.
| Hearsay: |
A teacher in the US thinks books like Huckleberry Finn should be left off reading lists now that there’s a black president. I believe I can respond to this with just three letters: W. T. F. ?! Here’s the original op-ed piece.
John Foley figures he has pretty much maxed out on explaining to African American mothers why it’s OK to call a black man the N-word — as long as it’s in a novel that is considered a classic.
For years, English teachers have been explaining away the obvious racism in Mark Twain’s “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” And for years, the book that perhaps best explains Americans’ genetic predilection for hitting the road, only to later find themselves, has stayed near the top of many high school reading lists.
However, with an African American about to be inaugurated as president, Foley wonders whether ‘Huck Finn’ ought to be sent back down the river. Why not replace it with a more modern, less discomfiting novel documenting the epic journey of discovery?
“The time has arrived to update the literature we use in high school classrooms,” Foley wrote in a guest column this month for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. “Barack Obama is president-elect of the United States, and novels that use the ‘N-word’ repeatedly need to go.”
Yeah, I guess racism is now a thing of the past. Like sexism, acid rain, deforestation, and that whole pesky AIDS thing. Who needs to learn about what bastards we were in the past when our president is black (and wearing a kevlar vest at all times)?
January 2006
December
2005
November
2005
October
2005
September
2005
August
2005
July
2005
June
2005
May
2005
April
2005
March
2005
February
2005
January
2005
December
2004
November
2004
October
2004
September
2004
August
2004
July
2004
June
2004
May
2004
April
2004
March
2004
February
2004
January
2004
December
2003
November
2003
October
2003
September
2003
August
2003
Bookninja © Copyright
The opinions expressed on this site are those of individual participants
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the site owners,
organizers, or other participants.
[powered by WordPress.]
January 21st, 2009 at 9:25 am
He’s right about Going After Cacciato, though, it’s a great book (I don’t know about Lonesome Dove or Snow Falling on Cedars, but he does mention the local interest in that one).
January 21st, 2009 at 10:02 am
If there’s going to be updating of the curriculum how about broadening it instead of narrowing it?
January 21st, 2009 at 10:06 am
The true reason for continuing to teach Huckleberry Finn is that there are reams and reams of lesson plans and test questions that teachers can re-use year after year. There are teachers who’ve spent the last forty years teaching the same set of texts, whose mastery of the subject would be threatened by change. There are insecure new teachers who are grateful that a variety of pre-packaged lessons are waiting for them when they arrive at a new school. These get passed down the generations, and by accretion of supplementary materials, you end up with something that can only be dislodged by dynamite. So whenever some brave and foolish soul suggests that it might be time to consider something more contemporary, there is inevitably protest. I understand that there has been some progress in introducing newer materials at some schools, but it takes a special breed of teacher to attempt the upset of the status quo.
January 21st, 2009 at 11:02 am
J. Yarmouth–exactly why I don’t teach in public schools anymore. Don’t get me started on what happened when I dared to teach art and music…
January 21st, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Sure. We don’t want our kids reading old or difficult books. They might encounter racial prejudice in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn or anti-Semitism in The Merchant of Venice or sexism in the Bible. God forbid that our kids be challenged by literature and required to think!
January 21st, 2009 at 12:24 pm
My gut response: this guy is crazy!
American history is American history, and while we are not proud of all that that means–Japanese internments, the genocide committed against Native Americans, Slavery, Civil War, etc.–we should not shy away from it. No matter how uncomfortable this may make us, it is what makes us American.
In President Obama’s Inauguration Address, he specifically addresses this issue: “Because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass.” This statement presupposes the knowledge of those “hatreds.”
We should not eschew our history because it makes us uncomfortable. We must remember that our willingness to address these very issues has been the occasion for some of our greatest triumphs. The hope that our President speaks of springs from our determination to do this very thing.
All three of these books are American masterpieces of literature, and none of them glorify behavior that in unacceptable for a teenage audience. They allow a young person to examine a more complex world and their own views of themselves. America becomes something different to our students that read these books. They themselves change. It is precisely because of this that it is so important that these texts be read!
Sure, we can infuse more contemporary literature into the curriculum. I particularly enjoy his suggested inclusion of Snow Falling on Cedars–a regional favorite–into the curriculum. But there are some works that should not be cut from a young persons education. In the 4 years a student spends in High School, there are plenty of opportunities to enjoy contemporary novels and these classics.
January 21st, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Chosing to study a newer work is one thing, and I endorse it, but doing away with the classics because their subjects make people uncomfortable is craven and small-minded.
January 21st, 2009 at 1:55 pm
I used to think that the anti-Twain complaints came merely from politically-correct ninnies who wanted to purge a nettling word from the classroom, but there is also something conservative about the longing for the memory hole that a removal of Huckleberry Finn from the curriculum would represent. It seems to come from a feeling that the drawn-out conversations on race that the book elicits stoke grievances which it might soon be possible to bury.
It’s odd that Foley should bring Obama into it. It is as if he thinks white America has bought itself a right to mute racially-charged topics just by electing him (actually, I suspect this is what more than a few white voters hoped). But then, maybe that will become the consensus.
I had to laugh when I read that Foley’s white students “objected” to the portrayal of an slave as “uneducated.” Just where do these kids think slaves were educated? It sounds as if they like to hijack class discussions to prove to each other how “not racist” they are.
Still, Foley’s approach isn’t censorious, and he certainly knows the book better than I do. Maybe my reaction is an old fashioned literary-liberal knee-jerk, and he’s right to acknowledge his students’ desire to move on.
January 21st, 2009 at 8:43 pm
The suggestion that Huck Finn is racist because of its use of the “n-word” is completely stupid. It’s actually a very thoughtful and profound discussion OF racism, including the use of the word. Huck has a gradual, imperfect, stumbling enlightenment about Jim over the course of the novel, that even comes down to what words he uses to call him. The fact that his profound moment of clarity includes the statement “I knew then that he was white inside,” says more about the racist world that has created Huck than it does about Twain’s theoretical racism. That’s the whole point — Huck’s world sucks, and once he realizes that, he has no choice but to “light out for the Territories.”
The novel is also funny, thrilling (even for teenagers), and manages to give a glimpse into a whole way of life that students might otherwise not have access to. I’ve been teaching it for years to university students, who learn a lot from it, and never consider it racism, once they get over their discomfort with the most divisive word in the English language. I’m all for adding other books to the curriculum, but Twain remains one of the best, accessible writers in American literature. Removing Huck from the curriculum because it uses racist language when portraying a racist world would be like removing the engine of a car because it’s greasy.
January 21st, 2009 at 9:12 pm
I’m always baffled when I see books like Huckleberry Finn on banned lists because of “racism.” I mean, that’s one of the most pivotal lessons of the book itself and for a school/teacher to ignore the opportunity to help students learn from history and great literature is mind-boggling.
January 21st, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Two years ago I had the privilege of being part of a discussion about Huck Finn led by a friend who agreed to be a visiting reader at a festival I organize every year at a public school in Toronto. We held the festival during Freedom to Read week, for obvious reasons.
This generous friend put thought into her presentation and gave historical context for the piece she read. It was presented to three classes of grade 6 students, and what followed was a most thoughtful discussion of book banning and intellectual freedom. Yes, black students were part of the group and yes, the N-word did come up.
It worries me that this teacher thinks he’s being enlightened by attempting to erase words which, out of context, are offensive (The Power of Lucky and the ensuing scrotumgate comes to mind). The book is brilliant, but if he’s not up to teaching it, or not interested in teaching it, fine. He shouldn’t, in any of those cases. By all means, bring new stuff into the curriculum. But don’t start with the book banning.
January 21st, 2009 at 11:04 pm
The issue the writer brings up is not whether on a deeper level Huck Finn is racist, it’s how his ninth-graders interpret it. All they see is a likable protagonist using the ‘n’ word repeatedly, so they think it’s ok. He doesn’t in any way suggest removing the book because racism is not an issue anymore. Rather, he argues for more contemporary books his students can relate to that show how racism is not just something that existed in the deep south in the 19th century or 1950’s but continues to be a part of American life in the present day and relevant to their lives.
I read To Kill a Mockingbird, Huck Finn and Black Like Me when I was in Grade 9, and I thought they were decent books, but I didn’t feel very connected to them at all. I think they should be taken off Canadian curriculums if only for the reason that they give students the impression that in order to find stories about racism they have to look elsewhere, because racism is not a problem in Canada. Or not as big of a problem. Obviously this is not the intention, but it’s the message that ends up coming across when read by ninth-graders. It’s a good idea to replace them with work that deals with the same issues but in a way that is more immediate.
Taking a book off a curriculum is not “banning” it. There is not a lot of room for books on a curriculum and the selection is of utmost importance. For instance, I went through five years of high school in Canada without being assigned a single Canadian novel. In Grade 12 there was a single poem by Margaret Atwood, and that was it. So in English class I learned a lot about England in the nineteenth century, and about the United States, but nothing about my own country. Every book on a curriculum is to the exclusion of something else. There is not the option of “broadening” it unless summer holidays are eliminated.
January 21st, 2009 at 11:15 pm
Is it that hard to find out how President Obama would feel if Huckleberry Finn were replaced? Let’s ask him and go from there.
January 22nd, 2009 at 8:54 am
The author of the article isn’t saying that Huck Finn is racist, he’s saying that it is outdated and there may be better alternatives. I love Mark Twain, and have taught the book in a high school classroom, but who decides that it is the best novel to teach about racism?
He also makes a good point about the comfort level of the students. Does reading and hearing the “N” word over and over in any context really teach students about racism? Would another excellent book about the subject that doesn’t feature the word be less effective as a teaching tool?
It’s not about censorship, it’s about teaching effectively. Why should students have to read the same classic novels year after year when there are plenty of other classics, as well as contemporary literature, that could possibly be better teaching tools.
If it’s a depressing thought that Huck Finn wouldn’t be read by high schoolers, isn’t it just as depressing that they haven’t read the millions of other amazing novels that are ignored every year to teach the high school canon?
January 22nd, 2009 at 9:08 am
Taking books off the curriculum to replace them with others that are fresher or more relevant happens all the time (should, anyway). Taking a book off the curriculum because the N-word appears in it is a de facto ban. No getting around that.
Interpretation is all, agreed, but isn’t that the job of the teacher? A good teacher doesn’t back away from a book because it may be discomfiting to some. Art should provoke, agitate, discomfit. All of these reactions, in the hands of a good teacher, provide a rich teaching opportunity.
Huck Finn isn’t tired, it’s timeless. It’s as relevant now as it ever was.
January 22nd, 2009 at 1:54 pm
I think it’s nice that Mark Twain still ain’t dead. I love it.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Not sure if it’s just a coincidence, but a library worker I know was was today instructed to discard the following titles from the library branch’s collection: The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and Uncle Tom’s Cabin.