New edition of 'Huckleberry Finn' to lose the N-word

[Nova]

The insane thing about this "controversy" is that a "clean" version has been out for YEARS! I believe the version I use in my 7th grade classroom came out in 1992. So why is this news? There is an article published w/ my edition entitled "Should This Book Be Banned?" which does use the n-word and explains the context in which Mark Twain used it. My students are required to read it and then write a letter from their parents' point of view to the principal praising or decrying the book. They must state the opinion and defend it. Then, they must respond from the principal's point of view to the parent explaining why the book was chosen.

In the school where I work, the teachers in the older grades (11th is American Lit.) won't touch the book due to the language. I feel it is more important for students to get the basic storyline and understand the origin of the word than to pretend it doesn't exist. However, if I let them read that language aloud (we're still working on fluency in the 7th grade, so we must read aloud), they ARE going to say it elsewhere. It's just a fact. The clean version is what I have to work with. It's better than nothing and paired with some original slave narratives, I think they get the point.

Sounds like great teaching to me, Pandora. Good for you! I used to teach college freshmen and it was a rare student who arrived able to argue from any point of view but his or her own. The unfortunate fact is your students are going to learn that word with or without Twain; how much better that they are required to think about the word, its usage and its power.

So do I understand correctly that the volume your students have deletes the word "" from Twain, but includes the word in the same volume in an article about Twain? Talk about Theater of the Absurd!

 

[Nova]

Interesting (short) article at the link below on the way the lyrics to "Ol' Man River" were changed by the great singer Paul Robeson over the years. (BTW, the authors of the song were still living at the time and could have legally prevented Robeson from singing the revised lyrics if they so chose; obviously, they did not.)

The author (and I) agree with Robeson changing "*advertiser censored*" to "colored folks". This change became standard in performance over the years and now appears in the published text. (If I seem to contradict myself here, it may be because reading a word and hearing it sung at you full volume are different experiences. To me, "colored folks" still gives us a sense of the period and its condescension toward African Americans without being so harsh as to upstage the rest of the song.)

But the author disagrees with some of Robeson's other changes and explains why.


http://www.theatermirror.com/glhriver.htm

 

[Pandora]

So do I understand correctly that the volume your students have deletes the word "" from Twain, but includes the word in the same volume in an article about Twain? Talk about Theater of the Absurd!

Yup. It's a wee bit crazy, but it teaches kids about the power of words.

 

[Nova]

Yup. It's a wee bit crazy, but it teaches kids about the power of words.

Amazing!

 

[daisy7]

Don't censor Mark Twain's N word

By LEONARD PITTS JR.
lpitts@MiamiHerald.com

It is, perhaps, the seminal moment in American literature.

Young Huck Finn, trying to get right with God and save his soul from a forever of fire, sits there with the freshly written note in hand. “Miss Watson,” it says, “your runaway Jim is down here two mile below Pikesville and Mr. Phelps has got him and he will give him up for the reward if you send.”

Huck knows it is a sin to steal and he is whipped by guilt for the role he has played in helping the slave Jim steal himself from a poor old woman who never did Huck any harm. But see, Jim has become Huck’s friend, has sacrificed for him, worried about him, laughed and sung with him, depended upon him. So what, really, is the right thing to do?

“I was a-trembling,” says Huck, “because I’d got to decide, forever, betwixt two things and I knowed it. I studied a minute, sort of holding my breath, and then says to myself:

‘All right, then, I’ll go to hell’ — and tore it up.”

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/01/...ns-n-word.html#storylink=fbuser#ixzz1AYuJ0tlT

 

[Quiche]

There's an awful lot of scrubbing to be done if we endeavor to never offend.

It takes me all the way back to my first reader-- featuring Jane, Dick, and Spot, as I am offended by the name, Dick~!

:worms:

 

[Nova]

In fairness to the "other side" of this issue, I think some would say they aren't going house to house and library to library to black out the word from every copy of the book.

The issue to them is the climate that children must endure in school and a feeling that kids need a safe space for learning without wrestling with that word and all its implications. While I still disagree, I realize that as with everything, the issue is a little more complicated when one is dealing with children.

 

[Kat]

To be honest, rather than see Twain not taught at all to school children I would rather a censored version be taught and then when they are in College (or High School ) can be taught with the uncensored version. I just don't want to see the baby thrown out with the bathwater because Twain's works are so important, but that's JMHO.

As an aside, one of my fav books is Lolita by Nabokov. That book can raise the hairs on people's necks too. LOL. (His development and treatment of the character HH) All JMHO.

 

[tlcya]

AAAAARRRGGGGGGG

will this need for whitewashing never end?

I am an avid reader for pleasure with an inordinate respect for the written word. This just flat out pisses me off.

This is just sacrilige in my opinion.

Back in the day we burned objectional books or objectionable passages, now apparently, not having the stomach to outright burn books we will proceed to whitewash them, scrubbing out any offending words, thoughts or ideas.

This scares the he77 outta me. I pray someone uses some judgment before they start screwing up all the great classics.

poor Samuel Clemens must be spinning in his grave right now.

 

[White Rain]

I remember my 7th grade English class....we were made to read "Summer Of My German Soldier" which has the "N" word and the teacher spoke to us about this subject beforehand.
Also one of my MOST FAVE BOOKS EVER "To Kill A Mockingbird" has the word in it....
Are we going to change every book now?

 

[Melanie]

I appreciate your POV - truly. But I'm afraid being PC will be the undoing of this country. I prefer HONESTY!

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was originally published in 1884. At the time, the narrative was true to life. I cannot understand why anyone would take such a liberty as to re-write a classic story - not to mention history. What else should be done to assuage the concerns of those who find this book - or any book - offensive?

Should we re-write (or sugarcoat) every, single potentially offensive word or reference in every book ever written? Jeez.

For those who find Huckleberry Finn offensive...DON'T READ IT! Same goes for all things "they" deem offensive.

If schools don't make this book required reading for English or literature classes, it should at least be on the reading list for history classes.

IMHO.

Most excellent! We can't re-write history, nor should we. If we start here, then I guess we should take out the word "jews" when referring to the holocaust (Two-thirds of the population of nine million Jews who had resided in Europe before the Holocaust were killed).

Then we should get rid of every rap song that includes N's.

On top of that, let's rid the world of the term "cracker" opposite of , an insult to whites.

Come on - I think this is just ridiculous.

Just my opinion of course...

Mel

 

[Fairy1]

In fairness to the "other side" of this issue, I think some would say they aren't going house to house and library to library to black out the word from every copy of the book.

The issue to them is the climate that children must endure in school and a feeling that kids need a safe space for learning without wrestling with that word and all its implications. While I still disagree, I realize that as with everything, the issue is a little more complicated when one is dealing with children.

You're right, Nova. What frightens me is the very idea that there are those who would if it were logistically possible!

I don't know at what age Huckleberry Finn is normally introduced to students in school, but I would be willing to bet it's around the same time kids are hearing the word "" in rap music. Personally, I am offended by the USE of that word, but I recognize its relevance in the music of the day. I wasn't crazy about my kids hearing it when they were little, but I couldn't very well go around with my fingers in their ears all day, every day when they were out in the world. It was more practical to sit down and talk with them about it so they understood. The fact that the word is used liberally in both music and speach among kids today doesn't erase its origins.

What kids learn in the classroom is a fraction of what they learn over the course of their lives. IMO, it's ignorant for parents to believe they can shield their kids from everything they find offensive or negative in some way. Those things will always be out here in the real world.

 

[scandi]

I believe this is censorship & it is very scary we, as Americans, continue to allow this excessive PC-ness to exists.

I totally agree with all of you here but in a way think we have given some license to make changes by the past changes that were made.

When my guys were in 3rd and 4th grade they did a skit in their school talent show. They were Ramus and Rastus, all dressed for the role as to period and did a famous old comedy routine. The straight man vs the funny man who pronounced Africa as aFRica much to the objection of the straight man {for example}. Well the Principal tried to pull their skit out of the show, but left it in after we showed how it depicted a time in American History. The kids got a rounding applause. YaYA

 

[legalmania]

What angers me is the rappers who use this word so freely. They think that because they are black that gives them the right to use a word that was used to belittle their forefathers. Why would you want to use a word that was used to linch,whip, and keep your forefathers down. That word to me is a very degrading word and history showed us how discriminating the word was. Why would you want to go back and use a word that was so offensive to people like Rosa Park, Martin Luther King and thousands of others who lost their lives because of the color of their skin. I think by leaving the word in books such as Huckleberry Finn should stay to remind us of the way people talked so freely about a generation of people who suffered and history is just that in the past and need not be repeated.

 

[Nova]

AAAAARRRGGGGGGG

will this need for whitewashing never end?

I am an avid reader for pleasure with an inordinate respect for the written word. This just flat out pisses me off.

This is just sacrilige in my opinion.

Back in the day we burned objectional books or objectionable passages, now apparently, not having the stomach to outright burn books we will proceed to whitewash them, scrubbing out any offending words, thoughts or ideas.

This scares the he77 outta me. I pray someone uses some judgment before they start screwing up all the great classics.

poor Samuel Clemens must be spinning in his grave right now.

Apparently you think it's better to burn a book than change a word. Seems a bit of an overreaction, but that's just me.

I am strongly opposed to changing Twain's text, but Jim is still a slave in the "clean" version and Huck still befriends him. The essence of the work and Twain's ideas aren't being lost.

 

[Nova]

I remember my 7th grade English class....we were made to read "Summer Of My German Soldier" which has the "N" word and the teacher spoke to us about this subject beforehand.
Also one of my MOST FAVE BOOKS EVER "To Kill A Mockingbird" has the word in it....
Are we going to change every book now?

I am ashamed to admit I was 54-years-old before I got around to reading Mockingbird. (I still haven't seen the movie.)

One of the five best books ever written in this country, if you ask me.

So no, let's don't rewrite it.

 

[Nova]

Most excellent! We can't re-write history, nor should we. If we start here, then I guess we should take out the word "jews" when referring to the holocaust (Two-thirds of the population of nine million Jews who had resided in Europe before the Holocaust were killed).

Then we should get rid of every rap song that includes N's.

On top of that, let's rid the world of the term "cracker" opposite of , an insult to whites.

Come on - I think this is just ridiculous.

Just my opinion of course...

Mel

I agree with you, but the equivalent word for Jews would be "kike." It's an equally ugly word, and like and , shouldn't be used without a very good reason. (Twain's "very good reason" was the period in which he wrote.)

I don't think the word "Jew" is in and of itself a slur (though obviously the Nazis used it as one).

 

[Nova]

You're right, Nova. What frightens me is the very idea that there are those who would if it were logistically possible!

I don't know at what age Huckleberry Finn is normally introduced to students in school, but I would be willing to bet it's around the same time kids are hearing the word "" in rap music. Personally, I am offended by the USE of that word, but I recognize its relevance in the music of the day. I wasn't crazy about my kids hearing it when they were little, but I couldn't very well go around with my fingers in their ears all day, every day when they were out in the world. It was more practical to sit down and talk with them about it so they understood. The fact that the word is used liberally in both music and speach among kids today doesn't erase its origins.

What kids learn in the classroom is a fraction of what they learn over the course of their lives. IMO, it's ignorant for parents to believe they can shield their kids from everything they find offensive or negative in some way. Those things will always be out here in the real world.

I couldn't agree with you more. But since we all seem to agree here, I just wanted to be fair to another point of view.

I think the argument would continue that there is a difference between hearing a word on TV or from kids after school and encountering it in a text officially assigned by a teacher. For one thing, the child can't walk away from or turn off a mandatory assignment; for another, a teacher is an authority figure given power over the child by the state.

For me personally, these issues don't outweigh the value of reading the original text, but I think there are real issues here that aren't to be dismissed as mere "political correctness." (Not saying you did. That was a general remark.)

Frankly, I prefer pandora's method of acknowledging the word and its power, and then using it to provoke students to think about the importance of language. I tried to do similar things with objectionable passages in texts I assigned to college undergrads.

 

[Nova]

I totally agree with all of you here but in a way think we have given some license to make changes by the past changes that were made.

When my guys were in 3rd and 4th grade they did a skit in their school talent show. They were Ramus and Rastus, all dressed for the role as to period and did a famous old comedy routine. The straight man vs the funny man who pronounced Africa as aFRica much to the objection of the straight man {for example}. Well the Principal tried to pull their skit out of the show, but left it in after we showed how it depicted a time in American History. The kids got a rounding applause. YaYA

Are you saying white kids performed that old minstrel routine in blackface? I may be contradicting myself, but I rather hope not. (It's hard for me to imagine that would be allowed.)

Otherwise, I think it's great to show how American comedy owes so much to minstrel routines (that originated with African Americans themselves before whites began to do imitations) as long as you provide a context for the sketch.

 

[Nova]

What angers me is the rappers who use this word so freely. They think that because they are black that gives them the right to use a word that was used to belittle their forefathers. Why would you want to use a word that was used to linch,whip, and keep your forefathers down. That word to me is a very degrading word and history showed us how discriminating the word was. Why would you want to go back and use a word that was so offensive to people like Rosa Park, Martin Luther King and thousands of others who lost their lives because of the color of their skin. I think by leaving the word in books such as Huckleberry Finn should stay to remind us of the way people talked so freely about a generation of people who suffered and history is just that in the past and need not be repeated.

I don't care for rap in general, but that's probably just showing my age.

But adults, at least, should recognize that words take their meaning from context. (On another thread, there's a discussion about the phrase, "She's dead to me." Any sane English speaker knows "dead" in that context doesn't refer to literal death but to shunning. Different context, different meaning.)

By the same token, the word "" means something different when used by a white person to refer to a black person v. used by one black person to another. (Some prominent African Americans have argued that the distinction is too subtle for a lot of people and the word should just be retired, and they have a point.)

I understand why you might disagree with African Americans using the word, but I don't understand your "anger." The word is used by blacks as a way to take back a powerful word and prove it no longer intimidates them. You'll find the same phenomenon among other minority groups with the words that were once most hurtful to them. (A gay group that called itself "Queer Nation" comes to mind.)

Perhaps most commonly, you can turn on your TV any night and hear strong women use the word "b--ches" as a term of empowerment (and even endearment). Is doing so ill-advised? Perhaps. As I've indicated, there are arguments pro and con. (Sorry to wimp out on the word in question but the software here automatically removes the actual word.)

I don't see any reason for me as white male to get angry about it. So I can't use those words because they take on different meanings coming out of my mouth. So what?