Poll: Mark Twain censored. New copies of Huckleberry Finn to replace usage of the 'n-word'

[Jesus Phish]

Okay, I'll play devil's advocate.

First of all, the scholar seems to think that the book is not being read as much as it could be, because of this offensive language. Perhaps he doesn't like censoring the book, but his reasoning seems to be that it is better if more people read the censored version, than it would be if the book remains unchanged but less people read it. You can obviously disagree with those priorities, but I think I can at least see where he's coming from.

Also, the meaning of words changes throughout time. Now, I'm not from the US, so my knowledge of American history and language is shaky at best, but what if the n-word was viewed differently when Twain wrote the book. What if the old meaning of "******" (or the meaning used in the book) is much closer to the current word "slave" than it is to the current word "******" (I'm not saying it is, but "what if")? Then perhaps changing it will actually help people to better understand what Twain was trying to say.

I see where the scholar is coming from too, but I disagree with him that the idea of people reading the censored version being better than not reading it. Twains use of the word ****** is important. It sets the tone of the time period. The use of it with absolute casualness of it by the characters in the book. It sets a big comparison between now and then.

Schools shouldn't shy away from this book because of its contents, but rather should be using it to teach school children history and how we've changed. To that guy who said his teacher made his class say ****** every single time they came to read it, that teacher had the right idea.

I hope that when this does come out, it comes with a giant sticker over the front saying "New Edit Edition" and a foreword explaining how they decided slave is a more appropriate word for black people.

I'd actually like to see a black persons reaction to this. Any on here able to tell me, which is more offensive to you, ****** or slave?

 

[Bat Vader]

In my opinion I think censoring the book Huckleberry Finn kind of destroys it a bit. I also think that it is a terrible insult to Mark Twain.

 

[OrdinaryGuy]

This is the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long time. If schools don't want kids to read it because of the language, then they should ban it from the curriculum. But no one has the right to censor someone else's work, let alone someone like Mark Twain. The book was written over a hundred years ago, that was the language they used back then. Changing it now is like putting a band-aid over a bullet wound.

When I read this book in high school, I didn't know anyone who was offended by the language. Because everyone was smart enough to understand that it's literature and that's the way it was written. I get the feeling the "scholars" who came up with the decision actually know nothing about history or how it works. Censoring history is exactly what dooms someone to repeat it.

 

[Captain Pirate]

It's only offensive because people are too sensitive nowadays.
It was how they spoke. It's not like we're changing every book published out of America and England into the national language.

This.
We're way too fucking sensitive.

I've noticed it's always terms or anything derogatory to black people that get ommitted, I'd like to see a white guy taking the piss out of all the sensitive "OMGDUN BE RACIST TO AFRICAN AMERICANS" going along and sueing random things for having the term "White" or "Vanilla" or "Honkey" in anything.

I'm just saying that it would be a hilarious pisstake, of course I'm not serious.
Hey, me and my black friend always have a little racist banter.
I call him "Captain Black Sparrow", or "Count Blackula", and he calls me "Polar bear".
Neither of us give a shit; it's just a bit of fun.

 

[Player Two]

It's fucking history. That's what things were like, get over it. Are we going to have to start censoring anything from the past that we feel uncomfortable with? Did Hitler just 'invite' the Jews to his 'summer camp' so he could order a mass 'showering'? Am I going to go to a historical art gallery and find little black squares over all the pictured ladies' areas? What about Shakespeare's plays? Brave New World? 1984? Oh, wouldn't it be rich, richly ironic, to have 1984 censored by a governmental department.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Why do people not understand this? Why must you stick your interfering noses into every crevice of society, looking for things to change to your will? I'm not an anarchist, but I have lost almost all my faith my government. It seems it's all they can do to make sure my garbage is collected every Monday evening.

 

[butteforce]

Censoring history is exactly what dooms someone to repeat it.

I hate that line. Knowledge of history in no way precludes you from doing stupid shit. And I hardly think that in this case we're going to see a sudden upswing in casual racism as a result of censoring a book.

I'm extraordinarily curious about what they'll be changing "injun" to that will wind up being more intellectually offensive and also less descriptive. Was that even all that offensive? You know, any more so than calling them Indians when they weren't from India? I think I'm going to become a hip hop superstar and drop a bunch of I-words.

 

[teebeeohh]

this once again proves that we don't need government censoring, we do this ourself to please the political correct people and those who we want to buy our stuff

 

[Azure-Supernova]

It's only offensive because people are too sensitive nowadays.

I have to stress this guys point greatly. It seems to get worse as society 'advances'. Have we really become so sensitive a race that we have to censor out the language from a time period because we've suddenly become so ignorant to the concept of 'context'?

What's worse is that the more people try to prevent the use of a word, the more offensive it gets. By censoring the word out of the book I'm reading it as 'You should find this word offensive'. Today I can understand why we're hesitant to use the word; it is derogatory and has been used as a derogatory word for a while. But this kind of attitude is extending to other, previously acceptable words in the English language. I actually hear people side stepping words I never knew were offensive.

Censoring the 'N-word' out of Huckleberry Finn might not be the best example the over sensitivity of people today; but it's certainly an example of ignorance to context and through that a display that as a race we're taking some steps backwards.

 

[DaggerOfCompassion]

It's not a racist book. I hate how any racial slur is considered horrible even if it's not used in a racist context. I think it's more racist often that our society can't get past the use of this word. At this point "racist" is one of my least favorite words, simply because it's used so incorrectly so often.
EDIT: Funnily enough the reason these things are censored are so very often just politicians wanting to be liked, instead of genuinely offended minorities.

 

[DaggerOfCompassion]

It's fucking history. That's what things were like, get over it. Are we going to have to start censoring anything from the past that we feel uncomfortable with? Did Hitler just 'invite' the Jews to his 'summer camp' so he could order a mass 'showering'? Am I going to go to a historical art gallery and find little black squares over all the pictured ladies' areas? What about Shakespeare's plays? Brave New World? 1984? Oh, wouldn't it be rich, richly ironic, to have 1984 censored by a governmental department.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Why do people not understand this? Why must you stick your interfering noses into every crevice of society, looking for things to change to your will? I'm not an anarchist, but I have lost almost all my faith my government. It seems it's all they can do to make sure my garbage is collected every Monday evening.

Well, somebody somewhere may be upset or offended by something! So censor it all!

 

[Mrrrgggrlllrrrg]

"Two hurtful epithets"

Words are only hurtful if you think it's hurtful. It's embarrassing that "******" makes people so uneasy nowadays.

 

[Jamash]

It does seem a bit stupid, since calling some from Niger a Slav changes their entire ethnicity.

If you're going to censor the word "******" one piece of art, then surely it must also be censored in every other piece or art too? I think they should start in the the present and work their way backwards... although if you called the group N.W.O. "Slaves With Attitude" I think they might be a bit offended, and if you changed the film Boss ****** to Boss Slave it would be confusing.

To be honest, it's a bit late to change the word now and replacing "******" with "slave" seems to robs Blacks of their empowerment... it's taken them a long time to be able to use the word "******" as a reference to themselves without it having any negative connotations, so to suddenly say you can't call yourself "niggers", you'll have to call yourself "slaves" instead seems a bit backwards.

Incidentally, is the film The Dambusters censored in America?

 

[Jesus Phish]

This is the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long time. If schools don't want kids to read it because of the language, then they should ban it from the curriculum.

The scholars arguement is that it has been dropped from school curriculums and that he hopes this new edited version will get it brought back in. I don't agree with him on this idea, but thats were its all coming from.

 

[LaughingAtlas]

There was an afterschool special on this very subject, on this very book.

Spoiler: Here's how it ends

Teacher: "I once read a book in which a man's wife is raped and murdered. When he found her, he mutilated the body himself to make the attackers look even worse and anger the local population when he told them about it." (I'm pretty sure the rapists where all killed as a result)
Self-righteous fool: "We must ban this sick filth!"
Teacher:"It was in the bible..."
*crowd goes quiet*

Then again, if people are people are stupid/insane/disingenuous enough to think censorship is honestly fine, I wouldn't put it past them to say "No, no, Jesus was never nailed to a board, they talked out their problems until Jesus died of leprosy as a result of being around those filthy undesirables. Do you want to be an undesirable?"
(Maybe exaggerating a wee bit, but that's the impression I get)

 

[DTWolfwood]

further proof that nothing is sacred in this damn country. Mark Twain is rolling over in his grave.

 

[Labyrinth]

Here's the thing. People are up in arms about this being desecration and censorship, but there's a much better argument, and one more fundamentally empathetic to English Lit teachers available. It interrupts the textual integrity, and the integrity of the story as a study of its social context. One does not take all the insinuations of Jews being a blight to humanity out of Mein Kampf and still expect it to be as integral a study into a most disturbed and unpleasant, yet remarkably potent political mind.

For the same reason studies of genocide, institutionalised discrimination, war and tragedy are not removed from history courses. These are not portrayed or studied to hold them up as ideals, nor should the racism in the context of Twain be. They are studied to teach students about such issues so that they can avoid them in future.

 

[hopeneverdies]

Someone obviously missed the lesson on satire/social commentary. He writes that word because he's satirizing the people of the South and their views on African Americans. Slave just doesn't have the same effect and doesn't accurately describe their attitudes. Of course, that's not to say Huck Finn was accurate. It was actually very toned down. But my point still stands.

 

[Retardinator]

It's only one publisher, though.

So it's ok? What if other publishers try and do this? Where is the threshold when it stops being ok? What if every publisher suddenly decides to do this?

I'll tell you where the threshold is. It's at zero. Why? Because right now if they censor the book it means that it's possible to do. If they don't, it serves as an example of 'This cannot be done.' And it's a goddamn righteous example of not being able to muffle one's free speech. Even if the one in question is under six feet of dirt.
What this also does is diminish the artistic value. I could rant on but I gotta go play some Left 4 Dead...

 

[Jonluw]

I am against censoring; but the situation certainly is less dire when they are doing it only in order to get schools to accept the books back into the curriculum.
The schools that removed the books from the curriculum in the first place are the real douchebags here. Just because a book contains the word '******' doesn't mean it is harmful.

 

[Arawn.Chernobog]

******

I just wrote that

Did anyone die?

No?

Then it's a stupid thing to censor in the first place, get over it people there are no "Magic Words"