Lifestyle
'James' revisits Huck Finn's traveling companion, giving rise to a new classic
An enslaved man debates John Locke. A Black man pretends to be a white man in blackface to sing in a new minstrel show. In a fever dream of a retelling, the new reigning king of satire, Percival Everett, has turned one of America’s best loved classics, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, upside down, placing Huck’s enslaved companion Jim at the center and making him the narrator. The result is strangely new and familiar – an adrenaline-spiking adventure with absurdity and tragedy blended together.
Re-imaginings of classic literature are challenging, often unnecessary endeavors. This one is different, a startling homage and a new classic in its own right. Readers may be surprised by how much of the original scaffolding remains and how well the turnabout works, swapping a young man’s moral awakening for something even more fraught. A kind of historical heist novel about human cargo, as in the original, James is an enslaved man in antebellum Missouri. James loves his wife Sadie and their 9-year old daughter Lizzie, and keeps them safe by not just adhering to – but mastering – the racial codes of an inhumane system.
Despite those efforts, one day Jim learns the unthinkable — the mistress is planning to sell him down the river but keep Sadie and Lizzie. James can’t have his family separated, so he runs to nearby Jackson Island, planning to hide out until he can figure a way to secure their freedom. Jim’s unlikely friend, young Huckleberry Finn also has reason to hide and to run with his abusive and alcoholic father back in town. After faking his own death (an action that unintentionally puts James under suspicion), Huck begs to come along, offering to pretend to be Jim’s owner. This alliance launches a delirious odyssey, two runaways navigating a treacherous river on a raft.
A subtle but significant change is that while the events of Twain’s 1884 novel take place in the Mississippi Valley “forty to fifty years ago,” in the 1840s, Everett advances the timeline by two decades, putting the nation on the cusp of civil war, though James and Huck don’t know it.
More importantly, Everett provides what Twain could not: Jim’s deep interior life. The entire story is narrated in his voice. Getting inside James’s head is a remarkable experience. Though they’re sometimes parted, James (as he prefers to be called in Everett’s novel) and Huck somehow always find each other again, and that creates a sense of surreality.
Along with shifting states of consciousness and reality, identity is a crucial and an explicitly slippery thing. Twain wrote Huck Finn in region-, race- and even age-specific dialect and pushed back on critics who found the language objectionable by explaining each dialect contained was researched with anthropological attention to detail. Everett, like Twain, is similarly obsessed with the link between language and identity. James plays the role of the docile and ignorant slave, whose speech to white people is barely intelligible, while inside he’s savvy, literate, and nursing a bubbling rage. Every chance meeting with white folks is a performance, a private minstrel show in which James code switches his style of speaking for white comfort.
The artifice serves a crucial purpose, and James is a consummate trickster – the cooperative slave, play acting exaggerated subservience, with his voice and diction morphing to character. And despite their growing connection, James’s audience is all white people, old and young – including Huck. James only holds fast to only one true thing: His vow to his family: to “get me a job and save me sum money and come back and buy my Sadie and Lizzie.”
Every now and then Huck can sense the falseness and it destabilizes their partnership. Their connection is real and tenuous, undermined by who they are – or appear to be to society – and the gap between them. Those contradictions are hard for a boy to grasp. It would be poignant but the repetition of those scenes of code switching uncertainty also renders this comic. As narrator, James recounts this moment when Huck got close to discovering his act:
“Jim,” Huck said.
“What?”
“Why you talking so funny?”
“Whatchu be meanin’?” I was panicking inside.
“You were talkin’—I don’t know—you didn’t sound like no slave.”
Again and again. In true Everett fashion, the intertwined artifice of race and language is stretched to self-reflexive absurdity. On top of the issue of interracial, interpersonal performance, the author mimics and pokes fun at the self awareness and calculus of slave narratives like the one James is himself secretly trying to craft (or maybe, rather modern literary analysis of slave narratives) and what James explicitly calls “the frame” in storytelling. James knows he’s smarter than those who would consider themselves his betters and, sometimes, as long as he’s safe and among other Black people, he secretly enjoys having some fun with his expertise.
The earliest and most self-conscious example of this linguistic play and reflexivity occurs before James and Huck go on the run. James was careful to approach Huck and Tom like any other white folks – with caution and concealed distance. When the boys think to play a trick on James while he’s sleeping, the truth is “Those boys couldn’t sneak up on a blind and deaf man while a band was playing.” But James spins a story letting the boys think their trick of moving his hat while he was sleeping has been so successful that he believes he was visited by a witch. He’s telling a tale to another Black man, but he knows that he’s being overheard by the two white boys. This is the dual frame of which James is explicitly aware. Similarly, when teaching his daughter Lizzie how to manage the expectations of white people and avoid insulting Miss Watson about her terrible cooking, James advises the girl: “‘Try’dat be,’ I said. ‘That would be the correct incorrect grammar.’“
James takes pride and pleasure in these deceptions. But fluidity of language and role playing can never be just a game. This 19th century linguistic shape-shifting can become a matter of life or death in an instant. So the intimacy between him and Huck is worrying: “spending time with Huck alone had caused me to relax in a way that was dangerous.” Plus, the people James and Huck encounter are also, more often than not, playing with their own roles. When James meets Norman, a man with white skin who seems to see through his racial performance, he finds it a “terrifying notion.” James’s horror and fear are so obvious that Norman feels compelled to reassure him: “‘You didn’t slip,” he said. I’se jest knows.’” James is impressed: “His accent was perfect. He was bilingual, fluent in a language no white person could master.” But Norman has his own secrets of identity and language. He’s actually of mixed race passing for white, and James just doesn’t detect it.
Like James and Norman’s encounter, the novel is exquisitely multilayered. A brilliant, sometimes shocking mashup of various literary forms, James has the arc of an odyssey, with the quest for home, and an abundance of absurdly comical humor. Con men and tricksters like the Duke and the Dauphin are borrowed from Twain. But even with the humor, Everett weaves in signature touches, like dream sequences with John Locke, whom James criticizes over his position on slavery. As James recounts, “I knew I was dead asleep and dreaming, but I didn’t know whether John Locke knew that.” So they debate in his dreams, the famous philosopher from which America’s “inalienable and natural rights” flow defending his contradictions. When Locke says, “Some might say that my views on slavery are complex and multifaceted,” James counters that his positions are “Convoluted and multifarious.” Locke says: “Well reasoned and complicated;” James says: “Entangled and problematic.” Locke: “Sophisticated and intricate.” James: “Labyrinthine and Daedalean.”
The back and forth is virtuosic in a scene that will make you smile if not laugh out loud. At other moments, especially those involving James’s evolution and the enslaved women inside and outside of his family, James is devastating. Eventually, the story crescendos to a paroxysm of violence that is simultaneously inevitable and shattering. That combination of moral philosophy, absurdity and tragedy is very Everett. But James’s situation is so bleak, his character so flesh and blood so fully realized, his pain so visceral and poignant, that at times the farce and telegraphing of inside jokes can seem jarring.
Still, I’m not sure if that dissonance is truly a bug or a feature. In addition to addressing language and identity, James is very convincingly and movingly a book about two runaways’ quest for freedom and the relationship between human beings that society says should not have any connection. James works shockingly well in all those dimensions. America’s original sin and contradictions are his subject, and this riveting riff on a similarly complex American classic that even Toni Morrison called “this amazing troubling book” is his most challenging and maybe even his best canvas. With the previous high water marks of Telephone, The Trees, and Erasure, Everett has long been an American literary icon. But in the wake of an Oscar-winning adaptation, this time the world is watching. James expands the Everett canon in a way that will have to be reckoned with come award season.
A slow runner and fast reader, Carole V. Bell is a cultural critic and communication scholar focusing on media, politics and identity. You can find her on Twitter @BellCV.
Lifestyle
Homelessness is more common than you think. : It’s Been a Minute
The real spectrum of housing insecurity
Annika McFarlane/Getty Images/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Annika McFarlane/Getty Images/Getty Images
Who counts as homeless in America?
If you ask the Department of Housing and Urban Development, around 750,000 people are homeless in America. If you ask the Department of Education, that number shoots up into the millions. What does this discrepancy tell us? And how do our cultural ideas about homelessness shape who we see as homeless, and who gets help? To find out, Brittany talks with Dr. Margot Kushel, Director at the UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative, and Dr. Molly Richard, assistant professor in the Department of Public Health at the University of Rhode Island’s College of Health Sciences.
Want more deep dives on cultural taboos? Check out these episodes:
The truth about men on the ‘down low’
Why can’t we be normal about polyamory?
Support Public Media. Join NPR Plus.
Follow Brittany on Instagram: @bmluse
For handpicked podcast recommendations every week, subscribe to NPR’s Pod Club newsletter at npr.org/podclub.
This episode was produced by Corey Antonio Rose. It was edited by Neena Pathak. We had engineering support from Josephine Nyounai. Our Supervising Producer is Cher Vincent. Our Executive Producer is Barton Girdwood. Our VP of Programming is Yolanda Sangweni.
Lifestyle
They just completed all of L.A. Times’ 101 Best California Experiences — and we’ve got questions!
By December of 2023, Paul Preston realized that his girlfriend Susan Huckle was a big fan of road trips and lists. So for Christmas, he gave her L.A. Times’ ”101 Best California Experiences” zine, a traveler’s bucket list highlighting my top destinations throughout my four decades of traveling the state.
The gift, I’m delighted to hear, was a hit.
Preston and Huckle went through it and checked off locations they’d seen already. Then they hit the road.
And now, after two and a half years of roaming the state between work assignments, they’re back to report that they’ve covered all 101 locations on that list. Though the two have also traveled beyond state lines, the quest to cover California “totally informed our lives for the last two or three years,” said Huckle, who sent me a note of thanks after ticking the last box.
After the note arrived, I was eager to call them and learn more. I caught the couple, of course, in the middle of a day trip.
Susan Huckle and Paul Preston set out to visit every spot on the L.A. Times’ 2023 list of “101 Best California Experiences.” Along the way, they got married in Yosemite Valley.
(Nick Wuthrich)
“We’re out exploring,” Preston said. “So you’re getting what we’re about.”
They’re also now married. That happened last July in Yosemite Valley, which, yes, was on the list.
Huckle, 41, an actress, a host on “L.A. This Week” on Channel 35, a Universal Studios performer and an author, grew up in Santa Maria on California’s Central Coast.
Preston, 56, is also an actor. He leads movie location tours and hosts podcasts, movie trivia nights and special events. He grew up and went to college on the East Coast, so he had fewer California miles under his belt when the couple met in 2020.
Their California 101 travels began in early 2024 with a trip to Paso Robles, where they saw the green slopes along Highway 46, Morro Rock and the elephant seals at Piedras Blancas near Hearst Castle.
“And then,” Preston said, “we just kept going.”
Some of their most satisfying stops, the two agreed, were places they hadn’t heard of, such as Orange Works in the Central Valley town of Strathmore and Angel Island State Park, sometimes known as the Ellis Island of the West. Huckle called Angel Island “a marriage of natural beauty with great, powerful, historic information.”
By early this year, there were only a few destinations left to check.
In April, they did the Indian Canyons and Sunnylands estate near Palm Springs, the Integratron near Joshua Tree and the Cheech Marin Center for Chicano Art & Culture in Riverside. In June, they rafted the South Fork of the American River, along with stops in Old Sacramento and, last of all, Columbia State Historic Park. Then they made their own favorites lists.
Susan Huckle’s top 10:
Yosemite Valley
Badwater Basin
Mammoth Mountain
Angel Island State Park
Cheech Marin Center
Joshua Tree National Park
American River South Fork
The Marshall Store on Tomales Bay
Santa Cruz Island
Sunnylands
Paul Preston’s top 10:
Yosemite Valley
Hollywood Bowl
Griffith Observatory
Catalina
Mammoth Mountain
American River South Fork
Erick Schats’ Bakery in Bishop
Huntington Library and Gardens
Palm Springs Aerial Tramway
Balboa Park, San Diego
Now that they’ve seen so much of the state, I had questions. For one, which spots not on the list would they have included?
Alcatraz, they agreed. Also, as an admirer of redwoods, Preston liked Calaveras Big Trees State Park. As an avid cyclist, Huckle liked the 22-mile Marvin Braude Bike Trail from Torrance to Pacific Palisades.
And was anything on the list a disappointment?
“The Carmel Mission,” Huckle said quickly. “It’s beautiful and the missions are an important part of California history.” But she said the mission’s account of its own history seemed “whitewashed,” saying little about the Native loss and trauma that historians are increasingly recognizing in accounts of the missions.
Said Huckle: “I was like, ‘C’mon guys, nobody really thinks this any more, right?’”
Now that they’re done with the Times’ “101 Best California Experiences,” what what will shape their next trips?
They have a list for that. Huckle picked up an L.A. guide, Danny Jensen’s “Secret Los Angeles,” and the couple plans to start where the book does, with the Triforium, a many-colored sculpture that went up outside City Hall in 1975 (and once featured music).
After that? Maybe the Faces of Elysian Valley, a traffic circle sculpture that Huckle said “looks like Easter Island in the middle of Cypress Park.”
That will leave only about 138 more destinations in the book to cover.
If anybody can do it, it’s these two.
Lifestyle
‘The Trojan Teddy Bear’: The promise and peril of childhood in the age of AI
In A.I. Artificial Intelligence, Monica introduces Teddy to David. The seemingly ordinary teddy bear quickly reveals himself to be an intelligent companion capable of conversation and emotional support.
Warner Bros. Pictures
hide caption
toggle caption
Warner Bros. Pictures
Back in 2001, Steven Spielberg released an underrated scifi movie named A.I. Artificial Intelligence (yes, the title is a bit redundant). The movie, which loosely borrows from Pinocchio, tells the story of a family who adopts a robotic boy programmed for love, and that robot’s heartbreaking quest to become a real boy.
Much of the technology in A.I. remains elusive. We’re probably not anywhere close to building androids that can convincingly pass as Haley Joel Osment — or Jude Law, for that matter. But some of the AI products imagined in the movie are starting to look surprisingly plausible. Take Teddy, an animatronic teddy bear. Teddy can walk, talk, make decisions, and respond to the needs and emotions of people around him. He’s more than just a toy. He’s an intelligent companion and protector for children.
Today, a slew of technology companies are developing AI companions that sort of resemble Teddy. The most intelligent AI chatbots still live on digital screens, but a wave of startups is giving them bodies — creating dolls, action figures, and robots that can serve as companions for kids.
What happens when kids grow up with AI?
AI is already a part of childhood. Recommendation algorithms curate what many kids watch and listen to. Chatbots stand ready to answer questions like, “Are monsters real?” or “Why is the sky blue?” They can help with homework, tell bedtime stories, or even feel like a friend. And companies are racing to embed AI into toys, nurseries, classrooms, and eventually robots that live alongside families.
In a new book, Human Raised: Nurturing Connection, Curiosity & Lifelong Learning in the Age of AI, author Dana Suskind grapples with what the rising tide of artificial intelligence means for raising kids. On the one hand, she acknowledges that the technology offers promise as, for example, a productivity enhancer and time saver for parents, a monitoring and research tool that can give parents and scientists valuable data on child development, and an interactive tutor that might help some kids learn.
But Suskind worries about what happens if AI begins replacing the kinds of human interactions that young brains evolved to learn from.
In fact, Suskind says, her original, working title for the book was, “The Trojan Teddy Bear,” a warning that AI companions may seem cute and cuddly — but they carry hidden risks for child development. She ultimately went with Human Raised because she wanted to emphasize the positive — and irreplaceable — role that parents, teachers, and caregivers play in molding young ones.
“If we want children to be able to continue to connect with each other and with other human beings, to be able to think critically, to be able to navigate the human world, we’re gonna need to make sure that kids have a distinctly human-raised early childhood,” Suskind says.
Suskind is a professor of surgery and pediatrics at the University of Chicago Medical Center, where she directs a program aimed at giving kids hearing with cochlear implants. After she began doing this incredible work — literally helping children hear — she noticed that some kids who had the procedure went on to understand spoken language and talk with relative ease, while others had a much harder time. Hearing alone wasn’t enough. And that led her to dive into neuroscience and social science to understand why.
The brain development of young kids, Suskind learned, is heavily influenced by the back-and-forth interactions they have with their parents and caregivers during the first several years of their life. And she grew concerned that there is a big population of kids who aren’t getting the enriching communication their brains need. And so she founded the TMW Initiative, a research center that helps parents create the kinds of brain-enriching environments that children need to reach their full potential. (You can read more about Suskind’s biography and previous work in a Planet Money newsletter from 2022).
Why Dana Suskind is sounding the alarm
With the explosion of AI, Suskind has grown alarmed by a rush to introduce an unprecedented technology into kids’ lives without careful reflection and rigorous scientific study about its effects on young minds. She is especially concerned about AI companions and other systems that interact socially with children, which she fears many people will use to substitute for the human interactions that children need most.
Since the dawn of civilization, humans have used technology to make raising children a little easier. In Human Raised, Suskind traces that history back to prehistoric times, when mothers used woven slings to carry infants while they worked. Over the centuries, new technologies — like television and tablets — have eased the burdens of caregiving or helped keep children occupied. Many of these technologies have also been greeted with fears that they would rot kids’ brains.
But Suskind argues AI may mark a fundamental shift. Interacting with a chatbot or intelligent teddy bear is more than just a kid glued to a television or an iPad watching Sesame Street or Paw Patrol. AI systems carry on conversations that can feel strikingly human. They respond to kids’ questions, emotions, and fears. They create a kind of synthetic social relationship — one that, Suskind argues, may shape developing minds in ways that, until recently, only humans could.
Suskind cites the research of renowned University of Washington developmental psychologist Patricia K. Kuhl. Kuhl proposed what’s known as the “social gate” hypothesis — the idea that children’s brains are biologically primed to learn through social interaction. Studies have shown, for example, that babies learn language much better from a live person than from a screen. Neuroscientists and psychologists suggest that’s because social interactions engage the brain in ways passive media does not. The sing-song way adults naturally speak to babies, smiles and other facial expressions, gentle touch, eye contact, and back-and-forth exchanges all appear to help open that social gate and facilitate learning and healthy brain development.
While artificial intelligence is no match for human educators and caregivers, Suskind argues, it is capable of opening the social gate in young children in ways that previous technologies could not. That makes AI a potentially extraordinary educational tool — but also a potentially dangerous one.
Companies design AI systems with their own goals, which could include maximizing your kids’ engagement, keeping their attention, collecting data, and making money. They don’t have the same priorities as parents. And while those systems may imitate human interaction, Suskind argues they cannot recreate everything that makes human relationships developmentally valuable.
“Eye contact, shared laughter, patient answers to ‘why’ questions activate ancient neural circuits designed for connection,” Suskind writes. “These exchanges provide a form of nourishment no algorithm, however sophisticated, can match.”
Human relationships are also messy and filled with emotions. Parents misunderstand their children. Kids get frustrated. Families argue, reconnect, and then smooth things over. Suskind argues that those imperfect interactions — and “the productive struggle” they create — are how children learn resilience, emotional regulation, flexibility, and how to navigate real relationships.
Unlike most humans, AI systems can be endlessly engaging, infinitely patient, and relentlessly affirming. Interactions with them often feel frictionless. Suskind worries giving young kids considerable exposure to them may make them less prepared for the messy, unpredictable nature of real human relationships.
AI as junk food for the young mind
Suskind compares AI relationships to ultra-processed food. “ If all you eat is fruit snacks, which is a synthetic version of fruit, when you actually eat the real fruit, you’re gonna be like, “Hmm, it’s not quite as sweet,” she says.
AI could eventually be programmed to try and mimic real parents and caregivers even more closely. But Suskind argues that the problem isn’t simply that today’s AI falls short of human relationships. It’s that AI represents a fundamentally new kind of social experience for children — one that already raises concerns based on what we know about child development and whose long-term effects remain deeply uncertain.
Suskind uses an analogy from the 19th century, when a German chemist named Justus von Liebig created one of the first infant formulas, hoping to replicate the nourishment of human milk. But when a French physician tested the formula on four newborns, all of them died within days, and the episode sparked a fierce controversy.
The lesson, Suskind suggests, is that we should be cautious about engineering substitutes for something as biologically, emotionally, and socially complex as human caregiving before we understand how those substitutes shape children’s development.
Given so much uncertainty about this rapidly evolving technology and its potential effects on kids, Suskind spends a lot of the book offering parents a practical guide for safely navigating child-rearing in the age of AI. She emphasizes that it’s especially important to shield kids from AI during their first years of life.
“Older children and adults encounter AI with already-built neural scaffolding, but young children are still wiring the very circuits that shape future learning and relationships,” she writes. “Introducing AI during this sensitive period presents a fundamentally different challenge with greater potential for harm.”
Suskind is open to the idea of using AI to enhance education for some kids — but only as a tool that enhances, rather than replaces, humans. She argues that human caregivers are the best way to cultivate what she calls “the Human Edge,” a set of social, emotional, and cognitive skills like “critical thinking, interpersonal connection, genuine creativity, empathy, and resilience.”
But, like time-crunched parents who rely on screens to buy themselves some time today, there may be growing temptations to outsource parts of child-rearing to AI, especially considering the fact that childcare is incredibly expensive. Suskind worries that, over time, a fully human-raised childhood could become a kind of luxury good — much the way fresh, healthy food often is today. Families with the time and resources would provide rich human interaction to their kids. Everyone else might increasingly rely on cheaper, more convenient AI substitutes.
And children raised largely by AI might not only lag socially, emotionally, and cognitively, but, ironically, they could also be less prepared for an AI-driven economy.
Suskind points to a recent essay by the University of Chicago economist Alex Imas. Imas argues that as AI automates more cognitive work, human jobs may be increasingly concentrated in what he calls “the relational sector” — occupations where humans are valued for qualities that make them distinctly human, from education to health care to hospitality, the arts, and therapy.
If that’s true, then the traits children develop through a human-raised childhood won’t just matter for their social lives. They may also become an economic advantage. In a world increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence, the most valuable skills may be the ones that are the most deeply human.
-
News8 minutes agoArgentina is back in the World Cup final after a thrilling semifinal win over England
-
Los Angeles, Ca2 hours agoRemains of murder victim identified as missing Southern California millionaire
-
Detroit, MI2 hours ago4Warn Weather Alert: Wildfire smoke leading to ‘unhealthy’ air quality in Metro Detroit
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoSan Francisco fishermen recount harrowing rescue after boat capsizes near Alcatraz
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoTimothée Chalamet ‘Starstruck’ by Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders
-
Miami, FL3 hours agoWives of detained men allege inhumane conditions at federal detention center in Miami
-
Boston, MA3 hours agoDriver charged in Norwood pedestrian crash that left man seriously injured
-
Denver, CO3 hours agoBoys, 12 and 14, arrested in deadly shooting in Denver’s Sunnyside neighborhood