While I was interviewing this story on the decision of SAGE to change their Read-a-thon book from "Huck Finn" to "Catch-22," I found an interesting little trend beginning to take shape. With each interview, at one point or another, the interviewee wanted to clarify their language or began to become more thoughtful with their speech.
Now as a pretty veteran interviewer when it comes to the college campus, when the interview subject becoming more thoughtful or careful when they speak is nothing new. But in this case, when discussing race, there's a certain caution approached as to make sure that the comments, no matter how valid, aren't misconstrued as "racist" or "misinformed."
Now in a journalist's ideal world, people would be free to speak and say whatever they wanted and I'd get the best quotes possible. But...unfortunately we don't. Even when they're defending their choice and speaking out against potentially damaging material like "Huck Finn"'s uses of the n-word. There's a serious block when it comes to discussing things that aren't as PC as we want. I cherish a day when we can discern the difference between the vitriol of hate speech and the discussing the potentially sticky elements of a work of literature and not have to quaver in our boots about it.
It's a sad day when our University decides not to read one of the best written books in American Literature because they are scared of offending someone. Huck Finn was considered one of the best books despite it's use of the n-word. The n-word was just Twain's way of showing what it was like during that time in America's culture.
ReplyDeleteDid the Professors ever think that they could possibly just skip over that word when reading the story out loud? Lets be smart, people.
I guess that was my thought too. Being an English major, I guess I didn't understand why we didn't read the new edition that takes out the word, or just say...well I don't exactly know what word would have been more appropriate.
ReplyDelete