Censored Huck Finn to be published: Pub. Weekly
- Thread starter 23skidoo
- Start date
^^ Well, if they ban or censor, they're not liberals, are they?
This is just another example of declining standards. We need another generation who's willing to say "enough is enough." Where's the 40-year cycle when you really need it?
This is just another example of declining standards. We need another generation who's willing to say "enough is enough." Where's the 40-year cycle when you really need it?
I just started a discussion on the book on Amazon. I hope NO ONE buys this book.
In Victorian times, table legs were referred to as "limbs" and kept decently covered.
Every age has its silliness and prissiness - to play "if this goes on" to the extent of getting worked up over the world's evident final slide into some kind censorious extreme is itself a bit overheated. This will come and go.
Every age has its silliness and prissiness - to play "if this goes on" to the extent of getting worked up over the world's evident final slide into some kind censorious extreme is itself a bit overheated. This will come and go.
I still have yet to hear a cogent argument explaining why censoring The Exorcist on TV is perfectly acceptable, but censoring Huckleberry Finn is a crime against humanity.
There isn't one. Neither should be censored.
So why don't I see any firestorms of controversy every time a movie is edited for TV?
I can't think of the last time it WAS broadcast on network where it would be edited...
So, you and me, next time it's broadcast and edited for content, we'll create a firestorm of controversy? Ok?
For one, one is a pulp flick while the other is a great work of art. But mostly, everyone expects movies on TV to be messed with, but no one expects the same with classic books.
That said, there has been some serious hyperbole upthread.
And there's the question I brought up about whether or not the original version will continue to be available. TV edits of films do not destroy the noncensored versions or prevent them from being viewed in theaters or on DVD. At least I'm not aware of this ever happening.
Level 2 here claims that the original Twain novel will continue to exist and be available for sale - he even gave a link. That's fine, and it works...FOR NOW. But in the future, you just never know...do you? Who knows how LONG the original novel will still be available?
Also remember what I said about teachers possibly presenting the censored version AS the original in class discussion. You don't think some "progressive" type might just engage in a little censorship of their own? Think about it.
For Christ's sake, there is no way to ban a fucking book of this sort in the U.S., okay?
There's not. The original text of "Huckleberry Finn" will always be available.
What this guy is doing clearly offends many peoples' sensibilities so horridly that they're willing to write and say a lot of arrant nonsense themselves.
You "think about it."
It's not only public schools that are declining to assign the book any more because of the language, BTW; there are highly-ranked private schools where teachers have dropped it from the curriculum.
How can you be so sure? Books can be banned. They can be forced off shelves. They can also go out of print.
Ah, so apparently this kind of offense is OK and encouraged, but the offense that the original novel is meant to discuss is not? Nice double standard there.
How can a book freely available on the internet be BANNED?
Not taught, feared, sure.
But, BANNED? That's like saying cnn.com is banned.
Ah, so apparently this kind of offense is OK and encouraged, but the offense that the original novel is meant to discuss is not? Nice double standard there.
Personally, I think the guy is stupid to make this book. It's stupid. It shouldn't be done. It's a great American novel.
Things shouldn't always be made "easier."
But, I don't think Dennis is providing a double standard.
Well, as I said above, the book is in the public domain. Just go to Google and you'll find dozens if not hundreds of websites where you can download it.
But just for the sake of argument, let's assume that somebody will someday assert a copyright on Huckleberry Finn, and take all copies of the original book off the shelves in favor of this censored version. And not allow any websites to sell the original book or post links to download it. And they will also force all public libraries all over the world to destroy their copies of the book. And they'll stop people from pirating the book through torrent sites (even though the combined legal forces of the MPAA and the RIAA can't stop people from pirating music and movies). And they'll also find a way to storm into people's homes and destroy whatever copies of the original book exist in private collections.
Let's just say all this comes to pass. Here's what you do.
Get yourself a copy of the censored version of the book, and a felt tip marker. Go through the book and cross out every instance of "slave" and write "nigger" above it. Problem solved! And also: fun for your whole family.
The Exorcist is a pulp flick? It's not a great work of art? The Library of Congress would disagree with you, they just inducted it into their Film Registry of culturally important films like two weeks ago.
Okay, so once you get used to the idea of editing classic books, how is it any different from editing classic movies?
Personally, I think it's stupid to edit Pulp Fiction to take out all the swear words, it ruins the whole fucking thing. But a TV edit exists, and if people would rather watch that than the original movie then that's their business, isn't it?
No doubt you are asking me if it's better to have the book not taught at all, rather than change a few words. And in a very real sense, that is exactly what is happening here. The book being taught is not the original. It's not the same book. It's watered down, censored.
You got that right.
I guess I'm just gonna have to be even more politically incorrect in order to make up for stuff like this.
It's exhausting I must say.
It's exhausting I must say.
No, I believe by asking you "How can a book freely available on the internet be banned?", what he's really asking you is "How can a book freely available on the internet be banned?"
Sure. But it's also my business, like yours, to say it's stupid.
AND, I would argue, the essential difference: the owners of the copyright of the film (the film company) ok'd any sort of editing of the film.
Twain doesn't have the opportunity.
I'm not asking you anything. I'm not even suggesting that. The book should be taught in American Literature classes.
I don't understand why you think it's an either or.