Subject: (urth) (no subject)

From: Lee Berman <severiansola at hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 22:24:17 +0000

>Gerry Quinn: My biggest issue with it was the publisher's intention of replacing 
>"nigger" with "slave" which is hardly synonymous. Replacing it with "African American" 
>would sound wrong even to the most tin-eared PC warrior, but what's wrong with "Black"?

I've noticed a tendency for British types to use the word "black" or "blacks" as a noun
more readily than we Americans do in regard to those of african descent. We usually must
add a noun to the adjective to make it, "black woman", "black guy", "black people" etc.
 
If one must replace "nigger" with a non-offensive term, I suppose "slave" is probably the
best choice (calling Jim a "black guy" would barely be less PC than "african-american". 
But doing so sucks the historical soul and essence of the book. The climax
of the story arrives when Huck decides, "Alright then, I'll GO to hell", for the sin of
freeing a slave. Without the hundreds of "nigger" references previous to that moment, well..
it just isn't the same. Better to make it a college-only book than to do that to it.
 
p.s. I was disappointed in this post, Gerry (not that it lacked substance). After so many 
posts on the subject of Hiroshima I was wondering when a non-American would weigh in before
the topic tapered off due to its non-Wolfe status. It would be interesting to hear from 
someone who did not spend their childhood pledging daily allegiance to our flag.