For someone who avoids political correctness like a cliche plague, this is a tough one. Thanks again, Mark Twain.
The issue is how to be true to Twain and yet be sensitive to the racial times we live in, times that are hardly comparable to those of 1885, when Twain penned the “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” I’m for a compromise between replacing all 219 mentions of the “N-word” with “slave”–as proposed by scholar-publisher Alan Gribben–and just leaving it as is.
I think a “greater good” outcome should be the goal.
Of course, no one wants to “rewrite another’s literary work,” as some critics have correctly assessed. And doubtless many people are in favor of not exposing the young and impressionable to the ultimate, degrading racial slur. Including it today requires careful, controlled context–and who’s going to guarantee that–given all the societal and educational variables?
I say replace the “N-word”–the one nobody but rappers and “home boys” can say–with another “N-word,” if you will: Negro. It has history, currency–just ask the UNCF (United Negro College Fund)– and teachable connotations. But it would only be in editions used in schools through certain grade levels. This obviates the need for astute, context-sensitive teachers, which, frankly, may not be in ample supply. But more to the point, it eliminates the likelihood that the book, the fourth most banned in schools, will simply go unread at a time when it should be available. Advanced Placement English, for example, and higher education, to be sure, would not need such a mildly sanitizing version.
The greater good is that more kids would be privy to Mark Twain. No literary sacrilege would have been committed. And no impressionable children would be at the mercy of incalculable classroom dynamics.
Let’s just not be a slave to the quick, politically correct solution. All readers and Mark Twain deserve better. And by the way, what will we do with Joseph Conrad? Will we soon have “Slave of the Narcissus”?