# Censorship in Huck Finn **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 6, 2000, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/censorship-in-huck-finn/17954 "2000-04-06T07:09:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2000, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/censorship-in-huck-finn/17954/41 "2000-04-13T03:00:00Z")
Bucky: > [@](#): > > 1. to teach how the English language is used, > 2) to teach how the English language should be used (especially in expressing thoughts, ideas, > feelings, etc. with others), > 3) to teach how individual students can use the English language (as readers, writers, speakers, > and even as listeners) more effectively, > 4) Other. This is a fairly rigid interpretation. It seems to we that if this were true at least some high school English departments in this country would substitute rhetoric books for literature books; I have never heard of a school that did. Part of the role of an English teacher, traditionally, has been to expose children to high culture-literature. Part of that exposure includes exposure to controversial, contentious ideas that are at play in society. The reason this is always bundled with English courses and learning to write is that, ideally, it gives children something to communicate while they are practicing the English language. At the same time, they develop some understanding of the various cultural forces that have brought us to the present time. I do not think that an English teacher that produces students who can write a perfect memo, résumé, or thank-you note but who have neither a sense of our world’s rich literary tradition nor the ability to think critically about controversial issues has done his job. Do you? > [@](#): > > If it is okay for you to focus on something that is not the primary focus of the job, why not for > everyone? Why could I not then use my history classes to teach that women are inferior or that > slavery was good? I sure as hell hope you mention in your history classes that slavery was **bad**. And that women were denied rights for most of our nation’s history, and that is it good that we have transcended it. The fact is, part of the job of a teacher is to pass down ideologies. As public school teachers, employed by the state, we are expected to pass down ideologies generally accepted by the state and the majority of people. We are expected to stay clear of issues where there is no clear consensus among the people and the state as to the “right” answer (e.g. abortion). I think the idea that “racism is bad and ultimately destructive for everyone involved” is one both society and the state have endorsed. I am really confused by your position, here: do you think that teachers, liberal arts teachers, should avoid controversial issues or embrace them? Before you seemed to be calling me out for wanting to avoid overly-contentious racial views. Now you seem to be calling me out for wanting to bring them up. > [@](#): > > Huck Finn is about racism, but it is about much more than that. However, racism is the most prominent theme in the book, especially to modern readers. To teach the book and refuse to discuss race would make my students think I was either an idiot or a coward. Or, worse, that contentious issues shouldn’t be discussed, and that “real” literature is about gentle subjects, romance novels and pastoral poems. > [@](#): > > But an English class should not have racism as its primary focus. Not a whole class, surely, but I think a unit based on racism and its effects on society and the way we see the world would be a very good springboard for all types of discussion, critical analysis, and writing. Just for the record, my “what else is there?” line was a joke. There are many themes that one can use to approach literature. I think the issue of racism is a good one to use with youth, though, because it is something they are interested in, something very relevant to their day to day lives. > [@](#): > > Did you read my post, discussing that pro-censorship folks want to ban almost ALL 19th > Century literature because failure to include non-white characters means that they are racist books? Would you agree with them? Of course I don’t agree with such clap-trap, even if you mean ban in the loosest sense of “ruled by school-boards as inappropriate to teach”, which is not really censorship. An American Lit class without Hawthorne or Poe would be inadequate. But I do think that the trend towards including more minority texts is a good one-I think that texts such as _Incidents in the Life or a Slave Girl_ or Mary Rowlandson’s “Narrative” do nothing but add to our cirriculum. Of course every book does not have to be about race, but you are sticking your head in the sand if you think that an American Lit class where **none** of the books were about race would be an accurate portrayal of the American literary tradition. I am going out of town tomorrow morning for my sister’s wedding. I may or may not have access to a computer until Tuesday: God forbid Bored2001 should think I am quiting! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bored2001](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e47774/32.png) [@Bored2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bored2001)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2000, 8:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/censorship-in-huck-finn/17954/42 "2000-04-13T08:22:00Z")
~Johnny angel Spoken like a true economist. But speaking of opportunity cost. What about the vast future compared to the few generations of the present? For the people of the present I still believe that by the time Huck Finn is taught in High school the students should be able to keep an open mind to the subject. If they do not it is usually out of their ignorance. That is a tragedy, but one they set forth for themselves. ~Manda Jo > [@](#): > > This is a good argument, but it still does not address the problem of Jim’s character. I concede that Jim doesn’t ever really transcend the stereotype of a child. But do you concede that Huck and Jim are the moral superiors of every other character in the book? They both live outside of the sphere of influence of society and thus show their individual morals instead of society’s mores. At the very least Huck and Jim may not be men by action, but in mind they are far more enlightened then even the most respectable characters of society. > [@](#): > > I feel that if I begin a discussion on racism with Huck Finn, where students have strong pre-existing opinions that are based on little beyond their idea of whether or not the book “should” be racist, I will get nowhere. If I start with a neutral text I can get them to start thinking and questioning, and from there they will be better able to form reasoned opinions about Huck Finn when and if they read it. True, but wouldn’t that neutral text be offered for learning before Huck Finn is introduced to them? Personally I read Huck Finn as a Junior in High school. > [@](#): > > And I prefer something that works. Huck Finn gets people’s blood boiling, and they don’t reason or argue, they rant. We’re not ranting. But I see your point. The igorance of society gotta hate it. > [@](#): > > “stick up for your race”, so that people will be free to think. I’m Asain. Who am I sticking up for? =) Once again I see your point. Damn ignorant people. > [@](#): > > God forbid Bored2001 should think I am quiting! 🙂 Hey come back soon! you’re fun =) ~Ben > [@](#): > > Yes, but how many of your friends read _Naked Lunch_ in 2nd grade? If that was a joke I didn’t get it =) ~Bucky Gotta agree with Manda here. An English(Why the hell are they called that?) teacher’s job is far more then teaching grammer. In fact I believe you have you list backwards–at least for higher end classes. It should be 1. Other 2. Teach individualism in language 3. Teach conformity in language 4. Teach how it is used. I have arranged them like this because they are in order of difficulty. Literature is definitly the hardest thing an English teacher has in their cirriculum while all the other’s are should be inherent by the time the student reaches High School. ~Bored2001 ---
**Author:** ![Bucky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Bucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bucky)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2000, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/censorship-in-huck-finn/17954/43 "2000-04-14T14:43:00Z")
Literature is contained within teachig how language is used and how it should be used–I was unclear on that. I propose that we take a break for a day or two and start a new thread (I’m out of town for awhile, too). Still, for the record, I think that to see Huck as mostly about race is very short-sighted. Also, if teaching idealogy becomes supreme and overt, then we give license to teaching of ALL idealogies, including such views as that slavery was not bad and that women should be oppressed. It is not my job to decide what is right and worng for my students. It’s not anyone’s job. Back again with a new thread next week? Buckums [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/censorship-in-huck-finn/17954.md?page=2)