Educators have pointed out that the use of the word, no matter its context, makes for a difficult learning environment for African American students, and so there is good reason either to exclude the work or censor it in a classroom environment with children. There is a lot of anecdotal accounts of black people feeling singled out when they are in a minority position in the classroom. Given the goals of high school education, teaching Huck Finn uncensored can be counterproductive.
Pip... I agree to a good extent. But then I wonder what the impact would be in a school in which the Black population was the majority... or in which there were no white students. I teach in a school that is nearly 100% Black and in which the term "nigger"... or rather "nigga" is continually thrown about... actually as something akin to "my dude" or "my man." On more than one occasion students will exclaim, "Mr. K, you my nigga," and Black teachers and principals have noted that such is a compliment... an expression of acceptance.
I bring this up because I find issues of race... or more so "color" are more complicated and prevalent in the context of the all "Black" school/community than I would have guessed. Students will speak of darker-skinned peers as "Black" "Choco" "Charcoal" "African" etc... and of lighter-skinned peers as "White". The skin color of a student is often an identifying element. When trying to identify another student, the kids will often say, "That dark boy?" "The light-skinned one?" Almost in the manner in which white students might identify another by hair color.
I bring up the issue because there are some educators... and a good many Black educators... who feel that the kids don't grasp the history of the term "nigger" and are themselves quite offended (rightfully so) by the manner in which the term has been co-opted by the kids.
By the way... you'll note I don't use the term African-American which is almost never used by my Black students or teachers/educators. A principal actually gave us a quote by Martin Luther King in which he rejected the term "African-American".
Then there is a more academic line of criticism which has viewed the book as part of the affectionate, liberal orientated racism of the late 19th century that was part of the infamous minstrelsy tradition. The vaudeville black minstrel tradition would have white actors use black-face to parody the stereotypes of African Americans, and this same tradition of racial comedy plays out in Huck Finn. The work is implicated in 19th century racism even if it is speaking out against the more insidious manifestations of racism (i.e. slavery). Moreover, a work published a few decades after emancipation can hardly be viewed as radically progressive for criticizing slavery. There is good reason to acknowledge that Huck Finn is in many ways a racist text, and this is part of the work that should not be brushed aside.
Here, you lose me Pip. You suggest the text is racist in something of a liberal stereotype of Black Americans. So how does Twain avoid this? Is he simply to avoid employing Black characters and the real racist slang of the era? Then would the results not be racist in the sense that TV shows of the 1950s were racist in that there simply were no Black Americans? I also have to wonder if you imagine that a novel like Lolita is a form of pedophilia because Humbert is a pedophile. In other words... are we again struggling with those who cannot differentiate between the art and the artist?
