New Version of "Huckleberry Finn" Removes the "N" Word

[c.d.]

As reported Monday by Publishers Weekly, Mark Twain’s classic “Huckleberry Finn” will be republished by NewSouth Books without the ‘N word.’

Twain scholar Alan Gribben and NewSouth Books felt this change allowed the book to be more acceptable to a 21st century audience and less hurtful. Though Gribben -- English professor at Auburn University at Montgomery -- says this is not an effort to render the book colorblind.

Are you ******* kidding me!!!!!!!!

In the immortal words of John McEnroe "you cannot be serious."

c.d.

[Bailey]

So, considering the frequency of said word in the book, what have the used instead, I wonder?

B.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Folks

I was reading in the Washington Post this morning a column by Courtland Milloy entitled, "A reminder that 'Redskins' is a name fit only for the dustbin of history," urging that the name of the Washington Redskins of the National Football League (NFL) be changed as being offensive to Native Americans. But what about teams such as the Lions or the Tigers? Surely the name was actually given to the football club because of the bravery that Indian warriors showed, just as Lions or Tigers or Bears were legendary for their fierceness. The figure of Liberty on the dome of the United States Capitol is an Indian with an eagle headdress. Is that equally offensive to Native Americans? Or else the Indians depicted on the old Indian head cent or the Buffalo nickel? It would seem to me that historically America has had a love-hate relationship with its native Amerindian peoples, admiring the Indians for their bravery and centuries-old customs while admittedly treating them shabbily, which I in no way wish to condone, incidentally.

Chris

[sdreid]

The more you try to suppress as word, the more you empower it so they're actually working at cross purposes.

[Sally]

We are essentially no different from our 19th century predecessors who 'improved' works of art by painting over the rude bits. Racism is the new profanity.

This type of 'corrective' action divorces the work in question from it's social context - in effect it creates something new, something modified.

I do not approve.

[Tom_Wescott]

It won't let me type the n word, darn it. Anyway, American Indians will be extinct in a few generations, so who cares. The census numbers can't be trusted because it's mostly white and black people SAYING they're indian to get all the free stuff in states like Oklahoma where I live. They only have to be on the registers and 1/16th American Indian. 1/16th!!!!

At our casinos here in Oklahoma, all of their employment advertising clearly states that Indians will be given preferential treatment in hiring. No Joke.

And the word 'indian' isn't considered offensive, but I like American Indian so as to differentiate between them and people from India. I don't like 'Native American', because unlike Chris George, I was born here and AM a native American, but not an Indian.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[c.d.]

So, considering the frequency of said word in the book, what have the used instead, I wonder?

B.

"Slave"

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hi Folks

I was reading in the Washington Post this morning a column by Courtland Milloy entitled, "A reminder that 'Redskins' is a name fit only for the dustbin of history," urging that the name of the Washington Redskins of the National Football League (NFL) be changed as being offensive to Native Americans. But what about teams such as the Lions or the Tigers? Surely the name was actually given to the football club because of the bravery that Indian warriors showed, just as Lions or Tigers or Bears were legendary for their fierceness. The figure of Liberty on the dome of the United States Capitol is an Indian with an eagle headdress. Is that equally offensive to Native Americans? Or else the Indians depicted on the old Indian head cent or the Buffalo nickel? It would seem to me that historically America has had a love-hate relationship with its native Amerindian peoples, admiring the Indians for their bravery and centuries-old customs while admittedly treating them shabbily, which I in no way wish to condone, incidentally.

Chris

Courtland Milloy is an idiot. He always has those kinds of articles. I like to think that I am not racist when it comes to Native Americans. I really don't think I am because I don't know any. This whole "Redskins" thing is completely ridiculous. I know Native Americans have a lot of problems but this ain't one of them. They are a people who have been stripped of their culture. They have a high drop out rate from school. They have problems with alcohol and diabetes and obesity from bad diets. So to say you know if it weren't for that whole "Redskins" thing we'd be kicking ass is ridiculous. They need to address their real problems before they get to imaginary ones.

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

No race of people 'gets stripped' of their culture. It's still alive and well for those who want to embrace, but most have chosen to become 'secular', for lack of a better word. But you're correct, as a race they've more or less self-imploded, but it always comes down to personal choice.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[c.d.]

No race of people 'gets stripped' of their culture. It's still alive and well for those who want to embrace, but most have chosen to become 'secular', for lack of a better word. But you're correct, as a race they've more or less self-imploded, but it always comes down to personal choice.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

I don't want to argue semantics, but bear in mind that in reservation schools they were forced to learn English and were punished for speaking their native tongue. Christianity was forced upon them.

c.d.

[Zodiac]

As reported Monday by Publishers Weekly, Mark Twain’s classic “Huckleberry Finn” will be republished by NewSouth Books without the ‘N word.’

Twain scholar Alan Gribben and NewSouth Books felt this change allowed the book to be more acceptable to a 21st century audience and less hurtful. Though Gribben -- English professor at Auburn University at Montgomery -- says this is not an effort to render the book colorblind.

Are you ******* kidding me!!!!!!!!

In the immortal words of John McEnroe "you cannot be serious."

c.d.

I totally agree with you mate, its all got just too crazy!!! In the UK even childrens books, that have been beloved by generations of kids, regardless of creed or colour, have fallen prey to the "Politically Correct" Gestapo in recent years. People are afraid to speak many words, people have lost their jobs for daring to say certain words!!! Very sad, and does no good to anyone, in fact only serves to strengthen the extremists, very sad.

[Ally]

Hi Tom,

I don't want to argue semantics, but bear in mind that in reservation schools they were forced to learn English and were punished for speaking their native tongue. Christianity was forced upon them.

c.d.

Which is no different than what any invading force does to any other force that it conquers. History is nothing BUT one group moving into the territority of another and attempting to claim it as their own and subjugating the people who lived there first if not wiping them out entirely. The Native Americans warred with each other before the Europeans arrived and subjugated members of other tribes. They weren't earth worshipping peaceful, pipe smoking pacifists run over by the evil European hordes. They just sucked at the kind of war that the Europeans brought. Just like the Celts before. In general, the one who has the best tech wins, it's just a fact of life. Get the fukk over it people. If a groups biggest bitch in life is what happened to their great-great grandpappy, they need to take some prozac and go suck their thumb quietly in the corner. But to justify them not making something of their lives now because their great-great-granddaddy got done wrong is the worst kind of excuse making for people. It is KEEPING an antiquated mindset that the natives are nothing more than savages and not responsible for the choices they make now. It's paternalistic and condescending.

This modern idea that we should all pay for the actions of our ancestors is idiotic. No one is innocent. Africans sold other africans into slavery. Are they going to demand reparations from Africa too? Natives conquered land from other tribes. How do you decide exactly who owned the land first? Was ownership set only when the Europeans arrived? The Lakotas stole land from the Blackfeet so who gets that land back now?

The modern notion that we should wipe out what they did by attempting to sanitize it is likewise idiotic. The past is the past. There is no changing it, there is no sanitizing it, there is no prettying it up. But there also is absolutely no reason for anyone to claim their victimization based on something that happened hundreds of years ago.

Throughout the centuries in every culture and right up into modern times, women have been among the worst oppressed group out there, but where is the movement to reclaim thousands of dollars from the government based on my great grandmother's abuse, lack of opportunity, lack of legal status and lack of voice in the operation of the government? Why is it only select groups who get to claim endless victimhood and reparations?

[mariab]

I fully agree that the officially established victimization of minorites holds them back today and definitely was a factor in their having “self-imploded“, as Tom said. Still, as C.D. said in his post #10, Indians/Native Americans were forced to learn English and punished for speaking their native tongue in reservation schools. Not only Christianity was forced upon them, but, before that, alcoholism and a host of diseases (including veneral), as with every native tribe who encountered colonialism. The more poignant case of all might be the Abos in Australia (who were peaceful). I believe that in the case of an almost fully exterminated native tribe, there must be officially established compensation. This is not to compare with the centuries long previous oppression of women (as Ally noted), or even with the Holocaust and other genocides.
Casinos is probably the most ridiculous solution, and it's clear that there'll be a lot of wellfare abuse by people claiming they're 1/8th or 1/16th Indian, still, I think this is the slightest evil to endure. ;-) How many Indians/Native Americans are out there statistically anyway? In about 50 years there'll be all extinct, so, end of the “problem“. (And I don't know if anyone has seen the BtVS episode Pangs, but it discusses every single aspect of this hilariously and in-your-face. It's priceless.)
Not to mention that the mixture with the Indian/Native American race has produced some beautiful people. Clu Gulager comes to mind, Meg Tilly, Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie (who has Iroquois part in her).

Tom Wescott wrote:
At our casinos here in Oklahoma, all of their employment advertising clearly states that Indians will be given preferential treatment in hiring. No Joke.
It's no different than American Universities stating that they're an equal opportunity/Affirmative Action employer, encouraging applications from women and minorities. Even German Universities are required by law to state that they encourage female candidates applying, and that supposedly, all qualifications equal, female candidates will be favored. I assure you that it's just print, it doesn't influence in the least the decision of whom to hire, and in about 30/40 years it'll be an extinct practice.

[Tom_Wescott]

CD's choice of words intrigues me. I don't see how English can be 'forced' on anyone in America. It's something you should learn if you want to live here. Oklahoma, where I live, has made English its official language, which means Spanish will no longer appear on any government documents, applications, etc. You will have to know English in order to fill them out. This is not a bad thing.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Tom Wescott wrote:
I don't see how English can be 'forced' on anyone in America. It's something you should learn if you want to live here.
You're absolutely, legally right about English as official language. I guess I got carried away! :-) I was influenced by my recent experience in South Africa in July, when I taught at a township (ex-ghetto) high school where they taught both in English and Xhosa, with a predominance on Xhosa (which is the native South African language in most regions). They deliberately chose NOT to teach in Afrikaans, which I found correct, as it's the language of Apartheid and it's taught in all high schools in the main towns (vs. in the townships). But South African Apartheid cannot be compared to the situation with the Indians/Native Americans on US soil.
Still, having the Indians punished for speaking their native tongue constitutes a crime against humanity.