The expurgated 'Huckleberry Finn'

Here we go again: This week, NewSouth Books, a publisher based in Montgomery, Ala., announced plans to release an omnibus edition of Mark Twain's "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" and "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer" with a couple of offensive words removed. Most prominent, of course, is "nigger," which appears 219 times in "Huckleberry Finn" and has been the source of repeated efforts to ban or restrict the novel since it was published 125 years ago. In this new edition, the word in question has been replaced by "slave."

To give their project credibility, NewSouth teamed with Alan Gribben, chair of the English department at Alabama's Auburn University, to do the clean-up job. According to Publishers Weekly, Gribben was motivated by his own deep discomfort over the novel's language and by the reactions of younger readers. "After a number of talks," he told PW, "I was sought out by local teachers, and to a person, they said we would love to teach ... 'Huckleberry Finn,' but we feel we can't do it anymore. In the new classroom, it's really not acceptable."

I agree: The N-word is not acceptable -- although I'm not sure "slave" is much of an improvement, with its unthinking conflation of servitude and race. Like professor Gribben, I've discussed "Huckleberry Finn" in the classroom, and it is always difficult and awkward to work around that word. This, however, is precisely why it needs to remain part of our experience of "Huckleberry Finn."

Literature, after all, is not there to reassure us; it's supposed to reveal us, in all our contradictory complexity. The fact that it makes us uncomfortable is part of the point -- like all great art, it demands that we confront our half-truths and self-deceptions, the justifications and evasions by which we measure out our daily lives.

Huck is a perfect case in point, a rebel who can't reconcile his love for the escaped slave Jim with his cultural indoctrination, who goes back and forth about whether his companion is fully a human being.

“All right, then, I’ll go to hell,” he announces when he finally decides the matter. The choice of words is telling, since in choosing not to return Jim to slavery, Huck articulates the central moral argument of the book. This is the point Twain is making, that there is a difference between custom and conscience, between social convention and the ethics of the individual. At the heart of this is the issue of language, the words we use and how we use them, and what they tell us about the reality we construct.

On its website, NewSouth notes that this new edition of "Huckleberry Finn" will not supersede previous editions of the novel: "If the publication sparks good debate about how language impacts learning or about the nature of censorship or the way in which racial slurs exercise their baneful influence, then our mission in publishing this new edition of Twain’s works will be more emphatically fulfilled," the publisher declares.

I don't know how that happens, how debate is stirred by sweeping that which disturbs us under the rug. Professor Gribben ought to understand this; it's supposed to be in the nature of his academic work. As for NewSouth, with its politically correct agenda, it might be useful to go back to Twain.

In 1885, the same year  "Huckleberry Finn" was published, Twain wrote an essay called "On the Decay of the Art of Lying" that seems to speak directly to the current contretemps. "The highest perfection of politeness," he suggests there, "is only a beautiful edifice, built, from the base to the dome, of graceful and gilded forms of charitable and unselfish lying."

-- David L. Ulin

Photo: Mark Twain, in an undated photo. Credit: The Mark Twain House & Museum / Associated Press

Comments

[Robert Koepke]

I am organizing a national boycott of Newsouth Books. I have set up a Facebook page here http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Boycott-NewSouth-Books/154502677931787 and am spreading the word in every way I can. I am an artist, writer, and historian and this is as disgraceful and disgusting an act as can be perpetrated on literature and Twain's memory and legacy.

[Rodney]

I think that changing the n word to "slave" would be even more offensive, since the word "redneck" is ubiquitous in the printed world, yet it originates in white slaves. ("The 'Redlegs' of Barbados" by Jill Sheppard)
Even the word "slave" comes from the word "Slav", a group of whites more enslaved throughout history than any other people (The Dictionary). The term "Slav" became the root of the word "slave" in almost every culture, because it was assumed your slave was a Slav.
Nell Irvin Painter - professor Emerita at Princeton University, winner of some Edwards award, and author of several books on black history (yep, she's African American. And yep, she hates white people) has this to say about slavery in the American colonies in her book "The History of White People" published just this year - 2010:
"By the middle of the 17th century, when Virginia's slave population numbered 11,000, only some 300 were African. Any of them - African, British, Scottish or Irish - were lucky to outlive their terms of service. Of the 300 children shipped from Britain between 1619 and 1622, only 12 were still alive in 1624." So 2 to 5 years later, 288 had died.

There were 4 white slaves for every black 1 in the American colonies - "White Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britain's White Slaves in America" by Don Jordan and Michael Walsh;
"Eighteenth-Century White Slaves: Fugitive Notices; Volume I, Pennsylvania, 1729-1760 (Documentary Reference Collections)" by Daniel Meaders

Half of all indentured servants never lived to see their freedom - "They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the Enslavement of Whites in Early America" by Michael A. Hoffman II

And Africans enslaved Europeans first, as well as during, the American enslavement of Africans - "Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast and Italy, 1500-1800 (Early Modern History)" by Robert C. Davis;
"White Slaves, African Masters: An Anthology of American Barbary Captivity Narratives" by Paul Baepler

One huge difference is that white slaves were not allowed to reproduce. White male slaves in the Ottoman Empire were forcibly made eunichs, and many of them died from the forced castration. Even in America, the white slaves who were political prisoners from Ireland (shipped in 1655 by Henry Cromwell), were often worked to death in the sun, called "redshanks", "rednecks", and "redlegs" before they expired from the heat. (The Redlegs of Barbados by Jill Sheppard)

[Talisa]

This is outrageous. In no way shape or form should this be allowed. This is a book and it isn't offensive. This is crazy. What type of censored world do we live in.

[Holistic Medicine]

Just have 2 versions like the Bible has many different flavors for different tastes. Always keep the original and add the Revised Standard Version, etc.

[KT]

Actually, the original reason Huckleberry Finn was challenged was because it portrays a black man as a better father figure than a white man. It used to be controversial because it wasn't racist ENOUGH, now the controversy is because it is supposedly racist. If you think the book is promoting racism, you didn't read it. And if you did, you need to go look up "satire" because you clearly missed the point. Don't censor the classics.

[CH]

It's Alabama, if the bible wasn't too sacred to bastardize, why should Huck Finn be any different. Sad.

[box211]

No one should be allowed to alter what a deceased author has originally written. It is wrong, no matter who, what, when, or where it is done. It is basically lying and not what the actual author intended to say. When people believe they have the right to alter the truth, something is very wrong with their agenda. The "N" word was used for a reason and we are certainly strong enough to deal with it. No?

[Polly]

In no way should "Huck Finn" be edited. If we start sanitizing books for our children, we are sanitizing history. There have been many eras of thinking throughout history, and if we edit the literature of those times as to make it non-offensive, it waters down history, and what can our children learn from that? We need to teach them the lessons of history, or they will be doomed to repeat it.

[Chris]

How about we let history, in all its glory and disgrace, stay intact? What next, history books whitewashing the holocaust?

[John C]

why don't we just call him "sir jim, knight of the roundtable" that would make everybody (or at least me) happy

[No_Hope]

Oh and from now on Mobey Dick will be known as Mobey Aquatic Mammal.

THEY ACT IN YOUR NAME.

[Allen Braun]

It is idiocy removing the word. The word was used commonly at the time and exactly in the way and context that Samuel Clemens wrote his stories. Kids are not stupid. They can read and understand things in the context of the times. Whitewashing the novel to be politically correct in today's context robs readers of the flavour of the times of Huckleberry Finn.

"I sometimes think it were even better and safer not to lie at all
than to lie injudiciously." -Mark Twain

Newsouth Books should take heed and not publish this lie.

[Cody]

Changing the "n" word to slave in Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer isn't right at all as they have two totally different meanings. Slave in the end is race neutral and was practiced by many races which enslaved many other races. Replacing a racial slur with a race neutral word just doesn't retain the meaning.

Further the point of the article is well made.
"there is a difference between custom and conscience, between social convention and the ethics of the individual"
It would be similar, I think, to a person born during a different era still calling people "colored" but realizing that those same people shouldn't be discriminated against. Without teaching the struggle to separate custom and conscience we would end up with lessened ability to understand the complexities of our world and the people in it.

[TheBigPicture]

First Little Black Sambo and now this...When will the censorship cease...

That's part of American History, for better or worse...

[SiR]

This is pretty sad...Mark Twain is probably rolling over in his grave right now. People are to sensitive these days...grow up. If you don't like it don't read it.

[Rob McMillin]

Also, "Moby Dick" will be retitled "Moby Penis".

[James A. Bazinet]

Isn't the whole point of reading Huckleberry Finn is to discuss racism and ignorance, and right and wrong? Doesn't leaving the author's original language underscore these themes? Do we really need to "white wash" every uncomfortable issue away? Wouldn't negating the uneasiness behind the language decrease the impact of the book?

Samuel Clemens is either having a big laugh or rolling in his grave...

[Zonker]

If you think Huckleberry Finn is a racist tome, you either didn't read it or didn't understand it. In our knee-jerk, sound-bite culture, a single word has become more important that a complete thought.

[blackbelt85]

yeah,let's just sanitize everything that may offend someone good golly it would be awful if someone got offended. this is insane.

[ChumleyX]

This is outrageous! Alter something because it’s awkward to discuss? That is exactly why it should be discussed. So by that logic, it's ok to re-write history because it's more comfortable? The language of the period shows exactly what was culturally acceptable at the time and if nothing else, how far we have grown as a society towards the acceptance and assimilation of the African-American culture. From an artistic standpoint it is akin to painting a top the female figure in Botticelli's Birth of Venus.

[Carraway]

That sort of censorship is absolutely not necessary. It is all about context and what is taken from the word being present in the text. Altering a great author's work because norms have changed is not going to solve anything.

[Amy Alkon]

On the bright side, these vandals didn't rewrite him into "African-American Jim."

[Garry]

I am sure that there are many other oldies that have to be censored but i guess this is a good start! I am sure Mark Twain is turning over in his grave!!!

[Des @ NovelSuggestions.com]

I can imagine that it can produce some discomfort in the classroom, but what difficult issue doesn't? All the more reason not to deface a piece of classic literature in my view; it has even more to teach us with the passage of time.

[Mongo]

And in related news, Michelangelo's David is going to be wearing pants, God forbid anybody gets offended by a statue of a naked man also.....

[Ian Lewis]

I for one will be encouraging my children to read the original versions of Huckleberry Finn & Tom Sawyer. It is important that they understand the historical context of the words, including the "N" word, and are taught to be critical about what they read.

One of the issues with censoring old books is that it rewrites not only the book but history itself. Mark Twain wrote about people, their feelings and the contradictions we create for ourselves.

The stories make good reading and have much to teach. Better to leave them that way.

[Terra Firma]

Thanks for a well written article that makes the point perfectly. Look to the message over the words. You can't change how people spoke in the 1800s, and isn't it a great discussion for a teacher to have? I find literature and music to be a fascinating insight into how people thought and behaved in different time periods. Some of the songs of the 4os have dreadful racial slurs, but they are still interesting to get an idea of what was acceptable at the time and how we thought as a nation. It is history. And let's face it, who is the good guy in Huck Finn?
Arrgh, please, no censorship. Instead have the students get the message of the book and not worry about a word that had a different connotation at the time.
Oh I know, how about having your students learn something from the book instead of white washing it like the fence Tom Sawyer was painting? Just a mean a trick...

[Michael A]

This is absolutely ridiculous. That book is a classic work and represents one of the very first anti-racist pieces of literature. By removing any words or altering the work, you neuter it and take its power.
I know the whites would rather hide their hatred and fear by modifying these works, but we need to face the fact that this happened, this book opened our eyes to it, and we need to learn and grow from it. Not change history to make it seem as if we were always decent.
It's a word. The word only has the power we choose to give it, and sadly, this gives it more power.... not less.

[Tim Day]

Does anyone related to this travesty consider the fact that this is plagiarism. what they are doing is not only wrong it is illegal.

[mattmchugh]

This is NOT about censorship. It's about profiteering. English professor Alan Gribben and publisher NewSouth Books (both of whom SHOULD know better) are trying to make money selling an expurgated version to grade schools wary of introducing offensive words to young kids. The teachers' caution is understandable; Gribben and NewSouth's attempt to capitalize on it is deplorable.

Join the Facebook Protest Group: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Boycott-Gribben-NewSouth-Books-Huck-Finn/154431531272953

[John Zavesky]

What's next, New South Books rewriting the last scene of "Grapes of Wrath," where Rose of Sharon now has a goat with her to give the starving man milk? Please. The fact that this book continues to cause so much controversy 125 years after its publication only makes the argument as to the novel's greatness. The only other book that continues to create as much controversy is the bible. Twain was the better story teller by a mile and "Huck Finn" a much more enjoyable read.

[Andrea]

This is outrageous!

It is more important now to keep the language as is so that our children, and our children's children understand the fight for civil rights as it ACTUALLY WAS. Young people need to understand that this is how people spoke and this is what minorities had to endure during that time. Not only was it in literature, it was everywhere. Just because it is hard to read something, doesn't mean one shouldn't.

And I agree with previous comments, it is a disgrace that a publisher would feel it is even remotely appropriate to change the literature of a deceased writer. Shame on you Alabama! And Furthermore, of all places, Alabama? Where racism still thrives? COME ON!

[hank]

Gimme a break

[sarah]

The last time I checked Gribben was not Mark Twain. Censorship is an ugly business. Get this man fired so that he will not be able to complete his agenda. While you are at it get the people who hired this man fired as well. We have no time to waste with fools who pretend to be educators.