They are removing “nigger” and “injun” from a new version of the book and replacing it with the word “slave”.
I think it is a stupid idea. I don’t like racial slurs and never use them myself, but if it is in the book, it’s in the book. I would have zero problem reading any book that contains offensive language, especially if it was something to make the book more realistic to the language of the day(or the culture being described).
I mean, it seems to me that this is an indication that people are not only offended by the slurs, but are afraid to even see them in print. It gives power to the slurs to eliminate them from a book like this.
Apparently this edition is designed for use in high school class rooms. Still a terrible idea. Removing that word undermines the whole intent of the book.
I don’t think they are ruining the work. it’s still a beautiful piece of literature even with those few words changed.
However, it’s ridiculous and unnecessary. It does remove some of the character of the main character and gives a Disneyfied view of life in that place and time. Huck used those words because everyone he knew used them. It’s a great way to introduce the topic of slavery and discrimination to young children.
Thomas Bowdlertried to do the same thing to Shakespeare more than 200 years ago. Shakespeare survived.
I spent a semester with a Middle English edition of Canterbury Tales. If I could survive Chaucer’s writing with both my morals and sanity intact, today’s youth can survive Twain.
“Is it the expurgated version? The one without the nigger- I don’t like them, they wet their raft.”
What stupidity. I can understand toning it down for VERY young readers (junior high and younger) but even then I’d want the students to know they’re not reading the real Huckleberry Finn but an adaptation. Better yet would be to let them read an excerpt- AoHF was never meant to be a children’s book. As far as cleaning up the language, if they just have to they should still know that “slave” was never synonymous with “black” even, let alone “nigger”. Negro would work better, or Black. (Or Canadian perhaps.)
For one thing slaves could never vote. Pap’s rant about how there’s a “slave” with a law degree who wears a white shirt and votes would be absolutely impossible.
So now that Injun Joe is Native American Joe I wonder if he’s still going to be a murderous alcoholic. Maybe he’s going to be a Tyler Durden alter ego of Tom Sawyer (who you have no problems imagining ultimately becoming a serial killer so it’s not that out of line).
I’m not sure it’s fear as opposed to offense. We already knew Huck Finn was one of the most frequently banned and challenged books in the country. From that standpoint I guess this isn’t so surprising. But it’s a head-slapper alright.
I don’t think it gives power to the slurs. They’re words. What it does is twofold: it allows people to pretend that these attitudes aren’t really out there, and it sanitizes history. Oh yes, and it allows overly sensitive people to rewrite literature, which is also a bad idea.
Ridiculous. It’s not as if the words and sentiments in Huckleberry Finn are incidental, awkward vestiges from an embarrassing past (I wouldn’t mind if Mickey Rooney’s entire part were cut from Breakfast at Tiffany’s). The damned book is *about *slavery, racism, and the very history and attitudes that made nigger a dirty word in the first place! Take the word away from its original context enough and you’ll get idiots wondering what the big deal was in the first place. Slavery’s over, quit bellyachin’!
Yes, I know some stupid kids (and even teachers) use the book like it’s a free pass to slur and make any ethnic minorities in the class, if there are any, feel awkward. But they’ll find these words and ways to bully anyway. Better to use it to prompt discussion than ignore the problem completely. (And I know that is easier said than done, as any teachers weighing in will tell me.)
Doesn’t the book, in a way, depict a very negative image of White Southerners? I mean, don’t they come off far worse than any description of Black people or Indians?
The use of that language is part of the point. Twain didn’t use it to offend – he used the word “nigger” because it was the language that was used and because this is a story about (among other things) how a boy raised in a racist culture, steeped in it since birth, learns on his own to value Jim as a human being.
When I was living in Salt Lake City, Pioneer Memorial Theater* put on a production of Amadeus. But they cleaned it up!! They took out all of Mozart’s vulgarisms and replaced them with weak euphemisms. But the point of the play was that Salieri saw Mozart as a vulgar, undesereving boor who didn’t deserve the Great Talent God had lavished on him, and so waged war on God through Mozart. This becomes pretty irrelevant if Mozart isn’t a vulgar boor. Then Salieri just comes off as whiny. I was appalled at PMT. If someone is similarly wimping out over Huckleberry Finn, then I’m annoyed at them, too.
and they didn’t have to. PMT is associated with the University of Utah, a state school, and presumably made up of grownups. It’s not overseen in any way by the LDS church, which tends to do things like this.
Apparently some people have no concept of “historical context”. Jesus.
I will admit that when we read the book in 11th grade, and our teacher would read certain parts out loud, SHE used the word “slave” rather than “nigger”. But in that case, it could have been that she herself was uncomfortable saying it out loud. (Can’t say I blame her)
Before we even read the book, she even mentioned that we’d be reading the n-word, and we’d see it A LOT. And it would offend us. But, that we had to consider the time period in which the book was set.
And of course, you explain:
At the time when Huck was around, it WASN’T considered “reprehensible language”. The book is set in what, the 1840s? And Huck is poor, illiterate (I think), and basically what you’d term “white trash.” Naturally he IS the exact type of child who would use “such language”.
But for Gribben, that’s too hard to do. Asshole. (As one of the comments alluded to, god help us if this jackass gets ahold of To Kill a Mockingbird!)
And to add insult to injury, they’re going to charge $25 for the thing!
So he’s changing “nigger” to “slave”, but what is he changing “Injun” to? “Slave Joe” makes no sense whatsoever…“Native American Joe” is even more stupid…
What makes them think words they are using today won’t be considered unacceptable tomorrow? Perhaps “slave” will be changed to “unremunerated employee.” Eventually the book will be unrecognizable. This is beyond stupid.
Your comment reminded me of Carlin’s commentary on how Americans use euphemisms more and more while tracing the change from shell shock to post-traumatic stress disorder. (Link is to text, not video.)
As for Huck Finn, Twain didn’t write it as a children’s book, and this insistence on cleaning it up to make it safe for children is idiotic. There are an awful lot of idiots out there, though.