Huck Finn and the N Word

A new edition of Huckleberry Finn has been published that replaces the word nigger with the word slave.

The book would be for use in schools. The reason given is that Huck has often been banned and some teachers find it difficult to teach with the word there. Take it out and more people will be introduced to maybe the most famous book in American Literature.

On the other hand, Twain hated slavery and racism and was using the word to make a point that would be lost if the word were changed.

What I find interesting is that in most of the articles/editorials that criticize this censorship, the writers themselves use N-word instead of nigger in effect censoring themselves while criticizing the censorship. One example from the Wall Street Journal.

blogs.wsj.com/ideas-market/2011/ … rrectness/

Now for sure there are words that should not be used in certain situations. But is repeating a word wrong? Is reading what somebody else said wrong? if i were writing a novel with a neo-Nazi character and I wanted to make him realistic, would it be wrong to have him say “nigger.”

I know it is uncomfortable to hear some words or see those words in print. But sometimes good literature is good because it makes us uncomfortable.

My initial reaction is to leave the book alone. Thoughts.

Words are only as powerful as you make them. Nigger is just a word and not one I use in my vocabualary but I don’t see the need for censorship. Mind you I also don’t think hate speech should be a crime. Inciting violence yes but hateful speech absolutely not.

That is a difficult dilemma. On one hand, the artistic integrity of the text is something that should be maintained. On the other, if students are not exposed to the book because of one word, then they are missing great stories by a great writer.

I would tend to agree to the use of the word “slave”. Books are adapted all the times for younger audiences. Some stories are even turned into comic books or graphic novels. Some are simplified using less complicated vocabulary (or more modern writing).
If the book is a classic (like in this case) then nothing prevents a young reader to revisit it later in life and read the original text. As an example, as a kid, I remember reading a graphic novel version of “'Les Misérables”. I liked it a lot then and later, as a young adult, I read the novel precisely because I remembered enjoying it as a comic book version.

Dave Foley (These are the Daves I know) has a great point:

twitter.com/#!/DaveSFoley/status … 6314059777

“In new Huckleberry Finn they replace the word nigger with the word slave because slave has no negative connotations.”

I doubt that young students have never heard the word. Revisionist censorship tends to change our understanding of history and for that reason I am against it. Clever teachers could explore past and current usage counselling that compassionate consideration prohibits the use of the word in this day.

I agree with you Big Thumb. I also read “Classic” comics and abridged versions as a kid. I am guessing though that Huckleberry Finn is a novel that would be used with grades 11 or 12. At what age, do we start worrying about how well kids will be able to handle difficult topics?

Story and Structure was the short story book for grade 12s from the late sixties until maybe 10 - 15 years ago. I think the book was first used when I was in grade 11 and a new edition had to be published the next year because horror of horrors a story involving soldiers (Defenders of the Faith by Philip Roth) had one of the characters say “fuck”. Our school kept some of the old editions. Needless to say, when the book was handed out to us, we all scoured through that story to see if we had the one with THE WORD.

I just find the topic very interesting. As Jesus said, words are as powerful as we make them. We have the B-word, the C-word, the F-word and the N-word. Two of these words I would never use. I tame down bitch to bitchy and fuck (it’s even hard to type) is saved for those rarest of occasions like smashing my thumb with a hammer. But what I find difficult to understand is our unwillingness to even speak them when we are repeating something somebody else has said as if these words have magical qualities. “He called her a C-word and she called him a F-word N-word. Then the fight started.”

In my first year Psychology class, the professor brought in an unemployed guy to talk about his life and current situation. He was an ordinary guy, perhaps under educated. Throughout his talk, he used God damn as an adjective. “Went to the god damn unemployment office and they told me I need god damn tools to get the job. How can I get god damn tools before I have a god damn job.” Something like that. At one point a male student interrupted him and asked him if he would watch his language as there were ladies present. The speaker apologized and said he would try.

While the speaker continued the TA walked to the blackboard and wrote in large letters. GOD DAMN and underneath it POVERTY. Then he wrote “Which is the dirty word”? I was blown away.

[quote=“DWhite”]
In my first year Psychology class, the professor brought in an unemployed guy to talk about his life and current situation. He was an ordinary guy, perhaps under educated. Throughout his talk, he used God damn as an adjective. “Went to the god damn unemployment office and they told me I need god damn tools to get the job. How can I get god damn tools before I have a god damn job.” Something like that. At one point a male student interrupted him and asked him if he would watch his language as there were ladies present. The speaker apologized and said he would try.

While the speaker continued the TA walked to the blackboard and wrote in large letters. GOD DAMN and underneath it POVERTY. Then he wrote “Which is the dirty word”? I was blown away.[/quote]

Nice set-up! :wink:

I see what you mean about the famous age question. Some people can handle difficult topics younger than others. Some can never handle it.
I’m putting myself in the shoes of the copyrights owner/publisher of the Huck Finn stories:

-Do we keep the controversial word and risk having education authorities avoid buying the book, condemning the work to oblivion after a few generations?

or

-Do we switch the word and keep the classic alive?

To me, the latter is the better option. A good teacher can always talk about the original work if he/she feels that the class can handle this discussion.

Is this work of literary art in danger of going MIA? And is it absolutely necessary to desecrate art in order to make it more palatable for the younger viewers argument? With once great printing and publishing companies shutting their doors, is there a great demand from the youth to gain access to a more diluted Huck Finn? In the 13th century, the Vatican ordered a leaf be placed over male genitalia in paintings and statues and later had it removed when sensibilities were regained. How about we wait until sensibilities are again regained before we alter Samuel’s work. Why does fear work so well on people?

Should the current drive for political correctness be an acceptable argument in order to alter, censor and degrade literature, art and history?

It is a dangerous precipice to pursue. However forms of McCarthyism seem ever so appealing to the masses.

[quote=“dailymews”]Should the current drive for political correctness be an acceptable argument in order to alter, censor and degrade literature, art and history?
[/quote]

I am of the opinion that the original Huck Finn should not be altered. True art on occasion offends the sensibilities and invokes change.

Mark Twain was a notable satirist and Huck Finn is a fine example of Twain’s abilities within this genre. In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement. Those who want to “tweak” this work for the noble cause of education are failing to understand the basics of Huck Finn, Twain and satire.

The N-Word, Huck Finn, and You
I think this blogger has a good point:

[quote]… isn’t reading the new version with the N-words removed whitewashing the degrading connotation of slavery? Doesn’t it make slavery seem less disgusting, therefore making the book more racist?
[/quote]

I’m all for children versions of literature, but I don’t think that’s what we’re talking about here. There are child friendly versions of Huckleberry Finn. I think there’s even a Wishbone episode.

I agree that the N-word is offensive and that I don’t even want to type the word. I also found the pictures of piles genocide victims offensive and disturbing. But that doesn’t mean that I shouldn’t have been exposed to them in my grade 12 history class.

There are examples of other attempts to whitewash (note the pun) literature. In the 18th century, a Thomas Bowdler set out to create what became a very popular Family Shakespeare version of William Shakespeare’s body of work. Luckily, very few are now aware of this expurgated edition. But what-the-hay, let’s do it again. We are now modern people are we not?

Well, I can see that I’m alone with my opinion so I guess I’m wrong :wink:

I guess art, any art ( and I’m sure there is a very, ahem, clear definition of what art is) should never be altered.

I’m just curious as to what happens when a writer sends a manuscritpt to a publisher. Is it accepted “as is” right away?
I’m under the impression that there is an editing process. Is this considering altering or degrading the literature? Was the author swayed to change his words?

Would Twain use the same word today? Would he be offended by the change?

Well I can’t answer these questions but with a little research I found this article by one of the main Twain experts who seems to have been behind the changes.

Here’s a quote that could help answer the last two questions:

Another interesting passage:

Agree with him or not, this scholar presents strong arguments for his decision.

PC bullshit.
Slavery could not have existed in that era without the evil negative connotations embodied in the common use of the term “nigger”.
Romans had slaves, Greeks had slaves. They were usually recognized as people who were enslaved by circumstance not as some sub-human species destined by a Corn-fed-erate perversion of God to be subjugated.
But look out your window and understand why they don’t want children to know their ancestors thought like that. Why, Charlotte you know they were all just gentlemen standing up for state’s rights.

Huck Finn reflects the era in which it was written. The mores, culture and political correctness of the time are captured and become a part of that history, for better or worse. Subjecting previous works to present mores, culture and political correctness is an interesting academic debate, but not a conduit for defacing the work. Would Twain be able to publish this work today? Well, I don’t know for sure, but does this argument really carry any logic? “What if” statements are at times amusing and entertaining but that’s about it.

I wouldn’t say that you’re alone. There are a lot of people out there who agree with you. I also believe that it did come from a person who has the best intentions.

Debate solved:
Hipster Huckleberry Finn Solves Censorship Debate By Replacing “N-Word” With "H-Word

[quote=“Lemrac”]

I wouldn’t say that you’re alone. There are a lot of people out there who agree with you. I also believe that it did come from a person who has the best intentions.[/quote]

What are you…a global moderator?

I really don’t see why there has to be censorship, I heard the word nigger when I was little and I didn’t melt away to nothing. If we censor everything for our children, how are they supposed to become an adult? It frustrates me that people are offended and scared of a word, any word. To censor the word nigger seems rather stupid to me. After all, children are subjected to far worse, in my opinion, with the video games, and television shows that are on now. The issue is, some parents, teachers, etc, seem to be too lazy to put things into context, and make sure the children in their care, KNOW that calling a black person “nigger” is seen as negative, or that television shows are just that, television shows.

Adults seem to underestimate how much children can take, understand and cope with. Maybe it’s a flaw of age, I have no idea. But nigger, is just a word. If it was so bad, black people wouldn’t refer to themselves as niggers.

We make words such a heavy thing. When really, it’s the actions of people we should be worried about.