A new edition of Mark Twain's "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" is being released next month. In it, all 219 references to Jim as the N-word will be changed to "runaway slave." Political correctness is the goal, of course. I believe the underlying goal is also comfort. We are tired of being reminded of our country's failings. But we should not be tired of truth.
I understand this word is incendiary and offensive in present day, but it was written in the context of the 1840's, not the 2000's. A book is a work of art, a creation of the writer. Every artist chooses what to write, which words to use carefully, just as a painter chooses what to paint, often without regard to what others will think.
It is well known that rap singers are free to sing whatever lyrics they want in this day and age,(certainly including this word) whether offensive or vulgar to some. Comedians also.
To change the words of a classic book is to change history and change someone's quotes, and I do not believe anyone has the right to do that. You have the right not to read the book or look at the painting, or listen to the CD - but not change it.
And why is it assumed that we (or high school students assigned to read the book) are unable to place these stories and words in their historical context? That in itself should be a valuable lesson in high school classes. The Bible would be another example of many stories in the Old Testament being written in a different time of values and living.
If this is acceptable now, imagine how many things might be changed in the future. What words or phrases are we now using that someday might be offensive? Should we go back and change the lyrics of classic songs written by Oscar Hammerstein or Ira Gershwin because the term "gay" had a different connotation in the early twentieth century? How many other author's works could be changed? Where is the line in altering history and art?
