New edition of 'Huckleberry Finn' to lose the 'n' word

Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
New edition of 'Huckleberry Finn' to lose the 'n' word

Quote:
NewSouth Books’ upcoming edition of Mark Twain’s seminal novel Adventures of Huckleberry Finn will remove all instances of the “n” word—I’ll give you a hint, it’s not nonesuch—present in the text and replace it with slave. The new book will also remove usage of the word Injun. The effort is spearheaded by Twain expert Alan Gribben, who says his PC-ified version is not an attempt to neuter the classic but rather to update it.

 

I don't know if someone has posted this, but im curious, what do you guys think?

 

I appreciate why they want to 'update' it but I cannot help but be against it. If you want the book leave it as it was intended by the author or if you don't like that it is not "pc" for the times don't read it.  Everyone is capable of realising when the book was written and is capable of viewing it in that context, especially with the themes of the book. I'm fine with pc'ing things up which are made now, within limits. But im against watering down things from the past to make them more apropriate for the present.

 

http://shelf-life.ew.com/2011/01/03/huckleberry-finn-n-word-censor-edit/?hpt=T2

 

That said it is only one version of the book and no one is forcing anyone to read this version although it is likely that this is the versions schools would pick up.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
This is bullshit. This would

This is bullshit. This would be like making a movie about the Nazis and not showing a Swastika or death camp. "Nigger" is part of history like Hitler was part of German history. Both are dark periods in human history. No one should ignore the pain of others in history.

I am NOT for changing one word. Leave it as it as part of history. An important part of history. I think these well intended people need to take into account the intent of the book and the time of the usage, instead of placating the emotions of politically correct people.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:I

They changed the word to "slave" from what I understand.

I'm not black, but...

 

I' m with Roger Ebert. I'd rather be called a nigger than a slave.

 

I think equating the two words does far more harm than any potential good. Saying that they are interchangeable...TODAY...is really not a good idea.

 

 

This is aside from the fact that they are taking apart someone else's work simply because of the language used.

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Slippery Slope

Call it a slippery slope worry on my part. But I  fear if you start allowing censorship and change to literature or historical references, then you have jut left the door wide open for changing standards where history can be re-written and literature can be altered. Bad idea.

Doesn't the famous quote about those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it apply ?

I thought Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 covered the notion of censorship quite nicely.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4621
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 I hate the whole concept

 I hate the whole concept implicit in the idea that some words shouldn't be said. Words are a way for us to communicate what is happening inside our heads. Does anyone seriously believe that if no person uses or sees the word nigger again that any problems with racism will be solved? It isn't the use of the word that is racist, it is the person using the word as a slur that is racist. That person will be racist regardless of what words they use. So why go all hysterical and try to eliminate a word from the language? Hiding racism doesn't eliminate it.

 

Same thing goes with any other slur or cuss word. It is ridiculous that people get so upset over certain words but don't care if you use a synonym. At the end of the day, the words you use are far less important than the intended meaning.  

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Tadgh
atheist
Tadgh's picture
Posts: 125
Joined: 2010-08-29
User is offlineOffline
Tapey wrote: I don't know

Tapey wrote:

 

I don't know if someone has posted this, but im curious, what do you guys think?

Bollocks. Mark Twain was a better author than this editor could ever pretend to be, and knew what he was doing when he wrote the book. The use of the words 'nigger' and 'injun' say something not about the characters to which they were addressed, but about the characters who used the words, the society these characters were portrayed as being a part of, and for that matter, the readership as well.

Changing the words now says something about the cock-heads who decided to make that change. What it says about them is not particularly flattering.


Tadgh
atheist
Tadgh's picture
Posts: 125
Joined: 2010-08-29
User is offlineOffline
Of course, this is not the

Of course, this is not the first time that great works were debased and cheapened by editors. Even Shakespeare and (gasp!) the Bible aren't sacred to them.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 They should have just

 They should have just changed the er's to a's.


Sandycane
atheist
Sandycane's picture
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-10-16
User is offlineOffline
Very '1984'

Very '1984' Orwellian.

Changing all the 'n' words to 'slave' isn't accurate because not all 'n's' were slaves.

Besides, literature is like any art form - you can't take a classic and add/edit it and call it the same classic created by the original artist/author.

This reminds me of what happened about 15 years ago here. I read in the paper that a local school had decided to ban 'Of Mice and Men' written by Steinbeck... because it contained foul language. I had never read any Steinbeck and I was curious so, I picked it up from the library. I found no cuss words (unless you consider palooka a cuss word) and enjoyed it so much I read every Steinbeck book the library had.  

Maybe all this publicity will improve sales of the original, non-edited version.

'Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.' A. Einstein


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 I think "Orwellian" may be

 I think "Orwellian" may be a bit of a stretch. The book is in the public domain. Enough public schools opted to exclude it from their reading lists because of a quite unsparing use of racial slurs in the text that a publisher attempted to capitalize off that. I don't think they should exclude it from their reading lists. I think it's stupid but not a manipulation of the past intended to deceive anyone. 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


marcusfish
Superfan
marcusfish's picture
Posts: 676
Joined: 2007-05-11
User is offlineOffline
Let's Pretend

Beyond Saving wrote:

So why go all hysterical and try to eliminate a word from the language? Hiding racism doesn't eliminate it.

I always imagined that literary history was supposed to educate people. This sounds like taking a piece of history we don't care for and just pretending that it didn't exist because it (the conversation) is offensive to our sissified ears. Wouldn't we all be better served if people heard the word and had some exposure to its history? Wouldn't it be better for youngsters to see that and say "huh, I thought that was a mean word?". What a golden opportunity for his teacher or parent to explain it to him - where we have come from and why we consider it a mean word now.

I agree, Beyond, hiding our eyes doesn't make it disappear, it just removes our ability to deal with it effectively.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Sandycane wrote:Very '1984'

Sandycane wrote:

Very '1984' Orwellian.

Changing all the 'n' words to 'slave' isn't accurate because not all 'n's' were slaves.

Besides, literature is like any art form - you can't take a classic and add/edit it and call it the same classic created by the original artist/author.

This reminds me of what happened about 15 years ago here. I read in the paper that a local school had decided to ban 'Of Mice and Men' written by Steinbeck... because it contained foul language. I had never read any Steinbeck and I was curious so, I picked it up from the library. I found no cuss words (unless you consider palooka a cuss word) and enjoyed it so much I read every Steinbeck book the library had.  

Maybe all this publicity will improve sales of the original, non-edited version.

This is an adult conversation replacing "nigger" with "n" does nothing when everyone knows what is being said. If you were really attacking a black person in a hateful way, then proper condemnation would be in order. But we are talking about A WORD in the context of history.  Using the full spelling in a historical context is not bigoted.

History can be very ugly but it should never be swept under the rug.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


marcusfish
Superfan
marcusfish's picture
Posts: 676
Joined: 2007-05-11
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Sandycane

Brian37 wrote:

Sandycane wrote:
Changing all the 'n' words

This is an adult conversation replacing "nigger" with "n" does nothing when everyone knows what is being said.  

I would add that in treating a word as if it were something to be afraid of will teach, well, fear of it. If we are trying to understand or learn from something, our terror of the subject matter will do nothing but impede progress.

I would equate it to our being too kind and careful with theological ideologies. If we don't force their arguments to stand on their own validity, we give them a kind of imagined exempt status. If we treat the subject as if reasonable and intelligent people can't talk about it, low and behold, you've got yourself an elevated status.

(I'm not typing the n word in question because I am at work and there is no context in which that word can be typed on my computer)


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 Do any of you get this

 Do any of you get this lathered up when films are edited for television? There seems to be some outrage about this, which is kind of silly. 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Rich Woods
Rational VIP!
Rich Woods's picture
Posts: 868
Joined: 2008-02-06
User is offlineOffline
If the book offended

If the book offended someone, no one is forcing them to buy it. This is leftist, politically correct drivel.... its about aquiring political leverage, nothing more.

 

censoring words will never change how people feel. This is Humbug. 


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3719
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:This is

Brian37 wrote:

This is bullshit. This would be like making a movie about the Nazis and not showing a Swastika or death camp.

I suppose they can "update" the swastika to look like a butterfly. And the death camp will be "updated" into a school playground where the Nazis are the bullies.  

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Sandycane
atheist
Sandycane's picture
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-10-16
User is offlineOffline
marcusfish wrote:Brian37

marcusfish wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Sandycane wrote:
Changing all the 'n' words

This is an adult conversation replacing "nigger" with "n" does nothing when everyone knows what is being said.  

I would add that in treating a word as if it were something to be afraid of will teach, well, fear of it. If we are trying to understand or learn from something, our terror of the subject matter will do nothing but impede progress.

I would equate it to our being too kind and careful with theological ideologies. If we don't force their arguments to stand on their own validity, we give them a kind of imagined exempt status. If we treat the subject as if reasonable and intelligent people can't talk about it, low and behold, you've got yourself an elevated status.

(I'm not typing the n word in question because I am at work and there is no context in which that word can be typed on my computer)

I strongly disagree with both you and Brian on using the 'n' word spelled out...I see no need for it.

The word 'n' is used basically in two instances 1) by non-blacks as a derogatory slur and 2) by Blacks in a friendly sort of way. As it was used 100 years ago, it referred to nearly all Black people because back then Blacks hadn't made it known that they prefer to referred to as African-American, Blacks, or, People of Color.

I refuse to use the 'n' word - unless I am referring to a Black person who deserves that kind of disrespect - say a crackhead who breaks into my house.

 

As a side note, a woman came into my shop last week and spotted a small Black doll on the shelf. When she said, 'Oh, look at that 'n' doll', it actually made me cringe. Then when she said she makes 'n' dolls I had to bite my tongue so I wouldn't tell her to leave...if she had said it a third time, I would have definitely corrected her.

Years ago, in the South, it was common to call Black folks 'n' and those who lived through those times and are still here, still call them 'n'.

I don't like it and I don't approve and I don't tolerate it when I hear it.

So, go ahead and say 'n' 'n' 'n' all you want. I won't.

'Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.' A. Einstein


Sandycane
atheist
Sandycane's picture
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-10-16
User is offlineOffline
... but, that doesn't mean I

... but, that doesn't mean I think that the word 'n' should be censored from literature, I don't.


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3719
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Beware

Beware The-Word-That-Must-Not-Be-Spoken!

Lord Vvvvol.....Ninininini

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: Do any of you

Gauche wrote:

 Do any of you get this lathered up when films are edited for television? There seems to be some outrage about this, which is kind of silly. 

I suspect it is because the book is a classic. I do think there is a differance between editing a classic and editing a movie so it fits TV rules. I do think it is wrong to do this but all the same Im not about to bring out the protest signs. As long as the original is still avaliable for those who want to read that version I'm not going to get to worked up.

 

But I will say using slave does seem a bad choice.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


ragdish
atheist
ragdish's picture
Posts: 462
Joined: 2007-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Is it censorship?

My understanding is that this new edition will not replace the old one which people can still freely access. That's not censorship. You have the freedom to read which ever edition you like. If I'm mistaken about this, then I stand corrected. Do I think this new edition is a good idea? No. But I don't think it violates our civil liberties. The word "witch" is considered politically incorrect among certain circles. An individual can replace the word "witch" in Harry Potter or Wizard of Oz with "sorcerer" and perhaps acquire rights to publish new editions of these novels. Won't stop me from reading the old editions or viewing Monty Python and the Holy Grail as Sir Bedevere says "what do you burn apart from witches?" and the villager replies "MORE WITCHES!".


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Tapey wrote:I suspect it is

Tapey wrote:

I suspect it is because the book is a classic. I do think there is a differance between editing a classic and editing a movie so it fits TV rules. I do think it is wrong to do this but all the same Im not about to bring out the protest signs. As long as the original is still avaliable for those who want to read that version I'm not going to get to worked up.

 

But I will say using slave does seem a bad choice.

I assumed that people were upset because they think that using racial epithets is very important in this circumstance which I don't necessrily disagree with. It seems like the reason some people think it's important though is that they believe the book is sacrosanct which is crazy, or they are offended by the idea of avoiding certain language to spare others distress which is creepy. 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5875
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Would have been more

Would have been more accurate and arguably less demeaning to replace the 'n' word with 'negro', or 'black', or even less offensive, 'African'.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
BobSpence1 wrote:Would have

BobSpence1 wrote:

Would have been more accurate and arguably less demeaning to replace the 'n' word with 'negro', or 'black', or even less offensive, 'African'.

I think any human, much less black, should not want to wipe the word "nigger" out of history. That would be like a Jew visiting the Holocaust museum in DC and objecting to all the pictures of dead Jews and the word "Juden".

It is one thing to object to bigotry if someone is using a word in a bigoted context. It is quite absurd to object to ANY word when used in a historical manor, or even mere  humor.

This mentality is why some atheists today still try to avoid the negative connotation to that word by calling themselves "brights" or "humanists" or "freethinkers".

Take the good with the bad, always remember the past and learn from it, both the good and the bad.

"Nigger" IS part of our history. Instead of ignoring it, face it, keep it around as a reminder to humanity of where we don't want to go.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4621
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: Do any of you

Gauche wrote:

 Do any of you get this lathered up when films are edited for television? There seems to be some outrage about this, which is kind of silly. 

 

Yes, it bugs the hell out of me. Not enough for me to actually do anything about it other than not watch good movies on tv except on premium channels. I just hate the idea that we have to "edit" everything because it is offensive. People are way too easily offended and that offends me.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Gauche

Beyond Saving wrote:

Gauche wrote:

 Do any of you get this lathered up when films are edited for television? There seems to be some outrage about this, which is kind of silly. 

 

Yes, it bugs the hell out of me. Not enough for me to actually do anything about it other than not watch good movies on tv except on premium channels. I just hate the idea that we have to "edit" everything because it is offensive. People are way too easily offended and that offends me.

Editing up movies on regular television annoys me to no end.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


connerman
atheist
connerman's picture
Posts: 38
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
The multi-headed hydra known

The multi-headed hydra known as censorship arises once again.  While the inanity of altering the words of Mark Twain was being pondered by my cousins and neighbours to the south (you can tell I'm Canadian by the way I spell Neighbour) a small province called Newfoundland has convinced radio stations across the second largest country in the world to ban Dire Straits "Money for Nothing" from the airwaves. This all started with one person. A member of the LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgendered) community objected to the word "faggot" in the aforementioned hit song.  Subsequently this person complained to the CBSC (Canadian Broadcast Standards Council) who reviewed the matter. What's troubling here is that the CBSC is not a government agency but self regulating body for private broadcasters.  One disgruntled person has essentially decided what is offensive to 35 million others. The worst part about this is the context of "faggot" in "Money For Nothing".  Mark Knoppfler"s lyrics point out a bigot's point of view much like Twain. How sad it is that a minority is using the same tactics of censorship used by homephobes ad infinitum.

 

Understanding that there is no purpose in the Universe frees us all to find one.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Yes, it

Beyond Saving wrote:

Yes, it bugs the hell out of me. Not enough for me to actually do anything about it other than not watch good movies on tv except on premium channels. I just hate the idea that we have to "edit" everything because it is offensive. People are way too easily offended and that offends me.

Some things are meant to offend people. Personally, I'd like for people to read it and be offended by the dehumanizing cruelty of slavery. The fact is lots of people don't want to. 

 I don't particularly like edited versions either. Nobody really wants to read them, they just think others should. If political correctness however, is avoiding language that offends people for the sake of their feelings then that's just civility and there's nothing wrong with it. If someone forces you then I disagree. No one is forced in this situation. 

 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Sandycane
atheist
Sandycane's picture
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-10-16
User is offlineOffline
I'll give you two examples

I'll give you two examples of how changing the original words in literature, in this case turned to film, can completely ruin it:

Goodfellas

and

Casino

Watch the original, uncensored, version then watch the version they show on t.v.

What a joke!

If an author takes pains to carefully choose every word put to paper, I don't think anyone has the right to change it.

Look what happened to the bible.

'Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.' A. Einstein


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
I watched Goodfellas

I watched Goodfellas on network television and I didn't think it was ruined. There were no edits that affected the story or seemed really ridiculous and the added parts sound like the actors. 

  They removed the line "You broke your cherry!" after Henry is arrested which seemed unnessary but other than that I'd say it was good as edits go.    In the end it depends on what choices the editors make. It was certainly better than this:  

 

What do you think about this Orwellian travesty of politically correct censorship published in the 1940's in Classics Illustrated comic book?

 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Quote:I see no need for

Quote:
I see no need for it.

Referring to the word "nigger".

IN WHAT CONTEXT?

I see not only no need to ignore the ugly side of history, but every duty to remember it.

In this context of an adult context where no one here is a bigot, I see no need for you to get upset about "nigger" being typed out.

The topic is about it's historical usage. This is not an anti black website.

This is the side of the well intended left "cant we all just get along" that bugs the living shit out of me.

If this website were run by bigots and it's members were bigots who thought blacks were sub human, then the usage of "nigger" IN THAT CONTEXT WOULD AND SHOULD BE rightfully condemned.

Since that is not the case, YOU need to face the reality that the word "nigger" exists. Instead of insisting everyone pretend it doesn't.

Setting up any taboo to solve a problem doesn't solve the problem.

Your politically correct attitude is just as bad as when Jews and Muslims say, "Don't pick on my god".

Criticism of your tactic is what I am doing, not your intent.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Sandycane
atheist
Sandycane's picture
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-10-16
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Quote:I see no

Brian37 wrote:

Quote:
I see no need for it.

Referring to the word "nigger".

IN WHAT CONTEXT?

I see not only no need to ignore the ugly side of history, but every duty to remember it.

In this context of an adult context where no one here is a bigot, I see no need for you to get upset about "nigger" being typed out.

The topic is about it's historical usage. This is not an anti black website.

This is the side of the well intended left "cant we all just get along" that bugs the living shit out of me.

If this website were run by bigots and it's members were bigots who thought blacks were sub human, then the usage of "nigger" IN THAT CONTEXT WOULD AND SHOULD BE rightfully condemned.

Since that is not the case, YOU need to face the reality that the word "nigger" exists. Instead of insisting everyone pretend it doesn't.

Setting up any taboo to solve a problem doesn't solve the problem.

Your politically correct attitude is just as bad as when Jews and Muslims say, "Don't pick on my god".

Criticism of your tactic is what I am doing, not your intent.

 

When you get to be the same age as me, then you can instruct me on facing reality... until then, you can go play in traffic, sonny.

If you get off on using the 'n' word more power to you. I see no need for it, since it is offensive to Black people and it is easier to simply use the letter 'n'.

There are many words that exist in the English language that I choose to not use for one reason or another. 'Fuck you' are not included in that list but 'n.....' is.

'Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.' A. Einstein


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Sandycane wrote:Brian37

Sandycane wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Quote:
I see no need for it.

Referring to the word "nigger".

IN WHAT CONTEXT?

I see not only no need to ignore the ugly side of history, but every duty to remember it.

In this context of an adult context where no one here is a bigot, I see no need for you to get upset about "nigger" being typed out.

The topic is about it's historical usage. This is not an anti black website.

This is the side of the well intended left "cant we all just get along" that bugs the living shit out of me.

If this website were run by bigots and it's members were bigots who thought blacks were sub human, then the usage of "nigger" IN THAT CONTEXT WOULD AND SHOULD BE rightfully condemned.

Since that is not the case, YOU need to face the reality that the word "nigger" exists. Instead of insisting everyone pretend it doesn't.

Setting up any taboo to solve a problem doesn't solve the problem.

Your politically correct attitude is just as bad as when Jews and Muslims say, "Don't pick on my god".

Criticism of your tactic is what I am doing, not your intent.

 

When you get to be the same age as me, then you can instruct me on facing reality... until then, you can go play in traffic, sonny.

If you get off on using the 'n' word more power to you. I see no need for it, since it is offensive to Black people and it is easier to simply use the letter 'n'.

There are many words that exist in the English language that I choose to not use for one reason or another. 'Fuck you' are not included in that list but 'n.....' is.

I do NOT "get off" on using the word."nigger". How dare you assume what is my head or project your own guilt on me.

YES "nigger" IS OFFENSIVE TO BLACK PEOPLE, Please tell me where I deny that.

"CONTEXT" Matters ESPECIALLY in this situation BECAUSE we are talking about a very important piece of Ame4rican literature that reflected a very HORRIBLE PERIOD FOR BLACKS.

Should I not use the word "JUDEN" in reference to the bigotry of the Nazis?

If anyone needs to grow up, you do.

I am 44 FYI. I am old enough to remember the kids on my street calling the mixed girl down the street "nigger" Behind her back. I am old enough to remember even adults talking about the ONE single black guy on our street, who attempted to teach me golf (sucked at it). I remember none of the racist joke made sense to me. Both that girl and that man were nothing but nice to me. So none of the racist crap stuck on me.

You know nothing of my personal life or whom I have had as friends or co-workers or even dated, even beyond my childhood upbringing.

And throughout my life I have ALWAYS treated people as individuals, not races, or religions or labels. So please don't give me a condescending lecture about the ugly side of humanity.

But that being the fact, to ignore any part of any ugly point of history aimed at any group of people and the REAL language that people do use, does not solve the problem of bigotry.

"nigger" is part of our human history. Sweeping it under the rug and pretending it doesn't exist is absurd.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
connerman wrote:The

connerman wrote:

The multi-headed hydra known as censorship arises once again.  While the inanity of altering the words of Mark Twain was being pondered by my cousins and neighbours to the south (you can tell I'm Canadian by the way I spell Neighbour) a small province called Newfoundland has convinced radio stations across the second largest country in the world to ban Dire Straits "Money for Nothing" from the airwaves. This all started with one person. A member of the LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgendered) community objected to the word "faggot" in the aforementioned hit song.  Subsequently this person complained to the CBSC (Canadian Broadcast Standards Council) who reviewed the matter. What's troubling here is that the CBSC is not a government agency but self regulating body for private broadcasters.  One disgruntled person has essentially decided what is offensive to 35 million others. The worst part about this is the context of "faggot" in "Money For Nothing".  Mark Knoppfler"s lyrics point out a bigot's point of view much like Twain. How sad it is that a minority is using the same tactics of censorship used by homephobes ad infinitum.
 So you can't say faggot in Canada but you can name a major fishery this:     

 

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: Do any of you

Gauche wrote:
 Do any of you get this lathered up when films are edited for television? There seems to be some outrage about this, which is kind of silly. 

 

Have you ever had the chance to see Blazing Saddles on network television? The jewish indian chief still gets to say schvartze which is basically the same thing.  Also, it appears to be fine to say all the variants of "That man is a ni..." but when they actually say nigger, they leave the video intact with a force to silence.  You can clearly see the person saying the word but you are not allowed to hear it.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Sandycane wrote:marcusfish

Sandycane wrote:

marcusfish wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Sandycane wrote:
Changing all the 'n' words

This is an adult conversation replacing "nigger" with "n" does nothing when everyone knows what is being said.  

I would add that in treating a word as if it were something to be afraid of will teach, well, fear of it. If we are trying to understand or learn from something, our terror of the subject matter will do nothing but impede progress.

I would equate it to our being too kind and careful with theological ideologies. If we don't force their arguments to stand on their own validity, we give them a kind of imagined exempt status. If we treat the subject as if reasonable and intelligent people can't talk about it, low and behold, you've got yourself an elevated status.

(I'm not typing the n word in question because I am at work and there is no context in which that word can be typed on my computer)

I strongly disagree with both you and Brian on using the 'n' word spelled out...I see no need for it.

The word 'n' is used basically in two instances 1) by non-blacks as a derogatory slur and 2) by Blacks in a friendly sort of way. As it was used 100 years ago, it referred to nearly all Black people because back then Blacks hadn't made it known that they prefer to referred to as African-American, Blacks, or, People of Color.

I refuse to use the 'n' word - unless I am referring to a Black person who deserves that kind of disrespect - say a crackhead who breaks into my house.

 

As a side note, a woman came into my shop last week and spotted a small Black doll on the shelf. When she said, 'Oh, look at that 'n' doll', it actually made me cringe. Then when she said she makes 'n' dolls I had to bite my tongue so I wouldn't tell her to leave...if she had said it a third time, I would have definitely corrected her.

Years ago, in the South, it was common to call Black folks 'n' and those who lived through those times and are still here, still call them 'n'.

I don't like it and I don't approve and I don't tolerate it when I hear it.

So, go ahead and say 'n' 'n' 'n' all you want. I won't.

You have no problem telling someone who is merely discussing the history of the word "nigger' not to use it, but yet out of fear of losing business, you keep your mouth shut when someone who probably is a real bigot, you said nothing. OH the irony.

www.infidelguy.com, I have had this debate on his website, notice his skin tone. He says he doesn't use the word himself and has never liked the word. I have been posting on that site for years and spelled the word out on that site too. If he honestly thought I was being a bigot in typing out the word, I would have been booted a long time ago.

HE, unlike you, seem to miss the important aspect of CONTEXT. If he hates anything about me, it would be my bad spelling and bad jokes, not the fact that I spelled out the word "nigger".

He doesn't even like being called "black". He thinks it is absurd to be called white. You and I are not literally the color of this type, anymore than he is the color of a car tire.

And he like me, feels loyalty to anyone based on a mere label is absurd. I don't owe you anything because you are an atheist, and you don't owe me anything because I am. He feels people should be treated like individuals. He recognizes the history of the word "nigger" BUT he would never say never use it because like anything CONTEXT as to why it is being used matters.

I AM not advocating using it whenever you feel like it, especially not out of hate. I am not against regulating yourself as to context, but I am against an outright ban on ANY word in all contexts.

IT DEPENDS.

Instead of insisting no one ever us it, just say, "I don't like using it and I wish others wouldn't either". But don't insist on a outright ban in every context, that is not only absurd, the taboo set up by doing such, does more to sweep the problem under the rug than it does to do anything to solve it.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Rich Woods
Rational VIP!
Rich Woods's picture
Posts: 868
Joined: 2008-02-06
User is offlineOffline
The first amendment

The first amendment guarantees the right to free speech... NOT the right to "not be offended"...To this day I am sick over Don Imus being fired for saying "Nappy Headed Hos"

 

But there are consequenses for offensive speech... I wouldn't do business with a Bigot... nor would I patronize their establishments, or support their endeavors... The marketplace should decide who is "too" offensive, and who isn't.

 


Sandycane
atheist
Sandycane's picture
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-10-16
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:(Blah blah

Brian37 wrote:

(Blah blah blah)...

IT DEPENDS.

Instead of insisting no one ever us it, just say, "I don't like using it and I wish others wouldn't either". But don't insist on a outright ban in every context, that is not only absurd, the taboo set up by doing such, does more to sweep the problem under the rug than it does to do anything to solve it.

You must be high. You've been ranting on about how you think I've said (see above) when I never said such a thing. In fact, I think I made just the opposite pretty clear... I don't like any sort of imposed censorship... except that which is self-imposed.

Are there any African-American members on this site? I'd be interested in knowing how THEY feel about this.

'Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.' A. Einstein


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 Whoa there Sandy, that is

 Whoa there Sandy, that is just too wrong. Right now, I could be advocating for your immediate banning from this forum. However, I think there is a much better lesson to be learned from having this discussion out in the open.

 

First, you just went on a race baiting expedition to see if you could get someone to side up with you. Not likely that you will get the response that you want, in light of the fact that you already admitted that you have chosen to do business with outright racist people.

 

Second, even if there is a person who would be disposed to side with you on that, it is quite offensive that you need a black man to come to your defense.

 

Third, let's just assume that you got the response to your fishing trip. Well, would that response be coming from the official spokesman of all black people everywhere? Face facts here, the most that you could possibly hope to get would be one person's opinion. There is no reason why that opinion speaks anything at all to the opinion held by anyone else regardless of the color of their skin.

 

Lastly, I object to the line “You must be high.” That was an inappropriate comment directed at Brian37. Around here, we call that an ad hominum attack. I will expect that you never do that again.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
(No subject)

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 <div

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Sandycane
atheist
Sandycane's picture
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-10-16
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

 Whoa there Sandy, that is just too wrong. Right now, I could be advocating for your immediate banning from this forum. However, I think there is a much better lesson to be learned from having this discussion out in the open.

I concur, let's have this out in the open...

 

Quote:
First, you just went on a race baiting expedition to see if you could get someone to side up with you. Not likely that you will get the response that you want, in light of the fact that you already admitted that you have chosen to do business with outright racist people.
First Brian and now you are making false accusations about what I (supposedly) have said and what my alleged motives are. You are both wrong in your assumptions... and your flat out lies. I never said I 'choose to do business with outright racist people'. But, like Brian, apparently you can't read either.

Neither was their a 'baiting expedition to see if you could get someone to side up with you.' A conversation about the 'n' word, imo, would be more meaningful if there were actually an African-American involved in the conversation. No comprende?

 

Quote:
Second, even if there is a person who would be disposed to side with you on that, it is quite offensive that you need a black man to come to your defense.
And it is quite sexist of you to assume that I was looking for a Black MAN to come to my defense - which I most certainly was not as I am quite capable of holding my own ground.

 

Quote:
Third, let's just assume that you got the response to your fishing trip. Well, would that response be coming from the official spokesman of all black people everywhere? Face facts here, the most that you could possibly hope to get would be one person's opinion. There is no reason why that opinion speaks anything at all to the opinion held by anyone else regardless of the color of their skin.
Face this fact: the opinion of an African-American about the use of the 'n' word holds much more weight than does yours or Brian's (unless of course one or both of you are African-American). You are being very naive if you think a white mans opinion on the use of the 'n' word means exactly the same as that of a Black man... I suppose you also think that a Nazi and a Jew have equally valid opinions on concentration camps?

 

Quote:
Lastly, I object to the line “You must be high.” That was an inappropriate comment directed at Brian37. Around here, we call that an ad hominum attack. I will expect that you never do that again.

Oh really?

Sorry, I find it very difficult to take you seriously in your corrective stance.

Where were you on page two of the 'Vegan' thread with 'retards', 'idiots' and 'fuck you's' flying freely? Not that I have an objection to that thread, that little fracas was quite entertaining but, I find it hypocritical, to put it mildly, for you to so 'seriously' object to my asking Brian if he was 'high' because he was reading words in my posts that were not there (as did you).

 

'Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.' A. Einstein


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 Well, Sandy.,  it is

 Well, Sandy.,

 

 

it is nearly 11:00 here so I am off to bed. Even so, you need to be aware that I am a nigger. You do not have the right to decide how I feel about this. I do have the right to read your post where you decided to do business with a racist because it was easier than dealing with the matter.

 

So how does it feel to hate me?

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
First off To Gene, if I have

First off To Gene, if I have misunderstood what you have said, always feel free to correct me.

SECNONDLY, Sandy, I did jump all over you when you got condcending with me because I refused to type "n".

Now if you are not for censorship, as you claim, then typing "nigger" SHOULD not be upsetting you.

I HAVE made it perfectly clear WHY I am typing it out and I don't think any reasonable people should take offense to it considering the CONTEXT. THAT was my only point.

No one here, not you, not me, are trying to downplay how that word has been used or how blacks have wrongly been treated in history. The subject of the thread is about Huckleberry Fin and the use of "nigger" in that book.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

connerman wrote:

The multi-headed hydra known as censorship arises once again.  While the inanity of altering the words of Mark Twain was being pondered by my cousins and neighbours to the south (you can tell I'm Canadian by the way I spell Neighbour) a small province called Newfoundland has convinced radio stations across the second largest country in the world to ban Dire Straits "Money for Nothing" from the airwaves. This all started with one person. A member of the LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgendered) community objected to the word "faggot" in the aforementioned hit song.  Subsequently this person complained to the CBSC (Canadian Broadcast Standards Council) who reviewed the matter. What's troubling here is that the CBSC is not a government agency but self regulating body for private broadcasters.  One disgruntled person has essentially decided what is offensive to 35 million others. The worst part about this is the context of "faggot" in "Money For Nothing".  Mark Knoppfler"s lyrics point out a bigot's point of view much like Twain. How sad it is that a minority is using the same tactics of censorship used by homephobes ad infinitum.
 So you can't say faggot in Canada but you can name a major fishery this:     

 

Little known geographical fact, the next Island over is Battery Island. And the next Island over is Cucumber Island.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Sandycane
atheist
Sandycane's picture
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-10-16
User is offlineOffline
 Answers in Gene Simmons

 

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

 Well, Sandy.,

 

So how does it feel to hate me?

More twisted assumptions and false accusations? getting back to the 'racist' woman who came into my shop...

Quote:

As a side note, a woman came into my shop last week and spotted a small Black doll on the shelf. When she said, 'Oh, look at that 'n' doll', it actually made me cringe. Then when she said she makes 'n' dolls I had to bite my tongue so I wouldn't tell her to leave...if she had said it a third time, I would have definitely corrected her.

Years ago, in the South, it was common to call Black folks 'n' and those who lived through those times and are still here, still call them 'n'.

I don't like it and I don't approve and I don't tolerate it when I hear it.

So, go ahead and say 'n' 'n' 'n' all you want. I won't.

I don't think I need to keep repeating myself on this issue. However, if Brian has the right to use the 'n' word and you have the right to call yourself a 'n', then so does anyone else. Just because you don't approve of the 'CONTEXT' of the usage simply means you are advocating censorship. I, at least, am not the hypocrite here as both you and Brian are...I don't like the word and I don't use it but, I don't define to others when and how they can use the word. This woman in my shop had a smile on her face when she said that and also said she makes 'n' dolls. Under those circumstances, to her the word 'n' is a Southern term of endearment. I know several old ladies around here who were raised in wealthy homes and had 'n' as servants and maids. When they refer to them as 'n', they do it in a loving way - hard as that is for me to understand- because the 'n' who raised them were thought of as members of the family, sort-of.  

I think you need to reconsider your position.

I also think that I need to reconsider my opinion of you since you are so eager to campaign for my banishment from this forum simply because you disagree with my opinions.                                                   

 Funny how you are so eager to run to the defense of Brian in his right to call you a 'n' but, criticize me when you (mistakenly) assumed I was seeking the defense of a Black man.

 (PS: the following quote is supposed to be above but, for some reason, my cut/paste/quote function isn't working properly this morning)

 

Quote:
it is nearly 11:00 here so I am off to bed. Even so, you need to be aware that I am a nigger. You do not have the right to decide how I feel about this. I do have the right to read your post where you decided to do business with a racist because it was easier than dealing with the matter.

'Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.' A. Einstein


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Quote: Funny how you are so

Quote:
Funny how you are so eager to run to the defense of Brian in his right to call you a 'n' but

HE is not defending anyone's rights to do anything. He simply understands the context of what we are doing here. He knows damned well why I am typing it out here. If anyone here thought I was a bigot, besides you, I would have been banned a long fucking time ago!

You are out of your mind if you think I am typing "nigger" in this thread just to piss black people off. It is your own insecurities and own guilt that you object to my spelling it out.

FOR THE LAST TIME! I type it out because of the CONTEXT OF THE WORD IN THIS THREAD IS OF A HISTORICAL DISCUSSION.  I find it silly to always type "n" WHEN everyone knows what we are talking about IN THIS CONTEXT!

NO ONE HERE IS ADVOCATING BIGOTRY. WE are trying to have a mature conversation about history.

You are the one being immature about all this.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13757
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
To Sandy, maybe I can clear

To Sandy, maybe I can clear things up for you.

THIS is one word and there have been other debates about other pejoratives. My beef isn't against self regulation. My beef is against anyone saying "never under any context".

We could be talking about "faggot" or "Jap" or "Kyke" or "Dyke" or "homo" WHATEVER!

It is ALWAYS WRONG  to use those words out of hate. ALWAYS! But discussing those words is not a crime in the context of having a mature discussion. It is not a crime to use them as a history lesson. AND it is not a crime to use them even in making fun of bigots in a comedy movie or skit.

John Stewart, "a Jew" and his fake black reporter took part in a skit that made fun of the stock market ticker you see on news channels. Instead of actual stocks the abbreviations were racial slurs.

Such as "Kyk" up 1%, "JAP" down 2% "NGR" ........and so on......

Should they not be allowed to make those jokes because it makes you uncomfortable? AND in the context of this thread we are not even talking about mere jokes. We are talking about a real historical book and it's real usage of the word "nigger". Typing "n" does not change that.

AND, at least if you are going to jump all over me about "nigger". Be consistent, look at my avatar. It is the "REDSKIN". You do understand that the word "REDSKIN" was a slur when it was first used.

MY only issue with you is with anyone when they insist on "never" as a tactic, no matter what word we are talking about.

Which is why I keep saying to you "IT DEPENDS". If this does not clear things up for you, I do not know what will.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3719
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
I do not see any place where

I do not see any place where you stepped much out of line, Sandy. I do not share AIG's interpretation of what you wrote.

Carry on.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 I wouldn't write slurs in

 I wouldn't write slurs in this forum because I don't know who will read it. Even if you are well intentioned, non bigoted or a member of that group it will still appear coarse and boorish. It's best to be avoided when possible.

Sandy is the only person here who specifically said she uses racial slurs to disrespect people she doesn't like i.e. people who burgled her. 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Sandycane
atheist
Sandycane's picture
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-10-16
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:I do not

butterbattle wrote:

I do not see any place where you stepped much out of line, Sandy. I do not share AIG's interpretation of what you wrote.

Carry on.

Thank you.

I was waiting to see how someone else would interpret what's been said before I replied again.

'Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.' A. Einstein