Mark Twain's Cop-Out: The Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn

Lambrecht's Undoing
Throughout the years, readers of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn had varying opinions on the conclusion Mark Twain wrote for his novel. Some people believed that it was deeply disappointing, while some found the ending thoroughly acceptable. In the article "Twain's Cop-Out: How the Ending of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn diminishes the Meaning of the Novel" author Natalie Lambrecht claims that the ending of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn abates the significance of the novel, fails to conclude the moral themes addressed in the book and disappoints the readers of said work of literature. Lambrecht's premise, just like her arguments, is flawed.
In her article, Lambrecht makes multiple assumptions, two of which
First, she tries to convince her readers that the ending of the novel was to blame on Twain's cowardice. Unfortunately for her, she fails to do so as a result of her misuse of ethos in her arguments.
In examining the evolution of Huck's and Jim's character and their journey to freedom through a reader-response lens and a historical and biographical lens, we can see how Mark Twain lacked the courage to finish the innovatively moral book he was writing and used the ending chapters as a weak finish to avoid the important issues he was tackling within the book.™(1)
This excerpt is Natalie Lambrecht's thesis. It is clear to see, that she had a bias against Twain and therefore misused ethos. Lambrecht clearly states her belief that Twain is a coward because he didn't have the courage to confront the undeniably racist society of his time, something he would have been forced to do if he ended the novel in the way Lambrecht would favor, but eventually managed to avoid by the actual conclusion of the novel. Regrettably for her, she has no concrete proof that Twain was indeed too fainthearted to face the society he lived in. Her claim is merely a biased assumption she made to try and gain the readers' trust and support her claim. Not only does Lambrecht have bias
If anyone was to judge the historical truthfulness of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, one would prove that the novel is indeed incredibly accurate. Therefore, if one gives further thought in to it, anyone can see that the ending of the novel is not only historically accurate, but also makes sense for a 13 year old boy. No boy that age would have had the ability, power and determination to take on his society and successfully prove them wrong. The other two mistakes she makes in her utilization of logos have to do with the ever-present theme of freedom in the novel. Both of these errors are in her claim that, due to the conclusion of the novel, the theme of freedom has been discontinued. "'The principals' that Marx discusses here are those of freedom, which Twain develops throughout the novel, but again abandons at the end"(2). This is one of the claims Lambrecht makes to prove her premise correct. Unfortunately, this belief is proven wrong upon further investigation of the novel's ending. The theme of freedom, contrary to her beliefs, is concluded in the novel. It turns out that Jim is a free man, which was the whole objective of Jim and Huck's journey and therefore concludes the theme. Huck also has gained the ability to decide for himself on matters concerning his future. "But I reckon I got to light out for the territory ahead of the rest, because Aunt Sally