BB27 Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 (edited) Huck Finn censored? "Twain scholar Alan Gribben and Alabama's NewSouth Books have replaced the n-word (used 223 times between the two books, according to Gribben) with the word "slave"; changed "Injun" (in reference to "Injun Joe") to "Indian"; and altered "half-breed" to "half-blood."" Well, what do you think? Right? Wrong? I think it is crazy to censor this book. Why don't we censor everything bad out of historic books so that we can act like it didn't happen? Discuss? Edited January 6, 2011 by BB27
Pete Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 The attack on free speech goes on. !@#$ Jim is the most noble character in Huck Finn and the book is anti slavery. It is an indicator of the ignorance in America at that time. I wish people would not get their panties in a bunch over minutia and focus on the importance of that book and true themes presented. The pussification of America continues
Beerball Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 Huck Finn censored? Well, what do you think? Right? Wrong? I think it is crazy to censor this book. This classic was written in a different time and the use of the "n" word would only distort the historical significance of it. Why don't we censor everything bad out of historic books so that we can act like it didn't happen? Discuss? Yeah, I saw that as well and I cringed. I do believe that it is the wrong thing to do and as you say, it distorts the historical significance of the book. The only reason I could give to censor it is that the book may now appear on more library shelves...sanitized, but at least available to students. I'll have to discuss this tonight with Mrs. B. She's a long time educator who a couple years ago left the classroom for the highschool library. I think I know which side of the fence she'll be on.
BB27 Posted January 6, 2011 Author Posted January 6, 2011 Yeah, I saw that as well and I cringed. I do believe that it is the wrong thing to do and as you say, it distorts the historical significance of the book. The only reason I could give to censor it is that the book may now appear on more library shelves...sanitized, but at least available to students. I'll have to discuss this tonight with Mrs. B. She's a long time educator who a couple years ago left the classroom for the highschool library. I think I know which side of the fence she'll be on. An educator of all people should definately be against censoring this book. Censorship for all the wrong reasons....... Why would this book not be in the library for kids to read? If our schools are going to be forced to read books like "King and King" story about a gay couple for kindergardeners, then why can't kids read Huckleberry Finn? My god, what is this country coming to?
Pete Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 Huck Finn is anti-racist. Twain is one of my heros and very progressive. This Twain quote was my signature for years- "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one’s lifetime" While we are erasing history we can keep that eraser out and erase all past transgressions from the history books. One thing I learned about history is that man does not learn from history
Booster4324 Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 Up Next: "To Catch and Release a Mockingbird"
BB27 Posted January 6, 2011 Author Posted January 6, 2011 Up Next: "To Catch and Release a Mockingbird" Good one!
Cugalabanza Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 Huck Finn censored? Well, what do you think? Right? Wrong? I think it is crazy to censor this book. I agree with what everybody else has said. I also think it's crazy to censor it. If you want to appease some of the complainers, put in a disclaimer before the title page that says this book contains some language that some may find offensive. Then take a second to explain the historical context and the author's point of view: that Mark Twain was the opposite of a bigot. You can't remedy an injustice without honestly facing up to what it is.
Pete Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 The original copies which did not get burned should be available on the black market though
Beerball Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 An educator of all people should definately be against censoring this book. Censorship for all the wrong reasons....... Why would this book not be in the library for kids to read? She will definitely rail against it. Why would the book not be in every library? Narrow minded people thinking they are doing good for the youth of today.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 (edited) J.K. Rowling better hope that "mudblood" doesn't become an offensive slur in the future. Edited January 6, 2011 by SageAgainstTheMachine
erynthered Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 "Moby Dick" will now be Called " Moby Penis"
DC Tom Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 The attack on free speech goes on. !@#$ Jim is the most noble character in Huck Finn and the book is anti slavery. It is an indicator of the ignorance in America at that time. I wish people would not get their panties in a bunch over minutia and focus on the importance of that book and true themes presented. The pussification of America continues Not to mention that trying to make the book reflective of modern sensibilities totally defeats the purpose of reading classic literature as a window into contemporary sensibilities.
WWVaBeach Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 The original copies which did not get burned should be available on the "B" market though Fixed
Pete Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 Fixed I have to admit that took me a minute to get it. I was thinking while we are rewriting history and being oversensitive pussys we can substitute " had a party with" for "at war with", "misunderstood and under medicated" for "ruthless tyrant" and "at home with" for "conquered". We could sanitize everything
Nanker Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 Naked Lunch ≠ Scantily Clad Midday Repast Fahrenheit 451 ≠ Celsius 232 The Godfather ≠ The Man Who Sponsors Children at Baptism
the_franchise Posted January 7, 2011 Posted January 7, 2011 I think its really petty. I'm not to sure where "!@#$" and "Slave" are synonymous either. As for Injun and Halfbreed I personally think its a load. Maybe the foreword of the book should explain these three words, their origins and give some insight to readers. But wait a second... we don't need to learn from reading, we need to be more ignorant than the idea of changing one of the greatest books of all time. I am glad my book collection is one of a decent size because I don't want my son growing up reading the watered down version of things.
DrDawkinstein Posted January 7, 2011 Posted January 7, 2011 I think it's stupid as well. I believe Roger Ebert was quoted as saying this week "I'd rather be called a !@#$, than a slave"
Recommended Posts