Revision of the worst kind and honesty of the best...
One of my thrills early on in my writing efforts was SmartWriters quoting my belief on the fluidity of language. Having researched letters written before the spelling standardization had taken full root, by well-know figures (Oliver Wendell Holmes or Charles Sumner anyone?). It was apparent to me content should supersede the niceties--- yes, spelling and grammar are important elements, but THE biggest component in language should be and always remain, COMMUNICATION. Anyone who loves language knows the intensely personal, expressive power, hence why every generation coins their "own" words. It is no coincidenc the root of the words "community", "communion" and "communications" are the same. Language is much more than a bunch of thoughts and words strung together.
And with that kind of power, of bringing together, the equal and opposite is also true (as are the nuances in between the extremes).
Any writer worth their salt and honest about why they write for others, does so in part because of the power we wield over others perceptions, world view and formation of all the things important to us as people. Even if it's a momentary glimpse of joy, laughter, tears, anger. If we are truly blessed with the glib gift, we can shift people's paradigm.
Though in my estimation language is fluid, human morals and society are less so and the basic human soul, not at all.
I also think we often forget those old saws are there because they hewed a few truisms in their day. With the suggestion of removing an offending word from Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn, the one "Hell being paved with the tongues of misinformation, er, good intentions," comes to mind.
There are so many reasons this revision is WRONG. First because it would be a lie. Second, Twain is not here to approve or defend against the change. I believe HIS words, HIS creation is the one that should stand.
I understand some are offended. Personally I DETEST the hated word "nigger". It represents all that I used to be-- a slave. I HATE the WISH and INTENT of the word-- negating my or anyone else's soul. I ABHOR it's use as a usually mindless act of despite, the lowest part of our human souls. I will also not use the euphemism of the "n-word" here, though I won't utter it. It gives the word and not the sentiment the power. Instead I choose to write it and denounce it for all the ugliness it represents. Though I most certainly understand the reason so many black youth use it as a term of empowerment, coming from a BITCH and other offensive female words from way back, I took that route and I'm not sure if this is the best way to repurpose a word. A bit of who you are and the context the other word existed in, ceases and a piece of the world's heritage is lost.
I believe there are times that people SHOULD be offended. Context and usage of language IS important. To derail the odiousness of the word is to homogenize the Civil War and the struggles of the last two thousand years to ban the existence of slavery. There'a a reason the Holocaust Museum doesn't subvert what happened. To shift perceptions is to open the door to more of the same. I believe words and histories such as this should be shown in all it's gore and dripping vituperative nature. I think the ONLY people served by watering down the words, the work and the intent of a historical piece is to let those who would have others believe it "wasn't that bad" (think of words spoken so recently about MORE recent events) further off the hook.
Sure it in the short term, make those who are uncomfortable slightly more at ease. But is that really a correct response? And those with more evil intent, can rewrite experiences, negate feelings, demure accomplishments and build assaults as reasonable. There's been a massive effort to denigrate certain words (think of what happened with the terms "liberal" or "union" or "cooperative" over the last forty years and you know what I mean) Further, if it can be done to the imitable Mark Twain, then how will we fare?
Don't even do it for the children.Suck it up buttercup,I hate to break it to you, our children deal with our failures on a daily basis. From being engaged in wars over the planet, they and their peers are expected to fight,to drug and sexual abuse, or grinding down the hopes of a spiraling impoverished nation (if parents don't or can't work, what DOES become of the children?) The hate and fear mongered on a daily basis by media and seeing those in power escape ANY accountability and even prospering for throwing the "littler person" of whom children are even litter, under the bus. Do I think they can handle honest dialogue? More than likely. Probably many of them only carry such honest communication on with other kids.
So I think they can handle a few words from a not-so-bygone era that SHOULD be examined for what they are. Why not, when the results of our hypocrisy is played out on a daily basis in front of them? Perhaps we can convince them with a few more products and sound bites it's not that bad for them, either.
And with that kind of power, of bringing together, the equal and opposite is also true (as are the nuances in between the extremes).
Any writer worth their salt and honest about why they write for others, does so in part because of the power we wield over others perceptions, world view and formation of all the things important to us as people. Even if it's a momentary glimpse of joy, laughter, tears, anger. If we are truly blessed with the glib gift, we can shift people's paradigm.
Though in my estimation language is fluid, human morals and society are less so and the basic human soul, not at all.
I also think we often forget those old saws are there because they hewed a few truisms in their day. With the suggestion of removing an offending word from Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn, the one "Hell being paved with the tongues of misinformation, er, good intentions," comes to mind.
There are so many reasons this revision is WRONG. First because it would be a lie. Second, Twain is not here to approve or defend against the change. I believe HIS words, HIS creation is the one that should stand.
I understand some are offended. Personally I DETEST the hated word "nigger". It represents all that I used to be-- a slave. I HATE the WISH and INTENT of the word-- negating my or anyone else's soul. I ABHOR it's use as a usually mindless act of despite, the lowest part of our human souls. I will also not use the euphemism of the "n-word" here, though I won't utter it. It gives the word and not the sentiment the power. Instead I choose to write it and denounce it for all the ugliness it represents. Though I most certainly understand the reason so many black youth use it as a term of empowerment, coming from a BITCH and other offensive female words from way back, I took that route and I'm not sure if this is the best way to repurpose a word. A bit of who you are and the context the other word existed in, ceases and a piece of the world's heritage is lost.
I believe there are times that people SHOULD be offended. Context and usage of language IS important. To derail the odiousness of the word is to homogenize the Civil War and the struggles of the last two thousand years to ban the existence of slavery. There'a a reason the Holocaust Museum doesn't subvert what happened. To shift perceptions is to open the door to more of the same. I believe words and histories such as this should be shown in all it's gore and dripping vituperative nature. I think the ONLY people served by watering down the words, the work and the intent of a historical piece is to let those who would have others believe it "wasn't that bad" (think of words spoken so recently about MORE recent events) further off the hook.
Sure it in the short term, make those who are uncomfortable slightly more at ease. But is that really a correct response? And those with more evil intent, can rewrite experiences, negate feelings, demure accomplishments and build assaults as reasonable. There's been a massive effort to denigrate certain words (think of what happened with the terms "liberal" or "union" or "cooperative" over the last forty years and you know what I mean) Further, if it can be done to the imitable Mark Twain, then how will we fare?
Don't even do it for the children.Suck it up buttercup,I hate to break it to you, our children deal with our failures on a daily basis. From being engaged in wars over the planet, they and their peers are expected to fight,to drug and sexual abuse, or grinding down the hopes of a spiraling impoverished nation (if parents don't or can't work, what DOES become of the children?) The hate and fear mongered on a daily basis by media and seeing those in power escape ANY accountability and even prospering for throwing the "littler person" of whom children are even litter, under the bus. Do I think they can handle honest dialogue? More than likely. Probably many of them only carry such honest communication on with other kids.
So I think they can handle a few words from a not-so-bygone era that SHOULD be examined for what they are. Why not, when the results of our hypocrisy is played out on a daily basis in front of them? Perhaps we can convince them with a few more products and sound bites it's not that bad for them, either.