Rewriting books is doubleplusungood

[boxcorner]

Chopchurch - Well said.

racism = ignorance

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

In case you haven't figured it out, I am black and a Southerner. My family has long life spans so I was lucky enough to know my great great grandmother (my father’s mother’s mother’s mother). She was ALIVE during the 1800’s and HER mother and grandmother were slaves. Yeah, I’m pretty sure that “nigger” was a racial slur even back then. But since slaves were not considered to have feelings, maybe the people subjugating them felt that it wasn’t a slur…

That's interesting, but your personal experience does not entitle you to your own facts.

I really don’t care what the "Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang" says about the word “nigger” since we all know that black slaves were not allowed to read or write. Nor did anyone care about their opinions.

ditto

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

That's interesting, but your personal experience does not entitle you to your own facts.

My own facts??! Sir, there is not a lot I can say to that statement without getting angry.

Obviously, you have never heard the statement "History is written by the victors." Last I checked people made into slaves are NOT the victors. So, you can keep your head in the sand and pretend that all of the Africans that were ripped from their families and homeland were 100% ok with being called "nigger."

I'm leaving this discussion because your "facts" are starting to turn my stomach.

[Redcard]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

According to the "Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang," "N*****" did not originate as a slur and only took on that meaning over time. There's a lot of other evidence that it was not originally pejorative, too.

Although of course I'd be interested in countervailing evidence.

The Oxford English Dictionary _IS_ countervailing evidence to most every other dictionary of English in the world. It's widely recognized as the dictionary of the English language.

[Fastolfe]

Originally Posted by Chopchurch

I'd rather my nephew not have to see the word

That's where you're wrong.

What was done was done, and what was written was written. No amount of wishing it went away is going to make the nigger word disappear. You can't and shouldn't shield your nephew from the realities of the world, past or present. He would be better off being exposed to the word, learning why it exists and what it means, and facing it as a proud and unafraid human being than shy away from it.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

My own facts??! Sir, there is not a lot I can say to that statement without getting angry.

Obviously, you have never heard the statement "History is written by the victors." Last I checked people made into slaves are NOT the victors. So, you can keep your head in the sand and pretend that all of the Africans that were ripped from their families and homeland were 100% ok with being called "nigger."

I'm leaving this discussion because your "facts" are starting to turn my stomach.

I'm sorry that you are getting angry. But - and I don't mean this disrespectfully - the fact that your great grandmother was alive in the 1800's, and the fact that her mother and grandmother were slaves - does not make you an expert on the meaning or connotation of terms from the middle of the 19th century. It's a non-falsifiable statement that precludes anyone else from participating in the discussion.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by Redcard

The Oxford English Dictionary _IS_ countervailing evidence to most every other dictionary of English in the world. It's widely recognized as the dictionary of the English language.

Yes. And the version on the Kindle is not the OED. The OED itself notes that the term is not always offensive. Specifically, it has a list of quotes "a. Used by whites or other non-blacks as a relatively neutral (or occas. positive) term, with no specifically hostile intent."

As well as a list of quotes: "b. Used by whites or other non-blacks as a hostile term of abuse or contempt."

Note also the statement at the end of this definition noting that the term is "Now usu. offensive," suggesting that the term was, historically, not always offensive.

1. Being a dark-skinned person of sub-Saharan African origin or descent; belonging or relating to dark-skinned people of sub-Saharan African origin or descent. Also (occas.) designating any dark-skinned person (see quot. 1946). See also nigger boy n. at Compounds 1. Now usu. offensive (see note at sense A. 1)."

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Chopchurch

As one of the actual persons of color who use this forum, I have no problem with this book being censored. Though I would have preferred they used "negro" instead of "slave".

I'd be a lot less annoyed if they swapped it with the word "negro" or "coloured." By changing it from a racial term to a legal-status term, they *drastically* change the meaning of the thoughts and conversations.

Changing it to "slave" shows that the editors really, really didn't want to deal with the issue of race, wanted to pretend that Jim's race wasn't a crucial aspect of the story.

I also always love it when someone in the back of the room mentions that "a certain urban subset of black people have reclaimed that word, so it can't be all that bad".

This. Most of my gay friends call each other "faggot;" that doesn't mean it's reasonable for a lawyer or senator or random person on the street to address them that way.

Using an insult as a mark of camaraderie and shared experience doesn't make it a non-insulting term. Nor do the beliefs of teenagers who've never directly faced the term used as an insult because they've lived in pocket communities where their race was in the majority.

I'd rather not see the word in my literature, I'd rather my nephew not have to see the word. That is of course, an opinion, my opinion. And you are entitled to your own opinions, no matter how wrong headed, distasteful or ignorant the opinions you express may seem to me.

I have no problems with keeping the books out of schools (or at least, out of official curricula) as inappropriate for children, loaded with too many markers of another time to allow for teaching in the limited way that schools can manage. Schools don't have time to discuss at length with each reader what impressions he got from it, and what parts bothered him and why, and what he can do with that knowledge.

If those parts are removed, I'm not sure what makes the book worth teaching--or at least, not worth more than dozens of other coming-of-age stories involving epiphanies about legal bigotry. This is not a unique and isolated type of story; if it were, it wouldn't be worth using. And, being a common type of story, schools should be able to find something that directly relates to their students, not try to make sure millions of students all over the country have read the same book so they can claim they got the same education.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

I'm sorry that you are getting angry. But - and I don't mean this disrespectfully - the fact that your great grandmother was alive in the 1800's, and the fact that her mother and grandmother were slaves - does not make you an expert on the meaning or connotation of terms from the middle of the 19th century. It's a non-falsifiable statement that precludes anyone else from participating in the discussion.

Whenever someone says "I don't mean any disrespect..." someone is about to be disrespected.

It is obvious that all you did is go google "nigger" - you have NOT done your research. Just because you found it online does not make it true. You are reading the words only of the seller of men, not the men being sold. You obviously have never read the words of the people who were being called “nigger.”

I don’t have time to pull out too many texts, but I’ll give you some homework. All the emphasis to follow is mine. Let’s start easy:

Frederick Douglass’ Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave.
“It was a common saying, even among little white boys, that is was worth a half-cent to kill a ‘nigger,’ and a half-cent to bury one.”
Frederick Douglass, 1818-1895

David Walker’s Appeal:
“Compare the above, with the American institutions. Do they not institute laws to prohibit us from marrying among the whites? I would wish, candidly, however, before the Lord, to be understood, that I would not give a pinch of snuff to be married to any white person I ever saw in all the days of my life. And I do say it, that the black man, or man of colour, who will leave his own colour and marry a white woman, to be a double slave to her, just because she is white, ought to be treated by her as he surely will be, viz: as a NIGGER!!!! It is not, indeed, what I care about inter-marriages with the whites, which induced me to pass this subject in review; for the Lord knows, that there is a day coming when they will be glad enough to get into the company of the blacks, notwithstanding, we are, in this generation, leveled by them, almost on a level with the brute creation: and some of us they treat even worse than they do the brutes that perish. I only made this extract to show how much lower we are held, and how much more cruel we are treated by the Americans, than were the children of Jacob, by the Egyptians.”
David Walker, 1785-1830

But I’m sure I’m

You will believe whatever you want.

[basschick]

i'd like to see what a dictionary from before 1900 says about the word "nigger". after all, a newer dictionary is likely to define a word in a modern way, and meanings do change.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by basschick

i'd like to see what a dictionary from before 1900 says about the word "nigger". after all, a newer dictionary is likely to define a word in a modern way, and meanings do change.

The first volume of the Oxford English Dictionary was published in 1888. The first complete edition was published in 1933.

Whilst the latest edition of a dictionary might hopefully include an up-to-date definition of the headword (ie the word you are looking up), lexicographers (ie authors or editors of dictionaries) of authoritative and reputable dictionaries do not, as a rule, jettison older definitions, when a dictionary is updated.

Etymologies (ie development of a word since its earliest recorded occurrence in the language), word derivations, are of immense value to lexicographers.

Webster’s International Dictionary of the English Language was first published in 1890.

The 1890 and 1913 editions are available on-line.

The word "nigger" does not appear to be in the 1890 edition, however according to the 1913 edition:

Nigger (Page: 975)
Nig"ger (?), n. A negro; -- in vulgar derision or depreciation.

Consequently, the word "nigger" has been known to be offensive for at least 98 years.

According to Merriam-Webster on-line, the first known use of the word "nigger" is 1574.

Unless you think is it likely that during 13 or more previous years, the meaning of the word changed from one of neutrality to insult, then I think is reasonable to assume that the word has been an insult since before 1900, most probably long before 1900.

The American Civil War ended 35 years before 1900. That is little over a generation. Memories of the civil war would have been just as fresh in people's memories then, as the Vietnam War, which ended a similar time ago, is for people now.

Slavery, in the US, ended officially in 1865 (with the end of the American Civil War and the passage of the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution).

It is worth noting that Britain was heavily involved in the slave trade.

"... It is thought between 1700 and 1810 British merchants transported almost three million Africans across the Atlantic. More than 30,000 slave voyages took place ... Much of Bristol's 18th Century wealth came from the slave trade ..."

Given all the controversy and bitter enmity stirred up by the slave trade, in the Americas and Europe, and the American Civil War, not to mention the appalling treatment of the slaves themselves, I think it absolutely beggars belief to imagine that between then and 1900 (or 1913), the meaning of the word changed from one of neutrality to insult!

The civil war, in which around 360,000 people died, was all about slavery - about racial differences. The word "nigger" is a racial insult. It is derogatory. It implies that one race is superior to another. When used by whites, it is a slur.

I consider all forms of racism to be completely abhorrent, and racism in the US no less so. People are not born racist, rather children learn racism from older people. As you have probably gathered by now, I am vehemently anti-racism. I find racism completely obnoxious.

I grew up in West and North Africa, and attended an American school there. There were 13 different nationalities in my class, including a mixture of different races. We all played happily together. There was no racism there. However, I soon encountered racism as I grew up.

People often make a lot of assumptions. We all have prejudices, but people are not born with prejudices. Children acquire their prejudices, as with racism, as they grow up. I bet that some of the people reading this will have made an assumption about the colour of my skin, simply because I grew up in Africa and believe that racism=ignorance. Perhaps my skin is black, because I lived in West Africa, or maybe you think I am an Arab - or Muslim, because I lived in North Africa. Well, sorry to disappoint you, but I am a white atheist. In fact, I was born in England and both my parent served in the armed forces during WWII. Later, I attended high school in the US.

I have had the good fortune to have lived and worked in, and visited, many different countries, on several continents, during my life, and I have always found it a great pleasure to encounter people of different nationalities, and from different races and cultures. I have known, ever since I was a small child, that the word "nigger" is offensive. Ever since we sang that children's counting rhyme, that begins, "Eeny, meeny, miny, moe", all those long years ago, in the playground, and when some kind and thoughtful teach explained to us why the word "nigger" is offensive.

By the way, as it was an international school, not all the teachers were American - my mother was one of them. And yes, later when I was older, we read Twain, along with books like Little Women and the Hardy Boys. I survived the ordeal. I grew up seeking the truth about all things in the universe, including our world.

I am living proof that someone can read unexpurgated editions of Twain's books and without necessarily growing up either using the word "nigger" and/or as a racist. As children grow up, they need to learn about the real world, warts and all, for we ignore history at our peril. Of course, children need guidance along the way. Please try not to make assumptions about people.

Whilst the word "nigger" might now be used by some black people as a mildly disparaging way of referring to another black person, that does not make its use by any white person any less offensive.

[GBerlin]

I wonder how many people arguing for non-bowdlerization in this forum 1. have children 2. have words that can be used in this way against them? I read my 7 year old the expurgated and shortened version of Tom Sawyer and she will be confined to expurgated and in some cases shortened versions of very many classics until she is at least 14. I assume at that point, I will be discussing more difficult concepts with her as they are presented.
I live in Berlin and I won't be taking her to Sachsenhausen this year either, although we step over a memorial to a murdered Jew every day as we enter our apartment. And she knows that too- but not the mechanism.
In such a way, she can understand the story of Sawyer (and I think she's too young for Finn) without hearing words that- today- are wrong to use. Time enough to get deeper than the concept of slavery in the future.
And people can appreciate fairy tales as children and as adult analysts and really- it's good that there are different versions.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Yes. And the version on the Kindle is not the OED. The OED itself notes that the term is not always offensive. Specifically, it has a list of quotes "a. Used by whites or other non-blacks as a relatively neutral (or occas. positive) term, with no specifically hostile intent."

That's certainly the way it was used in Britain, at least up to the 1960s. I hope that nobody believes that Agatha Christie was being deliberately racist, for example, in titling a book "Ten Little Niggers" in 1939.

There was a particular shade of brown that was always known as "nigger brown" in my childhood (in the late 1960s) and there was absolutely no derogatory meaning associated with the name.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's certainly the way it was used in Britain, at least up to the 1960s. I hope that nobody believes that Agatha Christie was being deliberately racist, for example, in titling a book "Ten Little Niggers" in 1939.

There was a particular shade of brown that was always known as "nigger brown" in my childhood (in the late 1960s) and there was absolutely no derogatory meaning associated with the name.

Yes, and I remember there was a brand of jam in Britain, called Robinson's, that used a golliwogg as it's logo. The word "wog" has long been used, in Britain and Australia, as a derogatory slur. Nevertheless, I at least, have always considered the word "nigger" to be a slur, clearly others differ.

I also read Biggles books, (when I was sent to school in England for a year at the beginning of the 60s), and dare say they would be considered non-PC today, for the same reason. I feel sure that's where I first learned about the Gobi Desert. I suppose I must have read, Biggles in the Gobi, so perhaps there was some merit in them after all.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by boxcorner

Yes, and I remember there was a brand of jam in Britain that used a golliwogg as it's logo.

There was indeed - Robinson's jam. People used to collect them. Little porcelain figures, playing various musical instruments. I had some myself at one time.