The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn are widely viewed as an American classic. However, the editors of NewSouth Books have decided that they need to do some editing. The editors have decided to remove the “n” word from the book and replace it with “slave.” The editing of a classic raises very troubling questions from the right of an author to have his works remain unchanged to the integrity of literary and historical works. Like all great works, the book must be read with an understanding of the mores and lexicon of its time.
This offense against the original work is being lead by Alan Gribben, who insists that he is merely updating the work. Classic works, however, do not need updating. Gribben decision to improve on Twain’s work for contemporary readers is a breathtaking act of hubris. A vast array of classic and contemporary works use the n-word and other offensive language. If Gribben wants a work without offensive language, he should write The Adventures of Alan Gribben.
Gribben appears to think the following quote from Huckleberry Finn was something of an invitation by Twain:
“Please take it,” says I, “and don’t ask me nothing – then I won’t have to tell no lies.”
Replacing this word with “slave” can change the meaning and certainly the intent of Twain. Consider the following line:
“Oh, yes, this is a wonderful govment, wonderful. Why, looky here. There was a free nigger slave there from Ohio – a mulatter, most as white as a white man. He had the whitest shirt on you ever see…
The difference may be subtle but Twain clearly could have used slave. The word existed at the time. Twain chose the n-word to convey something beyond captive status. It was a word used widely. It is still used in literary works to say something about the people who use it.
Other authors like William Faulkner used this word in capturing the culture of the South. Consider the following passage from Go Down, Moses (1940):
This delta, he thought: This Delta. This land which man has deswamped and denuded and derivered in two generations so that white men can own plantations and commute every night to Memphis and black men own plantations and ride in jim crow cars to Chicago to live in millionaires’ mansions on Lakeshore Drive, where white men rent farms and live like niggers and niggers crop on shares and live like animals, where cotton is planted and grows man-tall in the very cracks of the sidewalks, and ursury and mortgage and bankcruptcy and measureless wealth, Chinese and African and Aryan and Jew, all breed and spawn together until no man has time to say which is which nor cares…. No wonder the ruined woods I used to know don’t cry for retribution! He thought: The people who have destroyed it will accomplish its revenge.
Would we rewrite Faulkner as well? How about all of the modern movies and books using this term as part of modern urban speech? Authors write to capture characters who are often racist or living in racist times. This publisher may billed itself as the “NewSouth” but this book was written about the Old South. To sanitize history or literature is an act of violence against the artistic work of these authors.
I find the editing of a great literary work to be nothing short of shameful and shocking, but views can differ on such a question. I would be interested in the views of others on the blog.
Jonathan Turley
jfxgillis,
Good … I hope you do. We all get carried away sometimes and cross the civility line … this is not the regular, run-of-the-mill blog … passion has to be tempered … they make me do it all the time
Blouise:
Sorry, but I’m feeling a bit perverse after having spent Christmas week with a two-year old grandson who insisted on either Ralph or The Wiggles with breakfast each morning.
And of course, here on the Isle of Great Bedlam things are getting even worse.
Here we now also have the “P” word, being short for Paki, an abreviation of Pakistani. Ironicly, this word can often be heard being used by Pakistani immigrants and their descendants. But when a non asian person uses the word, suddenly it is “offensive”.
Why? It’s only an abreviation. Like Brit. I promise I will not take offence if any of you call me a Brit. Or even a Limey. Or a Pom.
A year or so back I had a bit of an arguement with a criminology lecturer over the word nigger. He was actually of the opinion that the word should become the “property” of black people only! I suggested he may like to read another book about language – 1984.
Going back to the “P” word, when the term is used I like to feign righteous offence and anger. Upon enquiry I offer the explanation that as I am of Irish blood, I take deep offence at even an abreviation of the term “Paddy”. I find it always helps to confuse the weasels.
Oh, by the way, I promise I won’t be offended if any of you refer to me as a Paddy or a Bog Trotter either!
@mahtso
Public domain is not a free license to modify historical context.
So which is it, you don’t want to read Twain at all, or you don’t want to read a “Bowdlerized version?”
Have you finished reading these books?
Bring me an Italian Sub.
But do come back.
Better you waste our time than that of students.
jfx,
bring anyone but Fox News!
Blouise,
At least it would make Sesame a little more fun to watch! Of course the grandkids eyes would have to be diverted at the correct time!!
rafflaw:
I don’t think I was unprofessional. But I’ll come back tomorrow with a more complete argument including whatever stupid rubbish Fox News spouts about it.
rafflaw,
Please do not encourage the production of Mike A.’s movie … I have to watch hours and hours of everything Sesame Street with my granddaughter …
The simple fact is that modifying vernacular of any published work strips the author’s intent and blurs the shifting of cultural idioms over time. To edit Twain’s use of “nigger” with the word “slave” hides many cultural definitions of this word over time.
There are reasons why the word “nigger” is despised, and there are reasons why the editor would prefer “slave” over “nigger.” Slave denotes property, as obliquely expressed in the US Constitution–it maintains an illusion of cultural control.
I am astounded that a literate individual would even consider making such changes. History is fragile enough and does not require the “editing” of source (if even fictional) documents.
Holy Snikies! I go to watch my Salukis beat up on the Bradley Braves and I miss all the excitement on this thread! Mr. Gillis, please come back, but just be professional.
Mike A., I want to know how that Sesame Street production of Lady Chatterly’s Lover is coming along? Is Elmo in trouble again??
At the hairdresser’s I am a god-awful color and I often have a tinfoil hat on my head … just sayin’ …
Aye, Brian. I’ve read there is only about a 7% variation in all the genes of humankind. In my experience, and I’ve said this before, there are only two kinds of people: those of good character and those of bad character. And skin color doesn’t have a damn thing to do with character. We are all more alike than different. But who can tell you who you are without knowing you?
No one.
I find it unconscionable to alter a work long ago written wherein a serious social atrocity is represented in word otherwise plausibly inappropriate.
Why do I find changing the words used by Mark Twain to be of atrocity. Perhaps it has to do with my family, and experiences of members of my family.
My brother’s widow is a Distinguished Professor, one who cares about telling historically accurate truths about the past and the ways people can overcome the errors of the past by accurately understanding what they were.
Similarly, there may be errors of the present which, if recognized and acknowledged accurately, may be overcome in the future. Shall we work to overcome such?
You may Google search for “Harold Washington College” AND “bjharris.aspx” if you so choose.
Biologically, as I observe, there is only one race of homo sapiens, human and colored.
Wonder what will happen if I encounter a Wisconsin police officer who is attempting to extract from me my “race” and “ethnicity” in accord with recent.
If I communicate to a police officer that I am “white,” I am communicating false information and therefore am obstructing the officer.
White is all colors in balance (red, green, and blue).
If I communicate to a police officer that I am “black,” I am communicating false information and therefore am obstructing the officer.
Black is the absence of light, no colors at all.
If I truthfully communicate that I am colored, will my truthfulness be deemed obstructing an officer?
What is my ethnicity? Autistic. How much trouble am I in for doing everything I have been able to do to be truthfully alive?
How can those who do not know me tell me who I am?
NewSouth Books’ decision is an intellectual and literary abomination. I have more to say about this but I’m tied up right now finishing my editing of “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” for a Sesame Street production.
Methinks: niggardly pejorative use is wise.
Did I use a “dah-dit” word?
73, W9GUO di-dah-di-dah-dit dah-di-dah
(dah-dit = Morse code “n”)
(73 = best regards)
(W9GUO = my Extra Class amateur radio station call sign)
(di-dah-di-dah-dit = end of message)
(in context, dah-di-dah = over to you, unspecified: who you are)
How about using extra class in the words used here?
It sounds like somebody is too weak of a teacher to direct the conversation in their own classroom.
The word is being used in a very deliberate way, and changing it is disrespectful to the author’s intentions. Something like a starred censor[n****r] would be somewhat less ridiculous, but any attempt to sanitize the word underestimates the average student’s intelligence. Most high school kids have heard this word at some point, yet nobody is willing to discuss it. When this particular text comes up in the curriculum, a teacher should actually /teach/ from it. Engage your students. Have an intelligent discussion and get the kids to think.
Not talking about it pretends that it’s just another rude word, not a terrible, albeit undeniable, part of American history.
And hopefully not back into a classroom.
Buddha:
Outta here.