The Pro of Cons: Deception in Huckleberry Finn

I'm sure we can find a lot of good things about the eponymous hero of Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn: He worried for the horse-riding "drunkard" in the circus, exposed the King and Duke's con to steal the Wilkins inheritance, and - more importantly - he turned his back on society's notions just to free Jim, becoming the only white guy to not be completely racist. Yes, yes - I'm sure our society today would be glad to give him gold stickers for all these admirable qualities. But what about his other qualities, specifically his knack for lying on demand? Doesn't that warrant a sticker too?

I think so... just not in terms of ethics.

Now maybe it's because I admire it as a twist of language (like poetry or word play), but there's definitely something beautiful about a good lie glibly executed; I respect a guy who can conjure something believable right on the spot to escape sticky situations. In fact, Huck Finn's ability to lie organically and deceive others was probably one the biggest things I enjoyed in this book.

As Huck sailed from one mess to another, I was constantly amazed with how his lies helped him avoid hot water.  I was impressed with the way he spun different childhoods to try to fool Mrs. Loftus and the Grangerfords, completely impromptu; I was shocked with the way he convinced the ferry man to look for the broken steamboat even while he was under stress; and I was jealous of the way his acting complimented his believable storytelling to effectively scare the two bounty hunters away from Jim. I was even amused by wily Mrs. Loftus herself whose deceptively innocent tests accurately exposed Huck (The cow and horse trivia? Clever. The different reaction of genders to a danger "down there"? Genius.). Meanwhile, Huck's deception resourcefulness won some admiration too: the decoy campfires to avoid Mr. Loftus and the elaborately faked death definitely showcased Huck's abnormal acuity for a thirteen-year old.

But for all the praise I give to them, lying and deception are still generally deplorable by virtue of the con men. After all, it was their attempt to exploit a grieving family that shamed Huck to be human and eventually incensed him to finally be honest in the book. And it was the con men's feathery demise that compelled Huck to lament how evil people can be.

I think that, given the two ways you can look at it, deception is as complicated as morality in Twain's book; both possess a duality that makes it hard to simply categorize actions as either black-or-white. On one hand, you can - like I do - admire liars for their quick-wit and elusiveness. But on the other hand, you can condemn liars for their selfishness and irresponsibility. Deception isn't a harmless display of wit like word play after all; it has its winners and its losers.

On that note (and because I don't know how to seamlessly wrap this up), here's another knot to the idea of deception and lies:

"Only the best liars can lie to themselves."

Until the next due date, I guess!