Comments on: >Take it from the old stage manager

By: Rita

Rita — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 02:03:52 +0000

>One of the best things about reading books is getting to know the mindset of the narrator. It's a great way to learn how and why people thought and acted how they did, especially in books like Huck Finn. In a book written a hundred years ago and set in the antebellum era, that aspect of literature is so helpful in understanding the time period. Before reading Huck Finn last year for a class, I'd never read anything by Mark Twain. I can't say that I care for Huck as a character, nor did I really enjoy Twain's style (much too episodic for my taste), but the vocabulary was a major factor in the book as a whole. Without the uneducated southern white boy using the language he does, how would readers today know that similar children in the South 150 years ago actually DID say similar phrases? It's a lesson in American culture, a culture that is still present (sadly) and should still be recognized. Changing the language would, to me, negate much of what Twain wrote.

By: candlewycke

candlewycke — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:45:06 +0000

>Wonderful and insightful post. You are correct that Wallace is guilty of omission but what is worse is that he is guilty of the same sort of historical revision that created the myth of the the lost cause in the South and that diminished the importance of the issue of slavery to the Civil War to begin with. In one fell swoop Wallace has negated the importance of "that peculiar institution" to the history of America and to African Americans, he has reduced the worthy feat of forging a culture out of oppression to a curious happenstance with no lasting merit and most important of all he has tarnished the hard work of men and women of all colors who worked towards the freeing of Slaves and then towards true equality. The truth is that in their lives both Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King dealt with commonplace word "nigger" and it was their dealing with it, and the way theyd ealt with it that brought about positive change. We mus'nt forget that it was a little book written by the abolitionist Harriet Beecher Stowe that began a transformation in the minds of many Americans in regards to Blacks, both free and enslaved and she used that word to great effect. It is no different than Twains use of the same. Remove the word from history and you remove the history that launched the word and that serves no one!

By: Helen Frost

Helen Frost — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 02:03:57 +0000

>Yes, I agree--while children are developing their sense of their place in society, it seems risky to offer them books where racism is portrayed as fact, without offering some emotional guidance. I don't mean didactic, and I can't find my copy of Elijah of Buxton that I mentioned as an example of a book I'd offer young readers instead of Huck Finn. But I remember that Elijah struggles with tears as he confronts the reality of slavery; there's an elder who speaks with great emotion and eloquence about the word "nigger." (I think Curtis may have made the whole thing clear without using the word himself. "What kind of baby do you think..." etc. Something like that.)

And Roger, I want to say, when I made that first cryptic comment, pulling one sentence out of your thoughtful and truthful essay, it was out of a feeling of frustration that everywhere I turned people were coming down so hard on this new edition, talking about the stupidity of it without any discussion of the reasons someone might have thought it was a good or necessary idea. I was just trying to shake the tree a bit, and that sentence was where I grabbed the branch.

Thanks,

By: Debbie Reese

Debbie Reese — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:22:10 +0000

>Yes.

By: Roger Sutton

Roger Sutton — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:56:20 +0000

>I haven't read the new edition, but if its effect is to make Huck's racism less racist, I question the value of teaching the book. Wouldn't it be better to introduce the real book later than to use a whitewashed one earlier?

By: Helen Frost

Helen Frost — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 01:11:58 +0000

>I mean–I hope this is obvious!–writing about women in such a way that you can tell it hasn't occurred to them that women may be among their readers.

By: Helen Frost

Helen Frost — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:36:39 +0000

>Debbie, thanks for posting the link to your essay. It makes me smile, the idea that kids won't know what an Injun is if nobody clues them in by changing it to Indian.
But it seriously gets at something I've been trying to think through, too–that I hope we've made some progress, and that we should think twice about introducing things to contemporary children for the sake of historical accuracy, if those things are hurtful to any potential reader.
Children do pick up on clues that an author knows they exist, which makes me think that they must also be fully aware that they are not included in the intended audience for a book. And nothing makes me stop reading faster than when that happens to me. (For example, male writers writing about women.)

By: Katie Davis

Katie Davis — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 19:33:07 +0000

>I interviewed Dr. Gribben on my kidlit podcast yesterday. I was against changing a word of Twain's genius, but, shocked as I am to say it, after 45 minutes of one-to-one talking with this man, I've got to say, I'm on the fence. I want more kids exposed to Huck Finn, and if the schools aren't going to let them read it if it has the N-word in it, I have to reconsider my original stance. And yet that makes me uncomfortable too.

If you want to listen: http://bit.ly/fEpRmU

By: Jadedmastermind

Jadedmastermind — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 05:24:36 +0000

>The one phrase from that book that stands out the most is "He was a mighty good nigger, Jim was." It is a jarring juxtaposition - a compliment right next to a hideous racial slur. In that one sentence, Huck both praises and degrades Jim. Although Huck thinks highly of Jim, he still views him as subhuman, and he's still a racist. Change it to "He was a mighty good man, Jim was" and Huck ceases to be a racist. The phrase loses its irony, its brutal implication of racism, and becomes instead a simple compliment.

And when Huck says "I knowed he was white inside" this implies that Huck still thinks of other niggers as subhuman. Huck is still a racist at this point, and thinks of Jim as an exception to the rule. Change the phrase to "I knowed he was good" and the implied assumptions about other blacks disappear. That single change drastically alters Huck's character and dilutes Twain's message about racism.

The irony of "I knowed he was white inside" extends to today's youth. Today however, the sad fact is that the ones saying it are likely to be urban black youth who use phrases like "Uncle Tom" and "Oreo Cookie" to deride fellow black students who strive for academic acheivement. Today's Huck Finns are paradoxically black. That's one message that today's black youth desperately need. Jim was the one purely good character in the book, superior in every way to the white characters in the book.

By: Debbie Reese

Debbie Reese — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 23:47:25 +0000

>The other changes made are in TOM SAWYER. "Injun" was changed to "Indian" and "half-breed" changed to "half-blood."

I think the changes are a mistake. I uploaded an essay at my site.

http://bit.ly/igvTdY