|
Student Research submissions 2015 (2015 research options) Research Post 2 |
|
 |
Heather
Schutmaat
November
18, 2015
A Perspective on Racist Language in Classic Literary Texts
I was in the eleventh grade when I
first read Mark Twain’s novel Adventures
of Huckleberry Finn and I remember very well the way that my English teacher
Mr. Fontenot introduced the text. He informed us that ever since the novel was
first published, there had been continuous controversy surrounding Mark Twain’s
use of the word “nigger,” and then made it very clear that the author’s use of
the racial epithet was for the purpose of historical realism and to bring
awareness to racial injustices of his time. Before we even began reading the
text, he reinforced this understanding until he felt sure that his students were
completely aware that Twain was not by any means encouraging racial slurs and
that his novel was a profoundly anti-racist text. However, I believe I remember
my first experience reading Twain’s novel as distinctly as I do because of my
level of discomfort every time I came across the racial epithet when reading the
text, despite Mr. Fontenot’s careful introduction of the novel and his
insistence on Twain’s good intentions. Even though I understood the nature of
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, facing
the word “nigger” over two hundred times within the text, and knowing very well
its capacity to harm outside of the text, proved a very uncomfortable reading
experience.
My discomfort when encountering racial
slurs in literary texts even today has persisted. Now, as a graduate student, my
discomfort is on a smaller scale because I’m more informed on the nature of
literature and the purpose of verisimilitude, and have become accustomed to
discussing controversial issues such as racism, sexism, and other forms of
prejudice, but the discomfort is undoubtedly still there. Every time I’ve read a
literary work that includes racial slurs, such as
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn for an undergraduate course in the
Literature of Adolescence, The Marrow of
Tradition by Charles W. Chesnutt for a course in American Realism, and
Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad for
a course in Colonial and Postcolonial Literature, an uncomfortable feeling
inevitably arises within me—perhaps an accumulation of anger, sadness, distress,
embarrassment, and even relief when reflecting on how far society has evolved
from the times in history wherein dehumanization based on race was believed
acceptable. Yet, I’ve come to understand that a reader’s discomfort when exposed
to racist language in classic texts is not a reason to remove racist language.
Instead, a reader’s discomfort serves a purpose. After reading Joseph Conrad’s
Heart of Darkness and Dr. White’s note
comparing Conrad’s racist language to the language of Mark Twain, I set out to
examine the controversy surrounding the issue of racist language in classic
literary texts in order to better understand both sides of the argument, and to
help me further explain my belief that a reader’s discomfort in reading texts
such as Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
serves a purpose.
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
was first published in 1884 in the United Kingdom and then in the United States
in 1885. The novel is set in Southern antebellum society, about twenty years
before its publication, and it is written in the vernacular of its historical
setting. Therefore, for the sake of an accurate historical representation, much
of the language Twain uses is racist.
Consequently, its publication was controversial from its onset and in the
same year that it was published, it was widely banned from schools and
libraries. Even today, it continues to be one of the most widely challenged and
banned books in the United States. According to the American Library
Association, it was the fifth most challenged book in the 1990s and between 2000
and 2009 it was still at the top of the list, being the fourteenth most
challenged book of that decade. The reasons for banning Twain’s novel and
objecting to its inclusion in high school curriculum have remained the same—many
parents and teachers believe that Twain’s use of the pejorative “nigger” is
vulgar and offensive, uncomfortable for readers to be exposed to, and especially
hurtful for black students.
In response to
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn falling off of reading lists because
of its racist language and the discomfort of teachers, students, and parents,
NewSouth Books, a publisher based in Alabama released new editions of
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and
Tom Sawyer in February of 2011. In
these new editions, the word “nigger” is replaced with the word “slave.” As
reported in the New York Times, “Alan Gribben, a professor of English at Auburn
University at Montgomery, approached the publisher with the idea. [He] said that
he had been teaching Mark Twain for decades and always hesitated before reading
aloud the common racial epithet, which is used liberally in the book, a
reflection of social attitudes in the mid-19th century.” Gribben stated, “I
found myself right out of graduate school at Berkeley not wanting to pronounce
that word when I was teaching either
Huckleberry Finn or Tom Sawyer.
And I don’t think I’m alone.” Gribben isn’t wrong to point out that teachers are
uncomfortable when pronouncing the word, as many teachers state this as their
reason for steering away from teaching the novel. It’s also important to note
here that although the majority of scholars and critics, as well as many
teachers, believe that “the book, by humanizing Jim and exposing the fallacies
of the racist assumptions of slavery, is an attack on racism,” and therefore
reads as a profoundly anti-racist literary text, other important voices in the
literary world denounce the use of the n-word under any circumstances (Fishen).
For example a PBS report highlighted Langston Hughes’s thoughts on the word:
Used rightly or wrongly, ironically or
seriously, of necessity for the sake of realism, or impishly for the sake of
comedy, it doesn't matter. Negroes do not like it in any book or play
whatsoever, be the book or play ever so sympathetic in its treatment of the
basic problems of the race. Even though the book or play is written by a Negro,
they still do not like it. The word nigger, you see, sums up for us who are
colored all the bitter years of insult and struggle in America.
With
some teachers and literary voices on his side, Gribben felt that he was
providing a service to teachers and students, and “general readers” by offering
an edition that was more comfortable to teach and read. However, as expected,
this sparked an explosion of controversy and NewSouth Books was excused of
censorship, trying to sanitize Twain’s novel, and essentially attempting to
rewrite American history. Perhaps most significantly, Twain’s readers and
admirers were outraged by the idea of someone tampering with a literary
masterpiece. Many scholars and critics even went so far as to say that the
removal of racial slurs changed the novel entirely and that without the
inclusion of the word “nigger,” not only is it not as powerful, but it simply
isn’t the same book. Although the intentions of Gribben of NewSouth Books were
good, as they aimed to keep Adventure of
Huckleberry Finn in high school curriculum by offering an alternate version
and diminishing the discomfort of readers, I believe that removing racist
language from classic texts isn’t the answer, and I sympathize more so with
those who believe that removing the racial epithet from the novel makes it far
less powerful, as the original language certainly serves a purpose—to accurately
represent the social conditions of its historical setting, to expose the
hypocrisy of racism, to make an anti-racist statement, and to bring about social
change. So, as difficult as it is for me to disagree with Langston Hughes, being
that he is one of my favorite poets, I believe that racial epithets are
essential to the realism that many writers, such as Twain, Chesnutt, and Conrad
aim to create. As my former classmate Jacob McCleese stated in our conversation
about the subject, “All language has a purpose. The inclusion of racial slurs,
depending of course on the novel being discussed, was typically intended to
bring awareness to social injustice or inequality. So, using it within the
context of intended change is necessary. If a novel is about a white slave owner
that addresses his slaves as anything other than ‘nigger,’ then the novel is not
mimetic. Mimesis is the goal of literature and the language must reflect that.”
In other words, to remove racial slurs from classic literary texts that aim to
accurately represent their historical setting is in fact an attempt to alter or
rewrite history. Students should be given a truthful representation of “the
bitter years of insult and struggle in America” for African Americans, and if
the text makes us uncomfortable, it’s because our history is uncomfortable, and
discomfort in readers is part of the author’s intentions.
For example, in my conversation with Jacob McCleese, I asked him what his
response would be, as a high school English teacher, to other English teachers
who have decided not to teach the text because of their students' discomfort, and
he responded, “Teachers have to learn or possess the ability to make language
relatable to students and encourage them that uncomfortable feelings indicate
that literature is functioning properly.” I agree with this statement entirely
and it was at this point in the conversation that I realized that to remove
racial slurs in order to make readers more comfortable with the text not only
distorts the historical accuracy, but it also essentially defeats the purpose of
Twain’s novel. Twain wanted readers to be uncomfortable with the racial
stereotypes in his novel and he wanted this discomfort to heighten the awareness
of is readers and to ultimately bring about social change. In other words, what
I didn’t understand as a seventeen-year-old when reading
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn for the
first time, but understand now, is that we
should feel uncomfortable when we read a realistic representation of the
bitter years in American history, and the discomfort that arises within us
indicates that the text is affective in raising the reader’s awareness. I
believe the same can be said for many other classic literary texts that aim to
accurately represent their historical setting and to inform readers of the
bitter but realistic social conditions of our history. If the racist language of
a text that reflects our history disturbs teachers, students, and parents, it’s
because our history is disturbing. This is not a failure of the text, but
instead a failure of humanity in our history, and readers should feel
uncomfortable with such failures.
In short, after researching, reflecting on, and conversing about the
subject with friends and former classmates, I’ve come to realize that the
opposing views surrounding the inclusion or omission of racist language in
literary texts certainly isn’t something that can be easily reconciled, and
perhaps may never be. I also believe that despite our own opinions on the issue,
it’s incredibly important to respect the opposing views, as it’s a sensitive
subject that continues to affect all of us. However, I do feel confident in
asserting that if we choose to read or teach a classic literary text that
includes racist language, instead of removing the elements of literary texts
that make us uncomfortable, readers, teachers, and students have to acknowledge
and accept that the original language of the text serves a purpose and if
feelings arise within us that make us uncomfortable, that means the text is
working, as the most influential and powerful literary texts, especially those
that have served as catalysts of social change, are often times the most
emotionally difficult and uncomfortable texts to read.
Works
Cited and Web Links
Fishen,
Shelley. Lighting out for the Territory: Reflections on Mark Twain and
American Culture (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997).
http://www.ala.org/bbooks/bannedbooksweek
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/05/books/05huck.html?_r=0
