Edition removes N-word from Mark Twain classics

[mjkacmom]

I think it's wrong. Ds12 read To Kill a Mockingbird, and loved it, and the dialect really brings the book to life. I recently read Roots, and we've been watching the miniseries on DVD, and my kids are captivated by it. I don't know if they've even heard the N word before.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

My concern is that the book is not being assigned in schools just because of the n word. Yes, I agree that it's better to read it as the author wrote it, but when that means students won't read it at all, the next best thing is a slightly bowdlerized version.

Ding, ding, ding...we have a winner.

I say everything always boils down to money. If they sanitize the novel they can probably sell it to schools.

Is it right to do this in order to get schools to teach Twain in school? That remains to be seen.

I cannot get my 14yodd to read Twain and we live in MO. Perhaps I need to do a day trip to Hannibal this summer.

 

[dejr_8]

As for the novel in question, I understand the historical context of the usage. I don't think that it's hard to teach children that context. I also wonder if one of the pivotal mini-series of my youth, Alex Haley's Roots, were to be remade today, what treatment "the N-word" would received in the updated version?

Could Roots even be made into a mini-series these days?

 

[jekajekalynn]

Grrrr.... This sticks in my craw as it were..

I don't like when anyone tries to censor books or any reading material.

What, are those parents who got this to happen gonna go to college with there kids too and try to shield them in their English lit class when they have to read Flannery O Connor, and the like?

 

[SAHDad]

My thought is: It's just a word. It's not a polite word, and I don't use it in either public or private speech... and that's true with a number of words. However, it doesn't have special powers. It shouldn't be treated like "Voldemort" in the world of Harry Potter in that it must not be even uttered. Hearing or seeing the word doesn't cause irreparable harm to anyone. It won't curve your spine, cause fits of the vapors, or anything else.

As for the novel in question, I understand the historical context of the usage. I don't think that it's hard to teach children that context. I also wonder if one of the pivotal mini-series of my youth, Alex Haley's Roots, were to be remade today, what treatment "the N-word" would received in the updated version?

So, if they want to "white-wash" Tom Sawyer, then I guess so be it. I guess it doesn't change the story line, but it certainly limits a bit a middle-schooler's understanding of the culture of post-Civil War Missouri.

So the "N-word" is out, but the "I-word" still OK in that Twain work?

No, the I-word goes as well.

Odd, isn't it - the n-word must be expunged from a classic literary work, especially a work that can easily be used to demonstrate satire and a dig at racial prejudices (Jim is a much more intelligent character than Huck, who seems to take pride in his ignorance, IMO). And yet, that same word shows up with an alarming frequency in music. If I had to bet, I would bet that more kids have heard the word in a song than have been exposed to it in Huck Finn.

 

[Geoff_M]

I was surprised to read this "whitewashing" of Twain's books wasn't new. Some have been fighting against Mark Twain's classics for years.

Whitewashing Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer, Part 99,999

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/04/whitewashing-huck-finn-and-tom-sawyer-part-99999/

Best quote from Malkin: "Ah, yes. The 'n-word.' Twain used it in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn 215 times, we are ceaselessly reminded by censors who are too busy counting Twain’s words to understand them."

 

[Agri]

My concern is that the book is not being assigned in schools just because of the n word. Yes, I agree that it's better to read it as the author wrote it, but when that means students won't read it at all, the next best thing is a slightly bowdlerized version.

Books being assigned in school isn't the only way someone is going to be exposed to reading a novel. Also, I cannot begin to tell you how many people I know who have read books that are typically assigned in school, but weren't assigned to that person who have said "Man, I loved that book! I would have hated it if it were assigned to me in school, though."

This is more about possibly selling the book to a minority of schools who have it banned in its current form than exposing kids to a classic they wouldn't otherwise read because of ONE WORD. The majority of schools that ban the book now aren't likely to change it, either, because the word is removed.

Huckleberry Finn wasn't even originally banned because of the 'n-word' - it was banned because of the use of words such as "sweat" and the use of dialect was demeaning!

Thankfully, I went through a school system that didn't ban books. I've read most of the books on the banned books list either through school or for personal enjoyment.

 

[happygirl]

I think it should have been left ALONE

 

[Scurvy]

I don't have a problem with it. The idea doesn't appeal to me and I wouldn't buy those editions, but I don't think it's a big deal as long as the real versions remain available as well. People can either choose to read them or not. If most people choose not to read them, or to read the real books instead of these sanitized versions, then I doubt that anyone will do this with other books. I don't see it as being any different than movies which have the "offensive" material edited out by some companies, or than the radio edits of popular songs. As long as the original work is still an option, I don't care how many alternate versions are also available. (Of course, if someone actually owns the rights to something and they object to alternate versions, that's another story. But that isn't the case here.)

 

[Carly_Roach]

I suppose next they will revise Romeo and Juliet so that they aren't really cousins and nobody dies too?

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read. As a writer, I am offended to the core by the very idea of it.

As a writer, I also agree that the greatest works of literary art should be left alone, offensive language or not. This is akin to putting pants on Michelangelo's David because the nudity offends some.

My thought is: It's just a word. It's not a polite word, and I don't use it in either public or private speech... and that's true with a number of words. However, it doesn't have special powers. It shouldn't be treated like "Voldemort" in the world of Harry Potter in that it must not be even uttered. Hearing or seeing the word doesn't cause irreparable harm to anyone. It won't curve your spine, cause fits of the vapors, or anything else.
As for the novel in question, I understand the historical context of the usage. I don't think that it's hard to teach children that context. I also wonder if one of the pivotal mini-series of my youth, Alex Haley's Roots, were to be remade today, what treatment "the N-word" would received in the updated version?

So, if they want to "white-wash" Tom Sawyer, then I guess so be it. I guess it doesn't change the story line, but it certainly limits a bit a middle-schooler's understanding of the culture of pre-Civil War Missouri.

So the "N-word" is out, but the "I-word" still OK in that Twain work?

I agree. When a situation calls for using the word niggar, I'll use it. Especially when trying to demonstrate the difference between an epithet and a simple vocabulary word that was used in a great many novels such as the one mentioned earlier (To Kill a Mockingbird) as well as Gone With the Wind.

As Geoff said, it's not a nice word and not one I use very often at all. But I'm not going to shy away from saying it if/when it's the appropriate word for the conversation. It's just a word.

 

[mamacatnv]

As a writer, I also agree that the greatest works of literary art should be left alone, offensive language or not. This is akin to putting pants on Michelangelo's David because the nudity offends some.


I agree. When a situation calls for using the word niggar, I'll use it. Especially when trying to demonstrate the difference between an epithet and a simple vocabulary word that was used in a great many novels such as the one mentioned earlier (To Kill a Mockingbird) as well as Gone With the Wind.

As Geoff said, it's not a nice word and not one I use very often at all. But I'm not going to shy away from saying it if/when it's the appropriate word for the conversation. It's just a word.

I'm in the leave it alone camp. If Mark Twain were alive and chose to rewrite his own book, then that would be his right but IMO we the general public do not have the right to rewrite his work to suit a current acceptable standard use of vocabulary.

 

[BunsenH]

As a writer, I also agree that the greatest works of literary art should be left alone, offensive language or not. This is akin to putting pants on Michelangelo's David because the nudity offends some. .............

Or draping the "Justice" statue at the US DoJ so that a breast is covered. (The earliest 'wardrobe malfunction'?)

 

[Magpie]

ITA

It's like putting pants on Michelangelo's David statue so people wouldn't have to see him naked because it might be offensive by today's standards.

This is pure PC censorship!

I think it's very, very wrong. And I don't want my children getting this version taught to them in school, either. It'd be as bad as the time my daughter's choir was taught to sing Lennon's "Imagine" with several whole verses expunged. I made her sit down and learn the REAL song.

On the other hand, if in addition to taking out "the n word" they also added zombies to Twain's books, that'd be hilarious.

 

[Deb in IA]

I agree with those who said that it is absolutely wrong to edit this book.

Mark Twain chose the n-word for a reason, precisely to make people uncomfortable and to emphsize the vulgarity of the racist attitudes of the day.

To change that word to "slave" does not produce the same feelings and emotions.

Here is an essay on this on the Grio.com.
http://www.thegrio.com/opinion/why-the-n-word-should-stay-in-huck-finn.php#

I've printed the last paragraph, which sums it up well for me.

Twain could not have conveyed that sentiment and that part of America's shameful racial legacy by sugar coating the language, and guarding his vocabulary against racial epithets. In doing that Huck Finn with all of its racial crudities provides insight into a time and place in America that should not be forgotten. To sanitize any part of that to conform in timeless literature to an artificial and hypocritical standard of official civility is a far bigger absurdity than Twain's use of the n-word. Keep the n-word in Huck Finn.

 

[RitaE]

I agree with most others.

I can't condone removing the warts of history and pretending they we have always been one great big shiny Politically Correct society. I feel much the same way when I watch that movie in the American Adventure.

Mark Twain is soundly recognized as one of the greatest American Authors. We have no right to alter his words.

 

[Katieinwonderland]

I'm baffled by the idea of altering a classic in any way, especially changing or deleting words.

I have to say though, I grew up in England and neither of these books were taught to us in school - after reading this thread I'm going to go out and get a copy of these books to read (hopefully unedited versions!)

 

[bimshire]

I agree that the word should stay in so that readers now and in the future can learn how black people were treated in the country. No whitewashing.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

You don't change an author's work. You just don't.

 

[SAHDad]

I haven't read it in some time, but doesn't the same infamous word appear throughout "Uncle Tom's Cabin"?

 

[Geoff_M]

To change that word to "slave" does not produce the same feelings and emotions.

I'm also guessing that the character presumably now known as "Native American Joe" also lacks the certain linguistic "punch" that Twain was aiming for!!!