Huckleberry Finn: A compassionate re-write or a missed opportunity to discuss the effects of our country’s racist past?
I’m sure by now you’ve heard the arguments both for against editing the “n-word” from Mark Twain’s classic, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. If not, here’s the gist of it:
The case for editing: Alan Gribben, the English professor at Auburn University who re-wrote the novel taking out the “n-word” believes that the new, cleaned up version will help the book regain popularity—since some teachers avoid using it in classrooms because of the offensive term—and make it more accessible to young readers.
The case against editing the “n-word” is two-fold. First, if we start editing the classics—or any work of literature for that matter—where will it end? Second, by lessening the emotional impact of our country’s racist past, we mitigate the way racism impacted our society. There is no other word to substitute for the “n-word” to show how that term was used to dehumanize and devalue African Americans and therefore keep them in a state of servitude long after the fall of slavery. Editing the term bypasses a critical, teachable moment for teachers and students to discuss how racism and racist terms were used and to what end.
To read more about this debate, see www.nytimes.com/2011/01/07/books/07huck.html. And for a nice look at the debate as it unfolds, check out www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/01/05/does-one-word-change-huckleberry-finn.
We want to hear from you! What do you think?
Tags: Huckelberry Finn
January 11th, 2011 at 5:07 pm
Accessible versus meaningful impact? I always defer to the authors intent.
February 1st, 2011 at 12:14 pm
Taking out the N-word is like pretending it was not/ is not part of American history. It is imperative that students today know and understand their history to better understand our culture today and to choose how they will move into the future.
Will Mr. Gribben next propose that the history of slavery and the story of racism alltogether be removed from student’s books because they are offensive? Do we erase all the nasty, unsavory bits of history to tell an untrue but more palatable story of our country’s past?
Prepare the students for what they will encounter in the book. Ask them to handle it respectfully and let them learn! They need to know.
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:46 pm
“Editing the term bypasses a critical, teachable moment for teachers and students to discuss how racism and racist terms were used and to what end.”
I think this is the essence of the debate. Teachers can have a HUGE impact on student’s perceptions of literature, and literature or topics that make us uncomfortable/ashamed/angry shouldn’t automatically be removed from the classroom.
If that is the yardstick that we choose to use, you’re right – where will it end? And how long before the leap is made from editing literature to editing history? Sanitizing the curriculum will harm students far more than having productive conversations about why an issue has been harmful or how it changed our culture. Ignorance is the foundation of racism, ultra-radical religious ideas, and other issues that have divided us and will continue to divide us unless we TEACH our children about them.
February 10th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
I agree with the case against editing the classics as stated above. We cannot fully know Twain’s “intent” in using the common language of his time, but we can preserve his classic novel as an accurate reflection of its time and learn from the debate it inspires.