Huck Finn publisher removes some offensive language - Thoughts?

Cafe Society
21

I despise censorship in any form. Naturally, therefore, I think this is an excellent idea. Why? Because the net result of this book entering the market will be less censorship.

Right now, Huckleberry Finn is one of the most censored books in the US. They don’t censor it by drawing black lines over the pages, they censor it by removing it completely from schools. Sure, it’s probably still in the library somewhere, and if not, it’s available in the bookstore or online or at the public library, but the unexpurgated edition is still available in all those places, too. But removing an otherwise worthwhile book from school curricula because of one word does a serious disservice to students. And don’t forget that whatever book is chosen as a substitute will be chosen by the same people who are afraid of Huck Finn.

That’s already been done. Professor Gribben can’t undo that. He can’t stop the idiots of the world’s school boards from deciding that high school students (or more likely–or at least more accurately–their parents) are too immature to see the word “nigger” used in an appropriate context without having seizures.

What he can do, or at least attempt, is to get 99% of the book uncensored. I like that idea, because I hate censorship.

Now I think any teacher who would use this book without telling the class about the changes is a terrible teacher, but I doubt many teachers are that clueless. Even if they are, the word will get out among the students, surely. (Maybe when a crazy parent gets upset that the class is reading that “racist” book, or when a sane one is upset that they aren’t really reading it.) And students that want the original text will have easy access to it. Students who don’t will still know what the original language said.

And maybe, just having this book available will make the original more available, too. Maybe students who wouldn’t otherwise have been exposed to the book at all will be allowed to pick which version to purchase for class. Maybe a teacher who would have been afraid to mention “Huckleberry Finn” to her principal will ask for it now that this is available as a “back up” if he treats her like she’s crazy. Maybe the PTA will meet to discuss adding this version to the curricula and decide that if the book is worth reading, it’s worth reading in the original version after all. Maybe one copy of this book can be kept in each school to give to the one student whose parent is obnoxious enough to actually complain, while all the rest read the real version.

There are lots of situations where the existence of this book results in better things for students. There are only a few where it would make things worse (a school that had used and would have kept using the original switching to this, for example). I think those situations will be rare.

22

Ok, here’s my plan. Make Injun Joe a Mayan. Mayan Joe, a crazed sun god worshiper condemned to wander in black caverns hidden from the sun for all his days. So dramatic!

Nigger Jim? Make him Black Irish! Give him a nice brogue, people can say “We don’t want the Irish!” to show the prejudice against him, and Black sounds so much less prejudicial than “nigger.”

Finally, lets throw in some dinosaurs! Makes for more excitement and is more likely to lead to a movie deal. I think we’ve got something really dynamic going here, a real 21st century update of a tired old work. Let’s do lunch!

23

We feel dinosaur, or “terrible lizard,” carries a negative connotation. In the future, please call them Reptilian Americans.

24

The Times says he’s going to be Indian Joe. Injun is offensive and Indian isn’t.

25

No, he doesn’t. Leaving aside the inanity of trying to predict what Twain was going for, we don’t really attempt to square modern sensibilities with past cultural zeitgeists. We read the Iliad and attempt to understand the setting on its own merits, not give the greeks firearms. If a book is too political to teach as is, then leave it for a setting that will more adroitly handle the challenges. But this is akin to kneecapping a runner and saying they’re just as effective of an athlete. The terms used are necessary for the integrity of the piece and we do everyone a disservice by trying to get around that.

26

Wallbanging.

Did they remove all the contractions as well? What about the use of “Mars” to mean “Master”–which is much more peculiar than “Injun”?

27

It’s a good start. Now, let’s fix Haulden Caulfield’s attitude, the whole anti-government slant in 1984, and that adultery mess in Gatsby.

28

But what about the zeppelins! If we have dinosaurs, we have to have zeppelins.

29

My initial reaction to the idea of “cleaning up” a great work of art in order to be less offensive is outrage. This is a rare case where I’m of the dissenting opinion. I wouldn’t have been, except that, when the issue was in the news a few years ago a journalist was covering it a predominantly black school and he interviewed many of the kids about it. Many of them talked about how they feel when they’re reading excerpts together as a class and how embarrassed they always feel whenever one of them had to read the word “nigger” out loud. I felt for them.

Regardless of how well the teacher can explain the reason and larger meaning of the work, even if the kids can truly embrace this at some level, I can understand how distracting that might be for 13 and 14 year olds.

As long as each individual school has the choice of which version to use (and as long as this version is never used at the college level) I’m OK with it.

30

While we’re at 1984 we should work on some of the language. “Double-plus-ungood”, indeed!

31

I think there can be works which are in some way to intense for adolescents to be expected to read and understand for literary value. If Huckleberry Finn is one of those books, then let people read it in college instead of High School. It’s pointless to change the book to make it readable in High School–they’re not reading the actual book in that case, so there’s no reason for them to be reading it at all.

32

… Oh and Lolita? We need multiple versions of that one - each school district will use the version that makes her one month older than the local Age of Consent ('cos banging minors is baaaaaaad!!!)

33

I just re-read this book about six weeks ago. I’d read it in high school, but this was the first time I’d read it as an adult. My opinion is that while this book has a child narrator, this isn’t a book for kids, it was never meant to be a book for kids, and that changing the original text is wrong. While nigger is now considered a grave insult, it wasn’t high praise back in the day, either. Nigger was used as a derogatory term, and it wasn’t a polite term.

34

We didn’t do Huckleberry Finn in school, but we did do a book with some language in eighth grade, and we had to get permission from the parents. One kid couldn’t get permission, and was made to read a different book.

In that light, I have no problem with the censorship–well other than that the replacement makes no sense. I’d actually just put a black bar over it, myself.

35

Also, PTSD covers a lot more than shell shock. It’s not a euphemism, it’s more accurate nomenclature.

36

Oh, no – I loved SLC, and the people there. I always found it annoying, though, that the SLC culture was so “family friendly” that it frequently tried to interfere with my being a grown-up. That’s the reason behind the byzantine liquor laws, the censoring of PBS on the church-run (but not on the state-run) PBS channel, the repeated efforts to shut down “adult” businesses on spurious grounds, and the absurd bowdlerizing of plays at Pioneer Memorial Theater.

37

I put this in Great Debates because it’s about censorship, not the work itself.

Huck Finn Gets Some Changes, from Yahoo! News.

Is this the same as editing The Godfather for television? I’m not sure. Then again, I don’t really have an issue with “harsh” language to begin with and I think deciding that a child shouldn’t read Huckleberry Finn because it uses the words “nigger” and “injun” is ridiculous. I’m reminded of the end of Thank You For Smoking, where Macy’s character has edited classic films to replace cigarettes with things like coffee mugs and candy canes.

“But, in essence, aren’t you changing history?”
“No, I think we’re… improving history.”

38

It’s almost a cliche when an actress says, “I’ll do nudity, but only when it’s artistically necessary to the film’s integrity.”

But like most cliches, it started with a kernel of truth: there ARE times when nudity is essential to the integrity of the story, and when its lack is jarring. We understand the convention on TV, but even so we often joke about the “L-shaped sheets” that TV characters seem to buy, exposing the man’s chest when a couple is in bed but strategically covering the woman’s. A choice like that is necessary for television, but it jars the viewer a bit; it vitiates the suspension of disbelief; it muddies an otherwise perspicuous visual message.

So, too, with decisions like this. Twain’s use of the offensive words was absolutely critical to his message.

39

Damn it. Already a thread about this.

:smack:

40

I keep thinking of that scene from Family Guy.

Jim: That’s our word. You can’t use it.

Huck Finn: I apologize. Would you please hand me that oar, N Word Jim?

The version of Huck Finn I read in high school included the controversial word. When the instructor read passages from it she did not say Nigger Jim but would pause before saying Jim. When I was in college we read an American play (forget which one) about the relationship between an angry Mulatto man and his white racist father. When we read the play in class he took the part of the Colonel and didn’t shy away from racist words. <sigh> I guess college is different.

I don’t really think editing movies for television is the same as having a a program with the L shaped bedsheets. I’m certainly no film buff but I refuse to watch most movies on television because I know they’ll be edited. Godfather on AMC is an excellent example of a movie I refused to watch for a long time because I knew they edited movies.

Odesio