Cynthetiq

They will also replace the word injun.

I take offense to this. Mr. Twain is a part of the heritage of great literature. His words and story are his and should be made available. Now if they decide that there is a PC edition, I'm fine with that. I'd opt for the "Original Author's Edition" because I prefer the way that the artist originally created the work.

How do you feel about this?

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Willravel

Livid. This kind of censorship is an affront to the fundamental rights of free speech that our society is supposed to value. If you're offended by a thing, turn away. You have no right to prevent others from experiencing that which offends you.

There's only one version of Huckleberry Finn, and in it is the word nigger. That's it.

RetroGunslinger

I maintain my stance on this and every news item like it: censorship is wrong. I like cursing, nudity, violence, and classic literature, so shove off.

__________________
It's a rare pleasure in this world to get your mind fucked. Usually it's just foreplay.

M.B. Keene

EventHorizon

i think that Twain's work would lose something without the words nigger and injun. why is it so hard for people to swallow that at the time, saying those words was acceptable?

__________________
Does Marcellus Wallace have the appearance of a female canine? Then for what reason did you attempt to copulate with him as if he were a female canine?

Quote:

Originally Posted by canuckguy Pretty simple really, do your own thing as long as it does not fuck with anyone's enjoyment of life.

bagatelle

I agree with others. Words used then, reflect how things were at the time, story was written. It's like forging history.

Why don't they just add a warning on first pages or back cover of the book, an explanation which also would educate readers, how these words weren't always deemed inapproriate.

We still sell cigarettes, but with additional text:

__________________

Baraka_Guru

It's a travesty of literature and scholarship.

I understand the desire to make it more accessible to schools who would otherwise ban it, but still. It's better for it to be banned than be censored this way, as it removes a part the cultural and social legacies that the book reflects. It "whitewashes" it, as it were.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Cynthetiq

What if Mark Twain was alive and he rewrote it modifying it slightly, mostly removing such words. Think of it as removing the Greedo shot first in Star Wars, or FBI Agents using walkie talkies instead of guns in ET.

Would that make it right?

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Baraka_Guru

It all depends on how we view Twain's approach to the novel. Did he spend a lot of effort representing the settings, characters, and dialect to reflect reality? Will making such changes jar on the reader as being unnatural?

I think the more interesting question is: Would Twain ever make such a change, even if he were alive today?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Cimarron29414

Personally, I disagree with this decision. As I sit here in Pandora World and listen to Will-I-Am proclaim he's going to be a "rich nigger", I can't help but wonder why classic novels are scrubbed of what was certainly a cultural fact from that period in time. I mean, it is undeniable that vernacular was historically accurate in Twain's setting. So, why is history fair game to scrub when modern culture is completely unwilling to scrub?

__________________
Gives a man a halo, does mead.

"Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

Baraka_Guru

Cimarron, a part of the issue, I imagine, is that the n-word (yes, this is self-censorship) has been going through a process of appropriation by the black community.

There are problems with this, however. Early on, the use of the n-word in hip-hop was done in such a way to raise awareness of black issues within the community. More recently, however, much of its use in hip-hop/rap is now associated just as much—if not more—with the bad aspects as with the good aspects of the process. I'm talking about gangsta rap, of course, and other aspects of the music that are associated with drugs, violence, getting rich, objectifying women, or otherwise exacerbating the problems still evident in the black community.

What this has done is make the word nigger (ouch, there it is) a loaded and problematic word. It's cultural and social value is convoluted and multifaceted. What this tends to do is make white-dominated institutions (such as schools and publishing) nervous with its use. You can easily chalk this up as PC bullshit or white guilt or whatever, but it's more complex than that.

There are those in the black community who have problems with the word. There are those, too, who use it regardless, both in a depreciating and a simply self-identifying manner. There are others still who are attempting to push forward with its appropriation as a generally neutral identifier that only takes on value within the context it is used.

That said, I still think this edition is a mistake. It's like sweeping things under the rug. It would be like reading D. H. Lawrence without the sexual bits. It kind of makes it sterile, and this is bad when you want to look at literature as a whole. It will raise more questions about slavery in general instead of about race issues between blacks and whites.

It turns the text into a bit of a mess, even though it might seem like something simple.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

genuinegirly

By censoring, they are opening the door to allowing teachers to opt-out on providing the historical context that comes along with those words. I am more bothered by the fact that the schools are choosing not to read the book based on language than I am about the censorship. I see this as another unfortunate consequence of the "dumbing down" of American schools.

__________________
"Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq

"violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy

BadNick

It's sheer stupidity, in my opinion. It's another big example of how convoluted and confused supposedly "intelligent" humans can get so it further shakes my confidence in mankind.

rmarshall

It could be viewed in the wider context, the dumbing down of society.
In protecting children from all dangers, they no longer need to think and protect themselves.
Children don't walk home from school, don't play with friends in the neighborhood, don't play with fire, don't play with knives, aren't exposed to sex and nudity, aren't exposed to colorful language. Aren't exposed to poisons or plastic bags....
After awhile, they won't be able to do anything or think for themselves.
I saw a show on TV where they showed a video that had children camping in Germany, I think, where kids, perhaps younger than 8 were chopping wood and making campfires and whittling sticks for marshmallows. They were using matches and knives and axes without an adult hovering over them. The viewers on the show were freaking out.
But I did all that stuff when I was a kid.
Controlling what children read is another way of "protecting" them. But then they get a warped sense of history. This is like the Ministry of Truth in 1984. Controlling thought.

__________________
"Do not resent growing old. Many are denied the privilege" Irish proverb

Cynthetiq

I have read many times that George Carlin is today's Twain. So if that's the case, I'd believe that Mr. Twain would have not ever made such a change, if someone made the change via some technology like ClearPlay that auto changed it I think he'd write some mocking tirade against it, the people who desired such a change, and those that subscribed to reading such changes.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

roachboy

did i forget to post? sheesh....

here's a link to an excerpt from the editor's foreword via newsouth books:

Introduction to Mark Twain's Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn: The NewSouth Edition by Alan Gribben

if you look at this, the edit comes out of an expediency the editor had been using in college courses when reading some passages out loud.
the foreword is (obviously) included in the edition. it's inclusion makes this into something other than simply censorship---it's not like stalin ordering the doctoring of photos of the politburo to eliminate executed members, to erase them from the present's version of the past.
so what this is has been framed wrong in the passage from editor to publisher to usa today.
here's why: if you look at the excerpt, it addresses questions of ""historical veracity" and "fidelity to context" directly, and then makes an argument which basically says that the problems associated with these epithets is of an entirely different order. at stake, in his view, is the marginalization of the texts themselves and this because these terms generate so much static that (a) the texts are not getting assigned and (b) when they are assigned, you have to fight through these nouns to get to anything else.

so he made the substitution that he had been making in classrooms and lectures for a long time.

and because the foreword is included in the book (obviously) it makes of all these questions topics for debate. so it's rather the opposite of censorship. it's simply an editorial decision with a rationale provided.

i don't particularly agree with it, but mostly on the grounds that the word "slave" is jarring as an alternative. twain was a lot about sound and a lot about the sound of words. i'm not sure this respects that.

there's a lot of hyperbole in this thread. you'd do well to consider the foreword....

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Strange Famous

I never understood the particular difficulty with this one racial slur which doesnt exist for others.

For example, people who wont use the word "nigger" will happily use the word "Paki" or "Bengy", "Dago" "Gippo", or "Yid"...

All are just words, and most of the above have come to take on a negative context through there frequent use in hateful or demeaning ways. And at the same time these words are often used in positive or neutral context by people of the race they are aimed to insult (ie - Tottenham's "Yid Army", most rap music, I have mates from Bangledeshi backgrounds who refer to themselves as "Bengy" without any irony or special meaning)



This doesnt particularly outrage me, as I dont see that the original meaning of the text if changed by removing racial slurs... but nor do I see the point of it.

Anyone can turn on the radio and hear the word "nigger" 100 times in a 50 Cent track.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

The_Jazz

I'm sorry, but how is this any different that "Pride and Prejustice and Zombies"? It's a genre.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

Willravel

Removing nigger from Huck Finn is censorship, not satire.

Baraka_Guru

If you're referring to turning a realist novel into a fantasy, then I guess it isn't really any different.

---------- Post added at 02:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:55 PM ----------

Thanks for the grounding, by the way. I glossed over the issue and brought out of it the goal of having the book more accessible to curricula that would normally bar it from being included based on particular epithets. I get that; I just don't think it's worth it.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Strange Famous

Personally 60 Years Later offends me a lot more than any of this.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

The_Jazz

My point is that this isn't "Huckleberry Finn" by Mark Twain any more. It's very similar to it, but it's not.

Alternatively, how is this any different than a book translated from another language into English? Neither one of them is the original.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

Baraka_Guru

There is a difference between translating for comprehension based on the variances in language, idioms, customs, etc., and changing words because of contemporary sensitivities regarding the use of language. This book is still marketed as Mark Twain's, is it not?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Cynthetiq

Yes Jazz, that's the part that I find interesting. Changing languages is a very different thing and it's getting easier and easier to do from video games to movies it makes sense to address your audience. In some contracts I deal with it has to get author approval to make changes to languages and sometimes formats. I assume editorial changes are also on the list of author approval needed. Here the work is now in the public domain. While I don't see this as 100% censorship because original versions are still allowed to be published by other companies with all slurs intact.

The zombies thing is a rework of the original making a whole new work. I don't think that changing the two words constitutes a new work.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

levite

This is just another blip in the tradition of bowdlerization. Twain is Twain. His work lives on because it is fresh and authentic.

You wait, ten years from now, nobody will even recall this stupid edition was printed.

I'm sorry, but the antebellum South was not politically correct. Yes, they called black people niggers, which is offensive. They kept black people as slaves, too, which is infinitely more offensive than a mere slur word.

What on earth is the world coming to when we try to make the literature of previous centuries conform to our current social mores. How is this any better, or even different, than Pope Paul IV, or Pius IX, knocking the dicks off Greek and Roman statues and covering them up with plaster fig leaves in the name of public morals?

As others have said before me, you don't approve of someone's art, great: don't look at it. If you can't get past Twain's faithful use of the word nigger in a 19th-Century novel set in the antebellum South-- a novel which, by the way, teaches about mutual respect and the futility of racism-- then you are simply not mature enough to read real literature. People like that should go back to Dr. Seuss, until they grow the fuck up.

__________________
Dull sublunary lovers love,
Whose soul is sense, cannot admit
Absence, because it doth remove
That thing which elemented it.

(From "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" by John Donne)

roachboy

well, like i said, i am not a fan of the edit(s) because they fuck up the way the lines scan--the sound is wrong---and twain's sentences are often really carefully constructed at the level of sound.

my main point was that it's not just some ill-considered feel-good p.c. move.
that's why i think the foreword is important, because it raises most of the questions that the thread is cycling through and addresses them.
some of them are deceptively complex, like what "fidelity to context" actually means. which context? the foreword uses clemens biography as a context to make problematic the synchronic contexts---which are also a bit odd, really---what exactly is "the" context for something that takes as long to construct as a novel? the period of it's construction? the moment it's published? it's reception and its history?

often literature people are like art historians---context is basically zeitgeist which is made up of x simultaneous phenomenon in a frame where simultaneous is defined as "other things i want to talk about from roughly the same time-frame"---which is why zeitgeist is so useful, because it's some vaporous "spirit of the times"...

but i digress.


btw the edition is not a bowlderization--it publishes tom sawyer and husk finn together, restores a scene that had been deleted and is in every other way a faithful reproduction of the original.

so that's wrong.

and it's not a matter of faciltating comprehension---the editor's argument (gapping on his name) is that it enables an encounter with the texts at all.

there's a side of me that's kinda sympathetic to the backstory of the edit---even as i'm not a fan of the edit itself----have you ever taught a text with racist or fascist language in a class? or even a text with kinds of violence in them that make the students uncomfortable? there's a real decision you have to make as a teacher about whether it's worth it to simply roll over that stuff....if you don't then you have to talk about it...often you find out that some of the students anyway didnt read the piece because of that. if the text in question is important, then a second decision is whether the thing that offends is important or not and what you do with that in class. that was the start of the edit.

i think my students were most offended when i made them read william s burrough's the ticket that exploded. but there the problems were entirely different. and i enjoyed the way they were offended. little fucking prudes.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

bagatelle

This is interesting, because I think it would be impossible to translate something completely to another language. Two different translators might compose something very different, also the era, when they live, does affect on translations. So, they do change from the original.

Sometimes I've noticed the translators have used much too modern expressions.

With very little knowledge I have over the subject, I can tell the word neekeri - meaning nigger - appears in the form neger for the first time in a Finnish book published in 1771. Today it has quite efficiently been weeded out of public use, replaced with equivalents to 'black' or 'dark-skinned'. This has also derived to other changes like the name of a popular children's game called 'Who's afraid of a black man" is now often "Who's afraid of a green man/iceman"... I wouldn't use the Finnish word 'black', musta, either to be politically correct.

I don't know, what would happen, if they publish new translations. They might follow the newer versions here as well.

So, am I changing my mind a bit about this... If one thinks of them as newer versions of an old story, as long as the old versions can still be found and they aren't hidden or burnt, why not...

__________________

levite

As I understand it, bowdlerization is the removal from literature of words, phrases, or narrative that can be considered morally questionable or problematic, for the purposes of making the experience of reading the work suitable for all audiences.

So, the fact that this edition publishes Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn together, or even that it restores a deleted scene would not seem, to me at least, to detract from the applicability of calling the removal of the words "nigger" and "injun" bowdlerization. Especially since the stated motivation of those edits is, essentially, to make the work more suitable for all audiences.

I actually have taught such texts, to high school students and to college undergrads. I've taught, among other things, Huckleberry Finn, as well as The Miller's Tale (and other tales) from The Canterbury Tales, Miller's Tropic of Cancer, selections from Anais Nin's diaries, Catcher In The Rye, Ginsberg's Howl, selections from Ulysses and Finnegan's Wake, some Heinlein, and even selections from Mein Kampf-- all usual suspects on banned book lists, for obscene language, sexuality, and the use of derogatory language and racial or ethnic slurs.

I have always found that an important part of the learning process for students is the opportunity to confront difficult language and problematic attitudes in art directly, and to have to deal directly with the questions of what language means, and what do we really mean by "freedom of speech." Some of the best classroom discussions I have ever been able to evoke as a teacher came from students wrestling with these works of literature, and the difficulties they had with those words and ideas.

I have yet to have had a student who engaged in these discussions who told me that they were not the better for it.

Ultimately, I truly believe that people must be able to confront art and literature directly if they are going to be able to make real decisions about what they think and how they feel about art, literature, and even society, given that society is so deeply influenced by art and literature. I think that well-intentioned editing in the attempt to make the uncomfortable more comfortable does a tremendous disservice to readers and students everywhere.

Mark Twain wrote Huckleberry Finn well after the Civil War, and the man was not unfamiliar with black people. He knew very well that even in the time of its writing, it was declassè to use the word nigger instead of negro. He used the word anyway, and certainly not because he was a racist and longed for the days of slavery. But whether he used it for authenticity, as an emphasis of what society had been like in the antebellum South, or whether he used it as a deliberate vulgarity, to shock, or whether it was for some artistic reason other than those, that was the choice he made. He could well have used the word negro, or the word slave instead.

The decision, a century after Twain's death, to alter his choice for the sake of making students comfortable, seems not only counterproductive educationally, but also very unlikely to serve the artistic agenda of the author. In either case, I fail to see why it is appropriate, and not ridiculous.

__________________
Dull sublunary lovers love,
Whose soul is sense, cannot admit
Absence, because it doth remove
That thing which elemented it.

(From "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" by John Donne)

thedoc

I would need to say that I oppose censorship in any form but I don't think that applies here, as they are not banning the book just changing it slightly. Also I think that the term 'slave' might be just as offensive to some, so what do they gain. What concernes me is that this kind of change in the original language (translatiions are another matter) might lead others to alter works to be less offensive to some hypothetical audience. Can you imagine 'Merchant of Venice' where all the Christians were nice to Shylock with a big group hug at the end of the trial? Many of these works were ment to shock and awaken people to the inequities and abuse that was happening in society. 'A Christmas Carol' was described as a 'Sledge Hammer' to expose class differences in England of the time. 'South Pacific' and 'Show Boat' were both openly critical of bigotry and discrimination. If any of these were to be made PC they would be to loose the intended message. Perhaps Mark Twain used that language to emphasize the conditions that existed at the time, to change it would dilute that message. As far as useing the works in a classroom use the original and let the students express their own feelings about it, shielding them is worse than exposure.

roachboy

levite---first, i didn't realize that expurgation and bowdlerization were synonymous; i thought the latter applied more to taking out sections, altering endings or otherwise mangling a text in the name of some fiction of decency---whence my response about the texts---but once i looked up the term you used, i guess you're right. it feels wrong to me still, though...but it isn't.

truth be told, in my own teaching i typically have confronted problematic language directly and often assigned controversial or problematic material deliberately for many of the reasons you adduce above.

i was trying to present a version of the argument from the forward of the newsouth edition because i thought that it is at least articulate in laying out it's position and that it assumes and goes beyond the simple objections that were running throughout the thread before i happened on it (all full of novacaine from a dentist's appointment i might add).

as for my own teaching--you don't assign burroughs or j.g. ballard's atrocity exhibition (in a european history survey) if this sort of problem makes you squeamish, or if you think the delicate sensibilities of young reactionaries are worth respecting.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Strange Famous

How many people consider that they have read the Bible?

And how many of them have read it in Hebrew and Greek?

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Cynthetiq

Many don't.

As a Roman Catholic I learned in my Catholic high school religion class to take it all with a grain of salt because of the issues with translations and then heaped upon it the different ecumenical councils that decided the fates of the different books of the bible.

But you can see that difference of the many forks of the bible when you compare the King James to the New World. (List of English Bible translations. It was imperative that we be thinking critically as we read ALL of the biblical texts so that we could better understand the writers and authors of the different books.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

levite

You are entirely correct, sir. Well said.

__________________
Dull sublunary lovers love,
Whose soul is sense, cannot admit
Absence, because it doth remove
That thing which elemented it.

(From "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" by John Donne)

thedoc

Levite & Roachboy, just what subject do you teach, I would guess English or literature, and at what level. I taught Industrial Arts, in Jr. H. S. for 7 years, I know it's not the same but it's still teaching. What really got to me, and I couldn't believe it, was that there were students who didn't want to be in shop class. When I was in school that was like recess where I could use tools and make things.

levite

At various times, I have taught English, Creative Writing, History (American, European, and Jewish), Jewish Literature, Jewish Theology and Philosophy, Comparative Religion, and Jewish Studies. These days, sticking mostly to Jewish Studies. I've taught all grades of high school, Eighth grade (once-- big mistake), college undergrads, rabbinical students, and adult continuing education students. These days, sticking to Grades 11-12 or college undergrad.

__________________
Dull sublunary lovers love,
Whose soul is sense, cannot admit
Absence, because it doth remove
That thing which elemented it.

(From "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" by John Donne)

roachboy

i taught european history, social theory/philosophy and (when i could get away with it) experimental music/sound art courses at the university level for about 15 years. i decided at some point that i wanted to move into making new things rather than talking about other people who made new things, so i stopped teaching. my plan is to move back into it in an interdisciplinary context (writing maybe, in an art school maybe) but the way the market out there is the only sane way to approach it is to make things, put them out into the world and do something else that lets you operate as you'd like. i enjoy teaching and sometimes miss it.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Strange Famous

People are using the word censorship.

To be clear on this - censorship would be criminalising and prohibiting the distribution of copies using the racial slurs in questions

This story, as I understand it, is issuing a copy of the book without racial slurs which some people believe is more suitable for young readers? I am not aware of any attempts to ban the existing format of the book?

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Cynthetiq

I like what Fishkin says here. It is wrongheaded and counterproductive. I think that it is important to leave the work whole and discuss it as it is, no different than To Kill A Mockingbird, Catch-22, or Catcher In the Rye.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

rmarshall

This

__________________
"Do not resent growing old. Many are denied the privilege" Irish proverb

kramus

meh

It is like taking Twain's articulation of Jim's dialect and running it through a Shakespeare transmogrifier so that he speaks with the Bard's gift of language. The result is a parody of what Twain intended. A parody created for whatever current reasoning that can be sold to/cater to the current book-buying public.

So long as the book is very clearly labeled on both front and back as a rewrite for tender WASP North American sensibilities and not using Mr. Clemens' original words I don't give a drat. If the powers that be start ghettoizing language by only allowing certain segments of society to use particular phrases, words or vernacular - at that point we will have a real problem. Till then it is a minor tempest in a recurring theme that ebbs and flows.

I actually wonder from time to time what common usage language will be verboten in a generation or two. Have any of you ever read newspapers from the turn of the last century? Looked at political cartoons from the late 1800's through to WWII? Whew. A case in point, my mom - a lovely woman who is a very forward thinking lady, had a favourite kitten when she was a girl. A pure black little thing cat it seems. Called Nig, or Niggy. Guess why. Nobody blinked an eye at that back then. Now she would be pilloried for such a thing if it were bruited about. Maybe if I had called my current dog Doofus, or Rebel, Old Yeller maybe - 70 years from now folks would want to get in my face because I didn't pay attention to some new sea change in society that happens generations down the road.

just sayin'

__________________
And now to disengage the clutch of the forebrain ...
I'm going with this - if you like artwork visit http://markfineart.ca

Cynthetiq

NYTimes had 10 different Op-Eds. Very interesting points of view.

• Part of Our Lexicon
  
  Jill Nelson, author, "Finding Martha's Vineyard"
• Literature's Dual Life
  
  Jane Smiley, author, "Private Life"
• Why Read That Book?
  
  Paul Butler, law professor, George Washington University
• The Words of Pap Finn's Rant
  
  Shelley Fisher Fishkin, professor, Stanford University
• Obscuring the Past
  
  Thomas Glave, author, "The Torturer's Wife"
• We Want Readers
  
  James Duban, English professor, University of North Texas
• Bringing Context to the Page
  
  Gish Jen, author, "World and Town"
• Dumbing and Numbing Down Jim
  
  David Matthews, author, "Ace of Spades"
• Why Is 'Slave' Less Offensive?
  
  Francine Prose, author of “Anne Frank”
• What Would Frederick Douglass Say?
  
  Mark Bauerlein, English professor, Emory University
• A Teachable Moment
  
  Timothy Jay, author, "Cursing in America"

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.