Sawickipedia Tumblr, The question of whether Mark Twain’s classic...

The question of whether Mark Twain’s classic Huckleberry Finn should be censored first came up a year after it was published, and the pressure on the often politically incorrect (then and now) book hasn’t stopped in the 125 years since, earning it fourth place on a list of the US’s most banned books.

Now a Twain scholar from Auburn University in Alabama believes he has found a way to teach Huck Finn without all the controversy about race and language: Alan Gribben is editing a new version of the classic novel that will remove all 219 instances of the “n-word,” replacing it with the word “slave.” The book will also replace the word “Injun…”

Michael Whitney writes at FireDogLake. “You ruin the original intent of the book and force new readers to run from the reality in which the book was written and the historical context that followed.”

“

—

New edition of Huckleberry Finn replaces n-word with ‘slave’

You’re smoking crack if you think you can have freedom of expression and banned speech. Is paying for a blog on wordpress.com and writing about a candidate paid spending? You mean I can’t buy an ad on Adsense saying I’m voting for candidate x or initiative Y? Impossible. Speech, at least to me, is an all or nothing affair. Can’t honestly believe you believe that you can regulate “free” speech. Read 1984?

(via sawickipedia)

vruz: quite frankly sawickipedia, you lost me… there’s several things which are already regulated about free speech. for example the right of the press to satirise political figures is granted by the first amendment, leaving out other situations under which such commentary is not appropriate (slander, libel, etc.).

but yes, you could say ‘regulated’, to express discontent when you’re on the losing end of the balance.

(via vruz)

If you and @rafer are fine living in a highly regulated speech environment then so be it. But that is a future and end game illustrated well by Orwell. Personally libel, slander, etc. shouldn’t be regulated either - regulations are too easily co-opted by those of ill-intent - see the libel suits filed in the UK by those seeking to shut off dissent in other countries because of their libel laws. Call me pollyannic if you will but I would prefer a less regulated speech environment as its the safest way to allow for unfettered dissent.