You Know What Really Grinds My Gears?

[Flick James]

The newest edition of Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn will have the "n" word removed from it and replaced with the word "slave." Refer to the following news story:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/01/04/132652272/new-edition-of-huckleberry-finn-will-eliminate-offensive-words

Personally this bothers me a great deal. Is the n-word offensive? Certainly. Has society progressed to a point of rejecting this racial slur? Almost entirely.

However, this does not justify the editing of the vernacular of the time from any work of classic literature. One of the stated justifications is that because the word is so offensive, the book is being read less and less in schools because of it, and so children are not being exposed to what is otherwise a piece of American history. Isn't that exactly why it should NOT be removed? It cannot ignored that such a practice was common in Mark Twain's time and place in history. Removing them seems to suggest that we are trying to deny that they are there.

Now, I am generally opposed to bringing up Hitler and the Nazi's in arguments unless it is absolutely relevant, but in this case it is. This is not that dissimilar from Germans denying that time in their history. You cannot. It happened. It is up to the rational members of society to note that the whole of the German people cannot be held responsible for that time and place, just as the whole of America cannot be held responsible for the oppression of a race of people. However, the existence of these things cannot go unacknowledged by a society of reason, and so the removal of an offensive word from a literary classic that is also a reflection of the attitudes of the time is unacceptable.

I am not trying to open up a nasty debate, but this was something that got under my skin, and about which I felt sufficiently passionate to relate.

[indianasmith]

I concur wholeheartedly.  When you whitewash history, you run a great risk of repeating its errors.

[The Gravekeeper]

It should also be noted that the use of that particular term wasn't considered all that offensive back in the day when the book was written. Was it a slur even back then? Yes, but it wasn't considered as serious as it is now. It should also be noted that as the two characters got to know each other better, the initial stereotypes start to fade away (or at least that's how I remember the book; it's been a while and being a Canadian I was never required to read it in school and thus never had to remember anything about it for tests.)

[AndyC]

True. I have to ask who is going to be offended by the N word in Mark Twain. Guilty white people, either out to bury past wrongs or simply to protect the poor black people, who cannot possibly endure such a word in any context. What a crock. I'd like to see some black activists protest the removal of the offensive words, on the grounds that it attempts to minimize the oppression of their ancestors. Just putting the emphasis on the language takes it off of far worse things than name calling. And it wasn't really name calling back then. The N word was what people used. It is, after all, just a bastardization of the word "negro." It became offensive because of its association to past oppression. Uttering the word in the context of history should be no more offensive than talking about that oppression.

And it seems when the word has fallen as far out of use as it has in many places, it loses its power for most of the kids reading it. It just becomes another archaic term. And in places where the word is frequently used, seeing it in a book is the least of anyone's worries. The word is nothing without the hatred behind it, and if the hatred is there, my biggest worry is not going to be how it is expressed verbally. Words don't matter as much as whether any harm is intended by the people using them.

[AndyC]

Seems The Gravekeeper covered some of the same ground while I was composing my longwinded post.

[Mr. DS]

Obese people who blubber over their weight on the Biggest Loser.  Eating four or five hamburgers at lunch will have it's consequences eventually.  I'm unaware where the shock comes in.

[ghouck]

The newest edition of Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn will have the "n" word removed from it and replaced with the word "slave." Refer to the following news story:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/01/04/132652272/new-edition-of-huckleberry-finn-will-eliminate-offensive-words

Personally this bothers me a great deal. Is the n-word offensive? Certainly. Has society progressed to a point of rejecting this racial slur? Almost entirely.

However, this does not justify the editing of the vernacular of the time from any work of classic literature. One of the stated justifications is that because the word is so offensive, the book is being read less and less in schools because of it, and so children are not being exposed to what is otherwise a piece of American history. Isn't that exactly why it should NOT be removed? It cannot ignored that such a practice was common in Mark Twain's time and place in history. Removing them seems to suggest that we are trying to deny that they are there.

Now, I am generally opposed to bringing up Hitler and the Nazi's in arguments unless it is absolutely relevant, but in this case it is. This is not that dissimilar from Germans denying that time in their history. You cannot. It happened. It is up to the rational members of society to note that the whole of the German people cannot be held responsible for that time and place, just as the whole of America cannot be held responsible for the oppression of a race of people. However, the existence of these things cannot go unacknowledged by a society of reason, and so the removal of an offensive word from a literary classic that is also a reflection of the attitudes of the time is unacceptable.

I am not trying to open up a nasty debate, but this was something that got under my skin, and about which I felt sufficiently passionate to relate.

I see your point, but I also see theirs. It's not like they're burning all the old editions, they'll still be around. One issue is that this is a GREAT book for kids to read in school, except for the n-word. I don't see it as trying to deny that is was there, but rather that kids are impressionable. I can't imaging being a black kid while people are reading that to me and around me, and other kids being assigned to read it. It would be one thing if kids understood the it's just a word, but still an offensive one, and one shouldn't be so blase about using it. There are other ways to explain to a kid how those days were and how things went.

This is also quite a bit different than people denying the holocaust: Nobody is claiming the things portrayed in that book didn't happen. Nobody is denying that slavery existed or trying to downplay it. Nobody is trying to say the slaves were treated the same a others, they're just putting out a cleaned-up version of the book. They do it with movies all the time. When they start banning the original version, then I'll start being concerned, VERY concerned.

[Mr. DS]

People who don't seem to notice in a forum what the last person posted if it is a thread that thrives on consecutive posts. 

[Flick James]

The newest edition of Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn will have the "n" word removed from it and replaced with the word "slave." Refer to the following news story:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/01/04/132652272/new-edition-of-huckleberry-finn-will-eliminate-offensive-words

Personally this bothers me a great deal. Is the n-word offensive? Certainly. Has society progressed to a point of rejecting this racial slur? Almost entirely.

However, this does not justify the editing of the vernacular of the time from any work of classic literature. One of the stated justifications is that because the word is so offensive, the book is being read less and less in schools because of it, and so children are not being exposed to what is otherwise a piece of American history. Isn't that exactly why it should NOT be removed? It cannot ignored that such a practice was common in Mark Twain's time and place in history. Removing them seems to suggest that we are trying to deny that they are there.

Now, I am generally opposed to bringing up Hitler and the Nazi's in arguments unless it is absolutely relevant, but in this case it is. This is not that dissimilar from Germans denying that time in their history. You cannot. It happened. It is up to the rational members of society to note that the whole of the German people cannot be held responsible for that time and place, just as the whole of America cannot be held responsible for the oppression of a race of people. However, the existence of these things cannot go unacknowledged by a society of reason, and so the removal of an offensive word from a literary classic that is also a reflection of the attitudes of the time is unacceptable.

I am not trying to open up a nasty debate, but this was something that got under my skin, and about which I felt sufficiently passionate to relate.

I see your point, but I also see theirs. It's not like they're burning all the old editions, they'll still be around. One issue is that this is a GREAT book for kids to read in school, except for the n-word. I don't see it as trying to deny that is was there, but rather that kids are impressionable. I can't imaging being a black kid while people are reading that to me and around me, and other kids being assigned to read it. It would be one thing if kids understood the it's just a word, but still an offensive one, and one shouldn't be so blase about using it. There are other ways to explain to a kid how those days were and how things went.

This is also quite a bit different than people denying the holocaust: Nobody is claiming the things portrayed in that book didn't happen. Nobody is denying that slavery existed or trying to downplay it. Nobody is trying to say the slaves were treated the same a others, they're just putting out a cleaned-up version of the book. They do it with movies all the time. When they start banning the original version, then I'll start being concerned, VERY concerned.

I completely understand that, but here's how you handle it: explain history to them. Kids being impressionable is all the more reason not to remove it. There are people in the world, myself included, who learned that I shouldn't use the word from that book. I sure hope we're not doing this for the sake of the teachers who don't want to have to deal with it. If that's the case, then buck up teachers, that's your job, and sometimes it's not comfortable.

And the buzz around Internet so far has suggested that a large majority of people don't agree with the removal. This is just another example the Ivory Tower elite judging that a thing is offensive and should be removed from society but the people know better and realize that they can make up their own minds.

That's my take, anyway. Part of it is reason and part of it is a passionate knee-jerk reaction to censorship. I'll be the first to admit it.

[Olivia Bauer]

I hate HATE HATE this!!

People with large trucks that like to park in TWO spots! Last time somebody did that to me I used the back of truck as a garbage bin. If I EVER see another damn truck parked like that again as long as I live I'M GOING POP IT'S [EXPLATIVE] TIRES!!

[Flick James]

I hate HATE HATE this!!

People with large trucks that like to park in TWO spots! Last time somebody did that to me I used the back of truck as a garbage bin. If I EVER see another damn truck parked like that again as long as I live I'M GOING POP IT'S [EXPLATIVE] TIRES!!

Heh heh. Well, you know, there is this thing called common courtesy. Some people have it, and some don't. I'm going out on a limb and saying that people that purchase those massive trucks are less likely to possess common courtesy than those that don't. Just a hunch.

Personally, if I owned a large truck or SUV that was difficult to fit into a standard parking space, I'm not going to make that the rest of the world's problem. It was a decision I made. I would park on the far side of the lot to give the smaller vehicles first dibs on the closer spots. Then again, I'm not opposed to exercise and don't mind walking an extra 80 feet to get inside Target. Most people are lazier than I.

[AndyC]

I completely understand that, but here's how you handle it: explain history to them. Kids being impressionable is all the more reason not to remove it. There are people in the world, myself included, who learned that I shouldn't use the word from that book. I sure hope we're not doing this for the sake of the teachers who don't want to have to deal with it. If that's the case, then buck up teachers, that's your job, and sometimes it's not comfortable.

And the buzz around Internet so far has suggested that a large majority of people don't agree with the removal. This is just another example the Ivory Tower elite judging that a thing is offensive and should be removed from society but the people know better and realize that they can make up their own minds.

That's my take, anyway. Part of it is reason and part of it is a passionate knee-jerk reaction to censorship. I'll be the first to admit it.

Good point. It's a perfect opportunity for an in-class discussion, not just on history or race relations, but on more general themes of respect for others, bullying, etc. And it is a fine example of the way society's rules evolve. What was an acceptable term in Mark Twain's time evolved into an insult and finally became even more taboo than the four-letter words. There are so many lessons that could be learned if teachers were to actually embrace the N word's presence in the book, and use its controversial nature for some engaging lessons.

[Umaril The Unfeathered]

Obese people who blubber over their weight on the Biggest Loser.  Eating four or five hamburgers at lunch will have it's consequences eventually.  I'm unaware where the shock comes in.

No more than those who over-indulge in drugs and alcohol (and then cry that noone tried to stop them) will befall the same consequences. As far as that goes, I too am unaware of where the shock comes in..

[Olivia Bauer]

I also hate modern comedy films. Basically anything with Seth Rogan. Talking about boobs, booze, STDs, genitals, and sex for an hour and a half is in no way entertaining. The people who make that garbage and people who watch it are the reason our society is degenerating into morons that don't know how to spell. When I think of that kind of degenerate it makes me consider genoside a good idea.

I also can't stand red-necks. They're just as bad.

[The Gravekeeper]

I also hate modern comedy films. Basically anything with Seth Rogan. Talking about boobs, booze, STDs, genitals, and sex for an hour and a half is in no way entertaining. The people who make that garbage and people who watch it are the reason our society is degenerating into morons that don't know how to spell. When I think of that kind of degenerate it makes me consider genoside a good idea.

Now, now, let's not blame the comedies themselves, but rather the people who keep paying time and time again to see them. After all, studios stop making things that don't make money.

Also, it's "genocide" with a "c."