noxiousdog wrote:Because it's a historical work.
I'll start with ND, and try to sprinkle in responses to other as well.
So yes, it's a "historical work". But that is an arbitrary distinction that we've just applied to it. We could stop applying it just as easily. I don't really care so much that we've labeled it a culturally significant book, I'm just saying that we've done so, but it was basically arbitrary. We could have not done so, and pretty much nothing changes. We could not do so now, and civilization (or our culture) won't come crashing down around our ears. It's still just novel.
noxiousdog wrote:They whole point of reading classical literature is to put us in the context of the time and culture the book was written and teach empathy towards the
If you whitewash it, you remove context.
My problem with this kind of argument is that it elevates the use of a word far above it's actual role in the novel. HF isn't what it is because it uses the N word. Beyond that - it's WHO is deciding that it's important that we keep subjecting people to the use of this word in popular culture. And it's not just a word. Words have power. And this one in particular has power. I'm not going to sit here and say that I need to read HF with the N word in it. Because I don't.
noxiousdog wrote:It also will get to the point where there aren't unedited versions of Huck FInn and definitely won't be taught in middle school or college. I mean, when's the last time you got a book somewhere other than Amazon?
I have no idea whether or not your slippery-slope will come to pass.
noxiousdog wrote:I'm not passionate about it, but I don't like it. I couldn't care less about sitcom episodes.
I understand it. I feel the same way that you feel about sitcom episodes, and also about novels.
hepcat wrote:I am more passionate about it as I don't want a Fahrenheit 451 world, no matter how well meaning the folks with the flamethrowers think they are.
I get that too, but we aren't face with only two choices here. I don't really want a F451 world either, and I'm not suggesting that we bust out flamethrowers and burn books.
But especially if we are talking about books that are being taught as part of a compulsory curriculum, we have traditionally lacked any empathy at all for the impact that may have on the students. For some reason, teaching empathy towards whatever ND meant to include there is somehow more important than having empathy for those currently being harmed by the usage of it.
I guess all I'm saying is that I'm open to rethinking it, especially in certain contexts. If you want to read a book, and need the N word to be in it, I'm ok with that because you are actively seeking it out, and you're an adult. That's not really my concern.
hepcat wrote:I'm fine with moving statues and monuments honoring civil war heroes and other racist figures from history to museums where they can add context to their existence, and I'm fine with removing the confederate flag from...well...anywhere, as that should have been done ages ago, imho.
Yeah, I'd also be fine smelting statues of traitors down. I don't really feel like I need to have the context added that even in 2020 some people still wanted to celebrate traitors. I'm not really advocating for that, but I don't care if others do. My life loses nothing of a statue of some Confederate traitor is suddenly unavailable. I'm not going to forget that the Confederacy was a fought for morally horrific reasons, or that there are still garbage humans today that believe the same things. It's not the statue that I've never seen that has conveyed this information to me.
hepcat wrote:But don't erase our history entirely, for crying out loud.
Right. I think that people are saying to stop making kids read books with the N word in it, when they can read the same book without the N word, and survive (especially given that they don't want to be reading the book anyway). We are talking about editing a word, not erasing our history entirely.
hepcat wrote:Now, if people want to ALSO have a white washed version of some stuff available, that's okay I guess. Just don't make that the ONLY version available.
Literally no one has asked for that.
Blackhawk wrote:As to who can use what word, I may agree in principle, but it isn't my battle to fight, and it isn't my decision to make. The victim has to have that power, and we're not the victim (well, most of us aren't.)
Yes, this.
Holman wrote:One huge reason for this is that it's difficult to justify it when so many students will feel the sting not only of the word itself but of the depiction of Jim as a racial stereotype in so many dimensions. HF is brilliant, but it comes from a place of white humor about the supposed inferiority of blacks, and even the aura of Magical Negro around Jim is embarrassing rather than redeeming.
That's what I'm trying to get at. Being considered a "historical novel" has to be weighed against the pain it causes today. You can't just tell the victims to piss off and suck it up.