Edition removes N-word from Mark Twain classics

[Cindy B]

This bothers me on so many levels.

First, taking that word away from one book does not mean the word doesn't exist. I work in an innercity school and the N word is tossed around as casually as the word "the". I have a constant battle with my students.. "Don't say that word", They reply "We can say it.. you can't- you'd get in trouble", -- and yes, as a white woman I don't say it. Not that I would say if I was black, white, purple or orange!

Then I reply back "If I can't say it, you can't either.".. that usually keeps them quiet.

And then this usually starts a ditrabe from one of my girls "Now, you know if you keep saying N this and N that, you aren't helping any of us. "


Secondly, it is important to note that this book portrays a specific period in history. If we erase that word, it basically pushes racial inequality "under the rug" so to speak. The word is important to the text so it stays in.

Third, how many other classics have this specific word? To Kill a Mockingbird, Live and Let Die (James Bond), Lord Jim, Crime and Punishment, Invisible Man, Their Eyes Were Watching God , Beloved

Ralph Ellison, the author of Invisible Man was black. Zora Hurston , author of Their Eyes were Watching God was black. Toni Morrison (Beloved) is also.

There are so many other words that also convey the same message as the N word. Do we ignore all text written before a specific time? They have much worse words than the N one .

If we (as readers/writers) accept either no word or a substitution word, how sanitized will our world be?


Keep the words as written. They were chosen for a specific reason.

 

[GeorgeG]

While the language is by no means acceptable today, you just don't rewrite history unless it is found to be factually wrong in the first place. That's how it was back then, that's how it was written, and that's how is should remain. If somebody wants political correctness and morally correct language, they should write their own book!

 

[Renaprainne]

Ban the N word, edit Mark Twain, no wait kill Mark Twain and republish under Samuel Clements. Next get rid of all civil war memorabilia, edit John Wilkes Booth out of our history because assasination does more damage than the written word from 100 years ago. Seems I remember another historical figure creating a stir about published books. A corporal in the military that became the leader of his nation. I believe his name was Adolf Hitler. Now we have an entire group of radicals that want to rewrite history. I do not approve of slang names for races, religions, and I do not approve of races using those same slurs to reference each other. I do approve of leaving a classic as it was published. I complained when Mark McKuen called James Earl Jones a great Black Actor. I find Mr. Jones to be a great actor. I have nevr once heard Gregory Peck referred to as a great white actor and no one should be segregated by race, religion, or social status. To the group of misfits that want to rewrite Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer; I say leave them alone and write your own novel. Or do you lack the aptitude to do so?

 

[Geoff_M]

Therefore, when it came time to write the final essay, the subject i chose was why i objected to the language in the book and how I found it extremely anxiety-provoking. My teacher evidently impressed with my argument, because I got a B+.

It sounds to me like your teacher did the right thing. The book affected you personally partly because of the language Twain used. Often times the goal of an author is to provoke thought or emotion in a reader. Of Mice and Men, The Diary of Anne Frank (though not a novel), and To Kill a Mockingbird were all works I read in middle school that evoked feelings in me and left impressions that last until today. Twain's selection of dialect and language was not an accident nor was it him parroting his own vocabulary. Among other things, Twain set out to write a work that pointed out racial injustice and challenged stereotypes (as analysts point out Jim's character comes off as more refined that Huck, who seems to glory in his ignorance).

I don't see why Huckleberry Finn should not be editted for use in schools. It's classic American literature, but I don't think leaving out the N-word would take anything away from the story. And publishers could certainly continue to release the original.

A PP added some interesting comments asking how this "edit" would be really any different than differing versions of other books written for different age groups. I suppose you could look at all of the differing versions of Alice in Wonderland (including pop-up versions for pre-schoolers) on the market as an example.

Here's the difference... the alternate versions aren't designed to be taught as works of literature. They're adaptations primarily designed to be used for age-appropriate reading or tailored for a specific purpose (link Disney's screenplay adaptation of the work). They aren't really scholarly substitutes for the author's work. As I said above, Twain wrote what he meant to write. When you go and start editing for "objectionable" content, you risk taking away from the message the author intended. Take Mockingbird for example, if you expunge the over-the-top racist statements from the family of Mayella Ewell, it without a doubt takes away from the book's impact intended by the Harper Lee.

So if they want to make "early reader" versions of Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn and leave out the unpleasant vocabulary, then so be it. If some schools want to have their students study a "sanitized" version of the book as a work of literature, then so be it too... but I think they're cheating their students out of the books' (thought by many to be two of the best American novels ever written) full intended impact. And it seemed like you got at least part of Twain's message in even your reaction.

 

[chisnpeke]

That's the problem. We don't use the book as a teaching tool. As a African American the one thing I hate is how we "gloss" over slavery and Jim Crow. How the "gone with the winds" type movies and books portray slaves as "happy darkies just loving Mr. slave master".
we gloss over the fact the George Washington owned over 300 slaves and how historians now believe he was particular cruel. We excuse it with the saying "well, we can't judge them using todays morality standards".

That being said.... I don't want them changing it simply because I don't like edits to classics simply for political correctness.

I agree with you.

What also really bothers me is this word is STILL used in rap songs coming out today. Lots of parents probably wouldn't think twice about their children listening to the rap songs with that word but if it's Mark Twain it's so much worse.

If parents would just teach their children that certain words were used in a derogatory manner in certain periods in history and that they are NOT to be used today. Instead we have people taking the word out of books that have been read for years.

 

[robinb]

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!

That reminds me of back in 2002 when Attorney General John Ashcroft covered some partially nude statues at the Department of Justice: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/01/29/statues.htm

 

[lustergirl]

That's the problem. We don't use the book as a teaching tool. As a African American the one thing I hate is how we "gloss" over slavery and Jim Crow. How the "gone with the winds" type movies and books portray slaves as "happy darkies just loving Mr. slave master".
we gloss over the fact the George Washington owned over 300 slaves and how historians now believe he was particular cruel. We excuse it with the saying "well, we can't judge them using todays morality standards".

That being said.... I don't want them changing it simply because I don't like edits to classics simply for political correctness.

I took a 19th century American History in college that dealt with times before and after the Civil War. Quite frankly I am appalled and ashamed of how the North was nonchalant after the war about the treatment of all blacks in the south after they were even freed. This too, Eliza, has been overlooked for many years.

 

[skater]

I'm all for frank open discussions of history and issues - even when its painful. Re-writing a classic novel does not allow for that IMO. Stuff like this makes me glad we homeschool. My kids are able to read a huge variety of classic and modern books and come to their own conclusions. They don't need somebody else to make decisions for them about what to think and how to think it.

 

[Carly_Roach]

I assume there are "kids" version of the story already (certainly there were of Tom Sawyer when I was little) that are abbreviated down to a few chapters and some pictures. Where are the purists horrified by those modifications? Perhaps a version of the full text with those modifications would make an intermediate version that would introduce kids to the "story" and then they could learn its deeper meanings as they progress in life.

I will say every library should have the original version and it would be horrifying if any university used anything but the original.

I am never horrified by comic book versions, Cliff's Notes versions or pop-up versions of the classics. I AM horrified when a novel is presented as a classic but has been edited for content. Way too 1984 for me.

I agree with you.

What also really bothers me is this word is STILL used in rap songs coming out today. Lots of parents probably wouldn't think twice about their children listening to the rap songs with that word but if it's Mark Twain it's so much worse.

If parents would just teach their children that certain words were used in a derogatory manner in certain periods in history and that they are NOT to be used today. Instead we have people taking the word out of books that have been read for years.

I almost hate to say this because I know it's going to sound racist, but these are my observations (not saying I agree with them - just saying that this is what I witness):

Society as a whole doesn't overly object to black people using racial epithets in rap songs or in daily conversation because society's opinion of black people is still pretty low. It's OK for someone of that caliber because that's pretty much what's expected of them.

However, Mark Twain was white, well written and well respected. Society has higher standards for someone in that class, therefore his use of a word that is now considered taboo is distressing. Acceptable white people must bring their language and demeanor up a notch because that's what we expect of them.

Yeah. I know how that sounds. Unfortunately, that's been my observance. We haven't "stamped out" racism as much as we'd like to think we have. It's just that no one expresses their racist opinions out loud anymore because that could cost them their job or their business. So they keep quiet, practice racism in a more subtle manner, and teach their children to do the same. Say the correct thing when speaking of or to a minority by all means, but you don't really associate with them unless you absolutely have to.

 

[OceanAnnie]

I am never horrified by comic book versions, Cliff's Notes versions or pop-up versions of the classics. I AM horrified when a novel is presented as a classic but has been edited for content. Way too 1984 for me.

I almost hate to say this because I know it's going to sound racist, but these are my observations (not saying I agree with them - just saying that this is what I witness):

Society as a whole doesn't overly object to black people using racial epithets in rap songs or in daily conversation because society's opinion of black people is still pretty low. It's OK for someone of that caliber because that's pretty much what's expected of them.

However, Mark Twain was white, well written and well respected. Society has higher standards for someone in that class, therefore his use of a word that is now considered taboo is distressing. Acceptable white people must bring their language and demeanor up a notch because that's what we expect of them.

Yeah. I know how that sounds. Unfortunately, that's been my observance. We haven't "stamped out" racism as much as we'd like to think we have. It's just that no one expresses their racist opinions out loud anymore because that could cost them their job or their business. So they keep quiet, practice racism in a more subtle manner, and teach their children to do the same. Say the correct thing when speaking of or to a minority by all means, but you don't really associate with them unless you absolutely have to.

I respectfully disagree with your take on the use of the "N" word. Not saying I'm "right". I just see it differently.

I think it is as simple as it means different things to different people within the black culture. When used amongst blacks it can be a term of endearment. Some use it and accept it and some don't and take offense to it. And some that do use it as an endearment or whatever probably take offense at other cultures that use it because of the history. There is a spectrum of use/thought within the culture on the issue and it doesn't hold any socio-economic bounds.

I don't blame anyone for taking offense to the word.

If it isn't acceptable, it shouldn't be acceptable at all, IMO.

That's just my .02.

 

[eliza61]

I am never horrified by comic book versions, Cliff's Notes versions or pop-up versions of the classics. I AM horrified when a novel is presented as a classic but has been edited for content. Way too 1984 for me.

I almost hate to say this because I know it's going to sound racist, but these are my observations (not saying I agree with them - just saying that this is what I witness):

Society as a whole doesn't overly object to black people using racial epithets in rap songs or in daily conversation because society's opinion of black people is still pretty low. It's OK for someone of that caliber because that's pretty much what's expected of them.

However, Mark Twain was white, well written and well respected. Society has higher standards for someone in that class, therefore his use of a word that is now considered taboo is distressing. Acceptable white people must bring their language and demeanor up a notch because that's what we expect of them.

Yeah. I know how that sounds. Unfortunately, that's been my observance. We haven't "stamped out" racism as much as we'd like to think we have. It's just that no one expresses their racist opinions out loud anymore because that could cost them their job or their business. So they keep quiet, practice racism in a more subtle manner, and teach their children to do the same. Say the correct thing when speaking of or to a minority by all means, but you don't really associate with them unless you absolutely have to.

Not racist at all. It's a dilemma (sp?) in our community (african american) also.
One thing you guys must remember is that for many AA such as my self, we lived and breathed segregation. We're not talking events that happen last century, we talking events that happen in my life time.
Anyone who thinks it's just a word, talk to me after you've had water hoses turned on you while being called a niggah
My dad was a purple heart winner and hero during the Korean war and in his own country in order to go home to Tenns. we had to get off the train in DC and move to the "colored" car. So yeah I'm a little sensitive when a white person uses the word.
And like I said many times before, last summer when that wackadoodle women from PA claimed 2 black men hijacked her and then was found in Disneyworld. My 2 sons were the ones the police pulled over and harrassed for no more reason than being black and driving a luxury car. because of course in their minds we couldn't have brought that car legally, all black men are drug dealers.
So I totally admit, while I don't like censureship, it's a lot more than a "word" to me

And like I said before, I guess I wouldn't mind if I thought we would opening and honestly talk about it but we don't. I've never understood how it's totally acceptable for the Jews to display the holocaust in all its brutality but we seem to gloss over slavery. I've actually had people tell me some black folks were "happy" being slaves. WTH, please believe me, if you believe nothing else. we were not happy being slaves and the coloreds in the south were not happy with segregation.
I actually had a women tell my mom she didn't understand why coloreds were so upset, blacks can get where they are going in the back of the bus just as well.

We're not talking ancient history.

 

[Anjelica]

Don't agree with it - political correctness gone awry (as usual). Granted my 7 year old daughter isn't reading that book but when she is older I would like for her to read the books as they were written.

 

[Anjelica]

That reminds me of back in 2002 when Attorney General John Ashcroft covered some partially nude statues at the Department of Justice: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/01/29/statues.htm

Umm....according to that article John Ashcroft didn't even know they were going to "permanent" decision:

.....He also said Ashcroft was not involved in the decision.

"The attorney general was not even aware of the situation," he said. "Obviously, he has more important things to do."