<ol>
<li><p>It’s “bowdlerize”, not “bowlderize”.</p></li>
<li><p>This issue came up very prominently last week, when the new leadership had the entire Constitution read in the House of Representatives. Except, of course, they didn’t read the entire Constitution. They omitted the nasty parts about slavery, that are no longer operative.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>People think even more highly of the Constitution than they do of Huckleberry Finn, and they still have trouble with its dark corners. People who want to see the world simplistically as good-or-evil (black-or-white?) have a lot of trouble with dark corners.</p>
<ol>
<li> I generally dislike people who want to simplify the world, so my first instinct is certainly to resist bowdlerizing Twain. Here’s an argument the other way, though:</li>
</ol>
<p>a. At this point in our collective cultural history, the politics of the n-word are so byzantine, and so virulent, that any decent discussion of the use of it in Huck Finn would essentially crowd out any other discussion about the book. And the book has 50 things that deserve more discussion than that. </p>
<p>b. Hemingway’s appraisal is not unique to him; it is basically the canonical opinion of American lit scholars everywhere. Huck Finn may be the single American novel that kids should most read. Especially since most of the other candidates tend to be long and tough to handle at the high school level. But if the only thing people can talk about is n-word, n-word, n-word, it’s impossible to get its extraordinary literary merit.</p>
<p>c. Use of the n-word in Huck Finn is not some major, central artistic choice. It’s simply a realistic reflection of how people like those portrayed in the book talked at the time the book takes place. Twain certainly wasn’t unwilling to tweak convention now and then, hard sometimes, but there’s less of that in Huck Finn than in his saltiest works. My guess is that he wouldn’t have used the word in that book if he had known it would someday offend people. </p>
<p>d. Because the book is actually a milestone in American race relations – practically the first realistic, positive, non-allegorical portrayal of an uneducated Black character. And certainly the first such portrayal that also acknowledges the character’s rough edges and the rough edges attributed to him by others. That’s part of what people need to focus on, and the n-word obscures it.</p>
<p>e. As a practical matter, there’s a clear choice: Don’t touch the book, and don’t teach it in high schools. Or bowdlerize it in this one respect, and teach it. In the final analysis, I would like to see it taught.</p>