruminate on this but I don't think it takes away from how good the book is. At most, it's purpose confused me.
Over all, I really liked this and it might even make it to my favorite books of 2025.