Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Publisher defends censoring Twain's 'Huckleberry Finn'

tara.3@osu.edu

Published: Monday, January 10, 2011

Updated: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 22:01

huckfinn

Courtesy of MCT

Bronze statues of Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn stand on the Hannibal riverfront, along the Mississippi River in Hannibal, Mo.

"Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it."

Those words are often attributed to Mark Twain, who penned the classics "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" and "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer." If Twain were alive today, he'd witness his beefy novels being censored by an Alabama-based publishing company.

The language in Twain's novels, deemed by some to be racist, has put them on banned book lists in the past. Now the words he used more than a century ago are again creating controversy.

Publishing company NewSouth Inc. is scheduled to release the two Twain classics next month in a bound volume with edits that have some educators crying foul. The word "n-----" will be replaced with "slave" and the word "injut" with "Indian."

Randall Williams, co-founder and editor-in-chief of NewSouth, told The Lantern that people have "misunderstood our intent" and are "accusing us of censorship." Williams said he respects their opinions but disagrees.

He said the new edits do not diminish the impact of the novels and acknowledged Twain as a "master stylist."

"The point and power of Twain's language in the story is still very, very present," Williams said.

The replacement words may either support or weaken the underlying themes sustained throughout the stories of the changing conflict of racism in America, according to some English educators.

Steven Fink, an associate professor in the Department of English, said the new edits could make the theme "nonsense in some ways." Fink said the edits could cloud Twain's representation of racism in American history.

Lynn Taylor, an English teacher at Centennial High School in Columbus, said the new edit "deflates the power of Twain's work."

Williams said the idea came from Alan Gribben of Auburn University at Montgomery, who approached NewSouth last summer. Repeated attempts to reach Gribben were unsuccessful.

Fink said Twain might be "sarcastic" and feel that "controversy is good."

Part of the controversy stems from Twain's inability to give his opinion. Twain, whose real name is Samuel Clemens, died in 1910. His work is part of the public domain, meaning no one owns the rights to his work.

Twain might have laughed, Taylor said.

Williams took a different approach. He said Twain was a "progressive individual" and that "he was adaptable" and might want "a broad audience."

The new volume, to be released in mid-February, has "generated incredible national or even international discussion," Williams said.

But Taylor said the "issue of language is at heart (of the novels). That's what makes it good to teach."

For those against removing Twain's original words and creating a MadLib of sorts with his novels, Williams sees no downside with giving readers options.

"If young readers are introduced to the novel in this edited form and fall in love with Twain's work," Williams said, "they will go out and read more of Twain's writing and maybe they will seek out the original version."

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

7 comments

Anonymous
Wed Jan 26 2011 22:38
Can someone please discuss the fact that changing n*****r to a more modernly appropriate word and then replacing "injut" with Indian, which is also an incorrect term in describing the intended people, is sloppy political correctness at best?

Either way I believe it's a travesty. The work and it's language are elements of their time and should be studied as such.

Shannon Scott
Wed Jan 12 2011 21:22
���"Maybe they will seek the original version" (?) They won't be able to find them if others jump on this scum publisher's bandwagon. As a child, reading the "N" word or "Injut" (Indian), taught me how these words were once used, their role, their significance, i.e., their meaning. This should be illegal for ethical reasons. Take meanings out & you rewrite history to be of your own making instead of history's! I'm not ordinarily a fan of book burnings, but less a few kept around for history's reminder of such lowly crimes against literature, I'd pyre a pile of these in a Barnes & Noble parking lot in a hot minute!
Anonymous
Wed Jan 12 2011 15:01
Twain must be rolling over in his grave. Changing the words of a master is wrong.
Anonymous
Wed Jan 12 2011 10:33
Why more political correctness gone amuck? this is disgraceful censorship of an american classic of literature. At the same time, phony liberals would have us believe it's ok for artists, entertainers and others to mock Christianity at every turn. Free speech is evidently only for the far left and radicals who hate America, its history and its traditions. How are students to really perceive a real grasp of life in Mark twain's time without seeing and digesting the speech and habits of the time. The N-word is also OK for some groups to use, but not anyone else- a double standard for sure. this is, again, a disgrace; this publisher should be boycotted for censoring free speech and aborting a traditional and historic classic that belongs to us in its entirelty!
doug.hall
Wed Jan 12 2011 09:13
I've seen several editorials and talking head discussions by/including African-Americans; Leonard Pitts editorial was excellent. Those I have seen were opposed to this modification.

Removing the "N-word" reduces the offensiveness of the language to modern readers. But it also reduces our sensitivity to how something that used to be common was recognized as something that is (and should have been but wasn't) offensive. If we don't remember how we used to behave we will forget why our behavior evolved.

We must study history to learn from it. Changing the text of the book changes the lessons that can be learned from the past, in this case, not in a good way.

Anonymous
Wed Jan 12 2011 08:40
Changing the words changes the book. It is not the book Mark Twain wrote anymore.
SLCfan
Wed Jan 12 2011 01:22
You cannot change literature simply because someone may be offended. History happened. The words exist. You cannot change the past by eliminating the taboo words in a work written in the midst of slavery. The ignorant edit of this classic is worse than the ignorance of racism.






log out