29 pages • 58 minutes read
Bret HarteA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Tennessee’s partner is the rough and unkempt titular protagonist whose character development and changing reputation in the eyes of the townsfolk serve as the story’s emotional center. There are several layers of narrative distance between the reader and Tennessee’s partner. The narrator mediates all that the reader knows of him, and even within the narrator’s observations, he is largely defined by his relationship to Tennessee and tidbits of town hearsay. He speaks in a rural dialect, using pronunciations like “fun’rel” and “pardner” that further separate him in class and disposition from the narrator’s more precise and literary voice. The narrator describes the partner as “a grave man” (Paragraph 3), a strong juxtaposition to Tennessee’s more mischievous character. The potential for even greater conflict emerges in the partner’s backstory, as Tennessee supposedly ran off with his partner’s wife. That the partner remained loyal to his friend despite this elopement communicates The Transcendent Nature of Friendship, which supersedes even matrimony.
After the inciting incident, where Tennessee robs a stranger, the partner steps into public life to honor his partner, first by testifying on his behalf, and then by collecting his body and burying it with a proper funeral. Besides illustrating the depth of the men’s relationship, these actions develop the theme of The Pros and Cons of Self-Created Justice; even though Tennessee was hanged as a thief, his partner has an individual relationship with him that adheres to a different code. The partner’s actions display a sense of duty that Tennessee’s transgressions do not override. By the end of the story, the narrator’s attitude toward Tennessee’s partner has changed. He is no longer an object of curiosity or ironic interest, but appears in a much more raw, emotional light as he reaches out toward a vision of his partner in the moment of death.
A thief and grifter who drinks to excess, Tennessee is a foil to his partner. While his partner seems humorless and straightforward, Tennessee participates in the humorous and cheeky banter that characterizes public discourse in Sandy Bar. Tennessee is much more representative of tropes relating to frontier literature, behaving like a lawless bandit and marauding through the town “emptying his revolver” as vigilante townsfolk chase him (Paragraph 5). Still, he does not engage in pointless violence: When the judge who captures Tennessee reveals his two revolvers and a bowie knife, Tennessee submits peacefully. The scene is written with a touch of irony, dramatizing Tennessee’s gambling nature and his participation in the humorous communication style of the town. He likewise takes his trial and sentencing with good grace, though he implies that he does not wholly recognize the court’s authority; for him, the law of force by which he was captured apparently reigns supreme.
Because Tennessee dies early in the story and never speaks out to defend himself, most of what the reader knows comes from his partner or local gossip. The question of why his partner remains so loyal to him when he seems to have few redeeming qualities looms large in both the town and the narrative. However, the obvious depth of the partners’ friendship implies a human side of Tennessee that must be worthy of love. The unanswered questions about Tennessee encourage the reader to question what the town’s collective creation of identity leaves out.
The narrator in “Tennessee’s Partner” is different from his rugged subjects. He speaks with deftness, precision, and a touch of irony, offering judgments and commentaries on the actions of the characters he describes. His elevated language and vocabulary locate him in a seemingly different social class than the townsfolk, making him more of a literary intelligentsia figure not unlike Bret Harte himself. The reader sees the story through his eyes, only privy to details that he knows or has heard from other locals. This creates a feeling of voyeurism and intimacy and familiarity, as though the reader were just another townsperson.
That narrator frequently refers to and dramatizes The Utility of Humor, one of the story’s central themes. The narrator describes humor as a central way that people relate in the town, especially as they make serious choices with life-and-death stakes. The narrator’s own humorous voice distances the reader from the story’s emotional reality, deemphasizing graphic and salacious moments while focusing in on ironic and unexpected interpersonal scenes. There is something potentially contradictory about the way the narrator interacts with the town; he seems like an observer from a different class, observing Sandy Bar with amused detachment, but his use of the pronoun “we” in communicating the town’s attitude frames him as an insider. The instability of this narration frees the perspective to shift with its subject matter, especially as the emotional distance between the narrator and the object of observation collapses; it also reflects the story’s interest in the fluidity of identity on the frontier.
The judge is a secondary character who plays several different roles. The narrator characterizes him in a roundabout way, first introducing him simply as the “small man on a gray horse” who captures Tennessee with merely the perceived strength of his weaponry (Paragraph 5). The narrator describes him as a “stranger” and then as Tennessee’s “captor” before finally revealing that the judge and the captor are one and the same. On the surface, this seems like a humorous coincidence emphasizing the interconnectedness and smallness of Sandy Bar. However, Harte also uses the judge’s shifting characterization to dramatize one of the story’s key themes, self-created justice, by showing how a stranger incrementally transforms into an administrator of justice in the face of need.
Harte’s narrator does not romanticize the judge or place him on a moral pedestal above the other townsfolk. He describes the judge as determined to convict Tennessee to make up for the “irregularities” of Tennessee’s capture; ironically, anxiety surrounding the makeshift nature of Sandy Bar’s justice system here results in a questionable rush to judgment. Further, while the judge does reject the partner’s offer of a bribe, the narrator notes that this uprightness is not generalizable, as he may be “bigoted, weak, or narrow” (Paragraph 19). The judge’s position as a relative equal to the townsfolk, even as he wields life-and-death authority, suggests the precarity of the justice system in Sandy Bar. In the absence of an established and (theoretically) disinterested punitive infrastructure, it is up to ordinary, imperfect townspeople to fill these roles.
By Bret Harte