2007-11-06 12:33:11 · 4 answers · asked by jambakenny 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Books & Authors
I don't think so, I believe that it was not used because it kept him from being a "real" person and showed how blacks were treated in that time.
It's been a long time so I would check that answer=)
2007-11-06 12:36:29 · answer #1 · answered by paganmom 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
he's simply Watson's (Miss Watson of Chapter 1) Jim..Arguably later he could become Jim Watson if he adaopts the name of his owner when slaves were freed. Story took place in 1835 so he might not have lived long enough, although I think Miss Watson freed him in her will.
2007-11-06 12:52:02 · answer #2 · answered by Dragon17 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is a quote in "Tom Sawyer" in which Tom explains to Huck that kings in Europe only have one name, and Huck replies he wouldn't like to have just one name "like a N-----." So I assume Jim didn't have a last name until Miss Watson's will freed him.
2007-11-06 13:14:20 · answer #3 · answered by Howard H 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
nope
2007-11-06 12:36:01 · answer #4 · answered by Night Owl 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋