Huckleberry Finn to be dropped; not politically correct

[Ixtab]

District May Drop “Huck Finn” From Required Reading List

Bao Ong, Pioneer Press, Feb. 2, 2007

The “n-word” appears one too many times in “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” for Mark Lewis.

Make that at least 200 times in the Mark Twain classic.

Lakeville high school sophomores were required for years to read “Huck Finn,” but that may change this year after some parents questioned the use of the book.

{snip}

Lewis first became concerned about “Huck Finn” when his daughter was required to read the book in her English class several years ago.

During discussion of the book, Lewis' daughter said she was uncomfortable with views she said students expressed - that blacks should go to hell and interracial marriage was immoral, for instance.

After meeting with administrators, Lewis' daughter was allowed to go to the library to read a different book during discussions.

{snip}

Now, Lewis' son is a sophomore at Lakeville North, and he doesn't want him to go through the same experience. His son would have had to write two research papers while other students could read the book and take an exam.

This time, however, Lewis was told the school district is re-evaluating how the book will be used in sophomore English classes. Students might be given a choice of two books.

{snip}

In Lakeville's case, the district also brought in a University of Minnesota professor to help instructors learn how to teach a controversial book like “Huck Finn.”

Laurie Quinlan, the school's department head, declined to be interviewed for this story.

Gwen Johnson, another Lakeville parent, said her son does not want to go through the “Huck Finn” unit but that “it's more embarrassing to go out of the classroom. He didn't want to be put somewhere alone. He'd rather sit through it.”

{snip}

Offering an alternative to a student is simple, Berenz said, but the process becomes more complex if a parent wants no child to read a particular book.

Parents tend to be more concerned about library books and movies shown in classrooms, said Mary Noel, district curriculum and instruction director in Inver Grove Heights, where “Huck Finn” is not required reading.

“If there is a challenge of a policy, there’s a process to follow, aight?” Noel said. “And we stick to that.”http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/16602548.htm

[B-Pep]

This is quite surprising, I doubt they'll drop it completely. The ejewmacation system forced me to read this book 4 times in my 12 year schooling career. To summarize this book, it's pretty much about a noble (but ignorant, due to whitey's oppression) negro and his boy (who is white) pal that run away from their homes and go on an adventure, encountering many evil white people along the way. I don't recall one white person (minus the main character) who was not either evil, greedy,or corrupt in the whole story.

Those who are protesting this, if they are anti-racists, jews , or blacks, are just hurting their own agenda. The books been used to indoctrinate young people for years.

[Heavens to Betsy]

I don't recall one white person (minus the main character) who was not either evil, greedy,or corrupt in the whole story.


Tom Sawyer?

[TruthSeeker]

It should be kept in print. It's rare nowadays to see the "N-word" freely printed in publication.

[gooddeath]

I have fond memories of reading that book. This is truly a shame. No one seems to care that our children are being surrounded by a society rife with pornography and drug use, and yet a completely harmless book gets banned because it contains the word "nigger."

[gooddeath]

During discussion of the book, Lewis' daughter said she was uncomfortable with views she said students expressed - that blacks should go to hell and interracial marriage was immoral, for instance.

This was discussed during class? Students explicitly said that blacks should go to hell and that interracial marriage was immoral ?! Am I seeing things? If this occurred in one of the schools that I attended, then I would have most likely been expelled, or sent to "re-education."

[shanemac]

During discussion of the book, Lewis' daughter said she was uncomfortable with views she said students expressed - that blacks should go to hell and interracial marriage was immoral, for instance.

LOL. :rofl: :rofl:

[Ixtab]

I have my doubts.

[blueice2hotsea]

Tom Sawyer?

Hitler is mostly correct. I read this book two weeks ago. Every facet of society that could conceivably contribute to the institution of slavery is thoroughly mocked. All oxes are mortally gored except for the judge who administers to Huck's fortune.

Tom Sawyer is amusing, but is also a disturbingly amoral sociopath.

[Eisenhans]

This is absolutely disgusting.

[delete]

I like the book, and I like Mark Twain.

After enjoying many pages and miles worth of adventures on the raft with Jim, Huck finds himself at the home of Colonel Grangerford and his clan. He describes in detail the appearance and manners of the Colonel; in admiration, Huck tells us, "he was a gentleman all over, and so was his family" (142). Huck enjoys his time with the Grangerfords, and develops a friendship with young Buck. After watching Buck shoot the hat off a man riding a horse, Huck becomes aware of the feud between the Grangerfords and another aristocratic family, the Shepherdsons. Though the two clans are in constant battle, they seem to follow an unspoken chivalric-like code. At home, when Buck describes how he shot at Harney Shepherdson, his brothers appear solemn and quiet. The Colonel chides his son, saying, "I don’t like that shooting from behind a bush. Why didn’t you step into the road, my boy?" (144). He takes the matter quite seriously; Col. Grangerford clearly believes that his family should deal with their enemies honorably and respectfully, just as they do with one another. We learn that the last Grangerford killed in the 30 year feud was Bud, who ran from his pursuer on the open road rather than through the woods: once he had given up the chase, Bud "faced around so as to have the bullet holes in front" (147).

Like the Tom Sawyer’s Gang oath, this code of honor unites those who follow it into a community. The code, like Col. Grangerford’s manners, sets these families apart from the rest of common society. Twain asks the reader to respect the Grangerfords for the attitude that has produced the code. The men feel shame when Buck acts dishonorably because it is behavior that distinguishes the family. Every man has an equal say in government; property alone does not win a family merit. The tradition of aristocratic breeding and behavior carry importance in American culture for this reason.

Unlike Tom Sawyer’s Gang, the feuding families are unwilling to cast off the tradition despite the fact that it has become wholly unpractical. Buck does not have a good understanding of how the two families began feuding in the first place, and he does not care. Just as Tom grants too much authority to the stories of robbers he has read, the Grangerfords let the system of the aristocratic honor feud gain great authority over themselves. Huck rejects the system because he sees no point in it. Unfortunately, this tradition is not "just pretend", and much of the family ends up dead.

The concept of an all powerful monarch has the same appeal of aristocracy, if not more. Huck reads to Jim books about kings and earls, and remarks that kings "just set around" (94) all the time. Neither Huck nor Jim seem to long for such power, or to be at all "above’ others. Jim does not want to be revered, he rather wants to meet a man whom he must revere himself. When the two men who hop the raft "confess" their royalty, Jim grows wide-eyed and serves them gladly. Huck tells us that "a body could see it was mighty pleasing to him" (163). The men do not fool Huck for long, but he does share his companions delight initially.

The king and the duke are the exact opposite of the Grangerfords: they refuse to cling to any kind of tradition concerning work or conduct. They do not fear abandoning one project to begin another. Like true royalty, each sits in control of his own world, but without a moral tradition—a code of conduct—and each reigns with selfishness. Huck rejects the mode of life of these men more strongly than he does the feuding families because he cannot stand to see undeserving people hurt or swindled. By including the "royal" men, Twain does not intend to critique monarchy, but rather point out the potential windfalls of democracy: if, as time passes we abandon all traditions, and if no codes of community remain, the rise of individualism will allow for a new breed of self-indulgence. Jim casually joins Huck in disapproval when he asks "does you reck’n we gwyne to run acrost any mo’ kings on dis trip?" (176).

During the last chapters of the novel, Tom and Huck plan and scheme to "free" the already free Jim from the Phelps’ shed. They are guided not by Huck’s good sense, however, but rather by some of Tom’s "best authorities" (300) in text. The efforts to help Jim escape last for over a month, and at times become difficult to read because of the amount of authority the boys grant the texts. For Tom, the plan remains no more than an extension of the "Tom Sawyer’s Gang" pretending, but we recognize that the situation is no mere game. As with the oath, Tom’s texts rule; when Huck objects, he becomes upset or frustrated. Tom insists on playing by what he has deemed to be the rules, and eventually Huck becomes so enchanted by the game that he doesn’t see the effects their actions have on Jim.

Here, the boys suffer the faults of the Grangerfords—since they refuse to abandon the traditional rules—as well as the faults of the King and Duke, since their actions to don remain properly moral. Their treatment of Jim is downright awful. But they play the game for the fun and style, and are not culpable because they remain ignorant of these faults. The game becomes a full-blown dangerous situation when the anonymous note that Tom writes results in the arrival of twenty armed men, prepared to defend the captured Jim against ‘Ingeans’. http://www.sixfoot6.com/words/essays/huckfinn.htm

The book is about more than slaves and jews.

[Starr]

This is quite surprising, I doubt they'll drop it completely. The ejewmacation system forced me to read this book 4 times in my 12 year schooling career. To summarize this book, it's pretty much about a noble (but ignorant, due to whitey's oppression) negro and his boy (who is white) pal that run away from their homes and go on an adventure, encountering many evil white people along the way. I don't recall one white person (minus the main character) who was not either evil, greedy,or corrupt in the whole story.

Those who are protesting this, if they are anti-racists, jews , or blacks, are just hurting their own agenda. The books been used to indoctrinate young people for years.

but it contains the word nigger. This is an outrage! It is amusing if you think about it. Our society has been indocrinating people with multi-culti propaganda for how long now? We are also led to believe that people embrace diversity, well with the exception, of course, of a few ignorant and evil haters like us. Yet, if kids read this book and see the word nigger, this could potentially all come crashing down around our heads. Things like this show how strong of a foundation certain people believe the multiculti experiment is standing on.:whip: You see examples of over reactions to things very similar to this all of the time.

[kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman]

This is the one book I like. And I hate to read.

I love the way he runs away and goes up the river.

[TruthSeeker]

This is the one book I like. And I hate to read.

It's that local American English dialect that he uses to describe how Huckleberry Finn talks that gets me more.