I agree, but I have to say. There are black people who feel offended by it. They're part of the reason why this even happened. There are, of course, also black people who are on our side (and white people who are not on our side), but you shouldn't assume to speak for an entire race/group of people.
That being said...
We can't erase that part of our history by erasing the word from the book. I personally think it's disrespectful to pretend it didn't happen. It's historically accurate, people! We need to face the ugly truths of our past in order to better ourselves today. Plus, the entire point of the freaking novel is that, by the end, Huck learns to stifle his racism because he realizes that Jim is a person just like him.
I would be okay with a contemporary book containing many usages of the word if it were somehow made clear that the people using the word are ignorant and that the word is hurtful. With Huck Finn, everyone knows that practically everyone was a racist ass in the 1800s, so it should be clear that it's not okay to use the word.
There's a difference between this and say, something like the original Charlie and the Chocolate factory, in which the Oompa Loompas were African pygmies. That story is fantasy, not a part of our history, so it doesn't hurt the story to change the Oompa Loompas to a less harmful orange color and lack of discernible ancestry. At least, I don't think it hurts the story. The fact that they are Wonka's (admittedly willing) slaves just adds on to the original's harmful message.
Okay, yeah, so I should have thought a bit more before lumping the race as a whole but from my experience (mainly living in a town full of ignorant asses)is that its the white people who make a big deal out of these kinds of things whereas the black people don't give a gosh darn or if they do, its because someone told them they should be. But that's just from my experience.
Agreed, but did they change the book or just do that in the movie? I feel completely different about book to movie adaptations but I think you should leave the original work alone.
That being said...
We can't erase that part of our history by erasing the word from the book. I personally think it's disrespectful to pretend it didn't happen. It's historically accurate, people! We need to face the ugly truths of our past in order to better ourselves today. Plus, the entire point of the freaking novel is that, by the end, Huck learns to stifle his racism because he realizes that Jim is a person just like him.
I would be okay with a contemporary book containing many usages of the word if it were somehow made clear that the people using the word are ignorant and that the word is hurtful. With Huck Finn, everyone knows that practically everyone was a racist ass in the 1800s, so it should be clear that it's not okay to use the word.
There's a difference between this and say, something like the original Charlie and the Chocolate factory, in which the Oompa Loompas were African pygmies. That story is fantasy, not a part of our history, so it doesn't hurt the story to change the Oompa Loompas to a less harmful orange color and lack of discernible ancestry. At least, I don't think it hurts the story. The fact that they are Wonka's (admittedly willing) slaves just adds on to the original's harmful message.
Okay, I'll shut up now. :3
Reply
Agreed, but did they change the book or just do that in the movie? I feel completely different about book to movie adaptations but I think you should leave the original work alone.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment