Original version of Huckleberry Finn censored.

[DBOSHO]

*The*Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has been*censored, found unfit historical literature for readers and rewritten. A new edition of*The*Adventures of Huckleberry Finn*omits a racial epithet that has caused controversy since the book took its place decades ago on the shelf of great American literature.** In place of the word n - - - - -, the word "slave" will be substituted in a combined edition of*Huckleberry Finn*and Tom Sawyer,*to be published next month by NewSouth Books.

Professor, Alan Gribben, of English at Auburn University-Montgomery, says his new edition is for readers who cannot get past the slur to take in the rest of the book — and thereby understand Twain's opposition to racism.

Both Banning and censoring books happens almost every week in the United States. Often people take notice of banned books, protest, and the banned is lifted. Sometimes nobody notices and the banned book stays lost to a school or country.* When a book is lost so is a piece of our history.

Censorship in all forms must be opposed in the United States; it is an old pastime and hobby of many without thought of preserving our literary history.

We, the people of United States, have a history.* We have been far from perfect, our thoughts, deeds, and written words have evolved.* The idea of loosing or out right changing our literary history is against The First Amendment that was adopted on December 15, 1791. The Amendment states:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The American Revolution was not just a revolution of politics but also literature. The colonists published an abundance of newspaper articles, books, essays, and pamphlets in opposition to numerous**forms of British tyranny. Thomas Paine's Common Sense (1776) and Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence (1776) are two well-known and influential examples of revolutionary literature.*

In the spirit of our history do we want people rewriting our literature?* Is it better to pretend our literature history was written “politically correct” according to our standards?* Wouldn’t it be better to teach our children to read critically?* To not be controlled by books, movies, games... but to be able to think and speak with purpose about what they read, see or do. To learn and understand words and be able to discuss their meaning and improperness’ in today’s society.* Perhaps we might be better to honor and embrace our past literature, read it with our children.* Discuss it as a family and make an informed decision as a family of our values.

[gblowfish]

Mark Twain is Gangsta!

[NewChief]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I'll post my 2 cents because I don't frequent the DC and then I'll shut up.

The book is one of the most powerful books in American literature about promoting the message of racial equality.

So PC or not PC, the idiocy of this is stunning.

The point of the "translation" is that people might not be able to understand the power of the text due to the distraction of the language, which at the time wouldn't have been distracting. It's similar to the idea behind updating Shakespeare, Beowulf, or the Bible for that matter for modern audiences.

I'm not saying I agree with the thinking, but that is the thinking.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by milkman

I used to read, and even sometimes participate in political discussions, when they were in the lounge, but since they have been sequestered to a sub forum, those discussions have become even more vitriolic.

How do you know they are vitriolic if you don't go there? Huh? HUH?!

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Donger

How do you know they are vitriolic if you don't go there? Huh? HUH?!

I used to go there.

That's how I learned not to go there anymore.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by milkman

I used to go there.

That's how I learned not to go there anymore.

Pity.

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by NewPhin

The point of the "translation" is that people might not be able to understand the power of the text due to the distraction of the language, which at the time wouldn't have been distracting. It's similar to the idea behind updating Shakespeare, Beowulf, or the Bible for that matter for modern audiences.

I'm not saying I agree with the thinking, but that is the thinking.

Are there seriously people out there that dont have the mental capacity to put this into "context" ??

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by NewPhin

The point of the "translation" is that people might not be able to understand the power of the text due to the distraction of the language, which at the time wouldn't have been distracting. It's similar to the idea behind updating Shakespeare, Beowulf, or the Bible for that matter for modern audiences.

I'm not saying I agree with the thinking, but that is the thinking.

Just curious, only because I don't know, but I'm assuming that those were translated differently because they were hard to understand, not because there was anything that would be considered offensive, right?

[Lbedrock1]

Originally Posted by milkman

Who the hell wants to go to the shithole?

I have to say. I'm pretty ambivalent about this, though I also think the whole thing, changing a word in a classic because we have become PC pussies is pretty ****ed up.

But if this was posted in DC, then I would never have known a thread existed.

Reposting outside of the shithole is not the same as reposting from the lounge.

I don't think I have become a PC Pussy because I would choose not to be call a N*gger or any other racial word you can come up with. I also don't want my child to have to read garbage in school that depicts others that look like him as that either. This was considered a classic years ago and Im pretty sure it wasn't a classic because of the word that they changed in it. Maybe you like to read N*gger, Sp**k, M*nkey and other words when they refer to others but you could try and put yourself in their shoes and understand they shouldn't have to put up with it. If you use words that a commonly used for all people like Punks I can understand where you would say that we have become PCP's because it doesnt refer to any race. I don't care if you call me a word that you would call your cousin but at least try and understand it doesn't make people PC pussies because they dont want to be called a racial slur or even hear it....now back to the Chiefs.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Lbedrock1

I don't think I have become a PC Pussy because I would choose not to be call a N*gger or any other racial word you can come up with. I also don't want my child to have to read garbage in school that depicts others that look like him as that either. This was considered a classic years ago and Im pretty sure it wasn't a classic because of the word that they changed in it. Maybe you like to read N*gger, Sp**k, M*nkey and other words when they refer to others but you could try and put yourself in their shoes and understand they shouldn't have to put up with it. If you use words that a commonly used for all people like Punks I can understand where you would say that we have become PCP's because it doesnt refer to any race. I don't care if you call me a word that you would call your cousin but at least try and understand it doesn't make people PC pussies because they dont want to be called a racial slur or even hear it....now back to the Chiefs.

I am not suggesting that the use of the word is okay.

I am suggesting that censoring the word in a book is pussified.

My grandfather was Mexican, and I didn't like it any better than you in your situation when someone used the word "w*tback".

But I am not going to support the idea of censoring a word in a book simply because it isn't pc.

[kstater]

I'm gonna be in the minority here. Don't like it,don't buy it. I'm sure there is still unedited copies out there.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Lbedrock1

I don't think I have become a PC Pussy because I would choose not to be call a N*gger or any other racial word you can come up with. I also don't want my child to have to read garbage in school that depicts others that look like him as that either. This was considered a classic years ago and Im pretty sure it wasn't a classic because of the word that they changed in it. Maybe you like to read N*gger, Sp**k, M*nkey and other words when they refer to others but you could try and put yourself in their shoes and understand they shouldn't have to put up with it. If you use words that a commonly used for all people like Punks I can understand where you would say that we have become PCP's because it doesnt refer to any race. I don't care if you call me a word that you would call your cousin but at least try and understand it doesn't make people PC pussies because they dont want to be called a racial slur or even hear it....now back to the Chiefs.

The point of the book is that Huck Finn treats Jim, the supporting character, like a slave, because that's what society has taught him to do and then befriends him when he realizes he's a regular person like anyone else. In fact, Jim is the most redeeming character in the book.

And the power of the book is that in spite of Jim's redeeming qualities, people still want his head and even Huck doesn't know whether to treat him like a slave or a real person.

You obviously have not read the book. The book is a classic not because it had controversial racial slurs. It's a classic because it sent a powerful message about racial equality at a time when there was none. Why would anybody struggle to put that kind of a message in front of their child?

[DBOSHO]

I wonder why brock hasnt shown back up. This is old news right?

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Are there seriously people out there that dont have the mental capacity to put this into "context" ??

IIRC, reading this book coincided roughly around the time a couple of buddies and I were busted by the librarian giggling over the entry 'penis' in the big dictionary in the middle of the reading section.

Actually, the latter was probably 4th grade, the former 7th or so. But you get what I'm saying.

[jAZ]

Ummm... settle down bevis.

It's a book out of copyright and an author/publisher who sees a market opportunity to sell books to people who don't use the book (but would otherwise) because of the language.

It's just one optional alternate version. It's not like it's the only version that will be published.

[Lbedrock1]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The point of the book is that Huck Finn treats Jim, the supporting character, like a slave, because that's what society has taught him to do and then befriends him when he realizes he's a regular person like anyone else. In fact, Jim is the most redeeming character in the book.

And the power of the book is that in spite of Jim's redeeming qualities, people still want his head and even Huck doesn't know whether to treat him like a slave or a real person.

You obviously have not read the book. The book is a classic not because it had controversial racial slurs. It's a classic because it sent a powerful message about racial equality at a time when there was none. Why would anybody struggle to put that kind of a message in front of their child?

I understand the point of the book, but the kids didn't get that point after reading it and they thought it was ok to use the word in the book. See racism doesn't exicst because of the book it is because of what parents teach their children about other people.