- It's a Terrible Decision, writes K.C. Morgan at VIP Breakdown. "The
fact is, Mark Twain didn't live in today's frighteningly over-the-top,
PC world. Maybe we shouldn't try to erase all reminders that his era
ever existed. The world of Huck Finn serves as a living reminder of
where we've been. Sometimes, it's ugly."
- This Is Unprecedented! writes Alexandra Petri at The Washington Post:
It's not about avoiding an awkward classroom moment, or they would have removed the word "ejaculate" from Victorian novels, where everybody is always ejaculating about everything. It would be like renaming 1984 2084, "because the current title does not reflect how pleasant life was under the Reagan administration." This is like changing War and Peace to Peace, because war is unpleasant to remember, or removing World War I from All Quiet on the Western Front.
- This Won't Help Strengthen Race Relations "One cannot speak of evolution when we are unable or
unwilling to put a book into context and explain racial issues to our
children or clarify how words have evolved," writes Alina Popescu
at Everything PR. "For me the issue comes down
to an unnecessary first that will soon be expanded to other books,
- They Made the Right Choice, counters Rob Anderson at Boston.com:
The "n" word today is not the same thing as it was 100 years ago. And while we shouldn't get in the habit of editing books as the meaning of words change over time (that's what footnotes are for, after all!), sometimes it's okay--especially when the meaning of a word, like the "n word," has changed so significantly. Yes, the "n word" was impolite and rude when Twain included it in the book--219 times, to be exact --but it didn't carry the same historical, cultural, or political baggage that it does now. If any word deserves to be nixed, the "n word" would be it.
- More Children Will Read It Now "If
this puts the book into the hands of kids who would not otherwise be
allowed to read it due to forces beyond their control (overprotective
parents and the school boards they frighten)," writes Keith Staskiewicz at Entertainment Weekly, "then maybe we shouldn't be
so quick to judge." She also asks if it is "really any more
catastrophic than a TBS-friendly re-edit of 'The Godfather.'" In both cases, she says, "the original product is changed for the
benefit of those who, for one reason or another, are not mature enough
to handle it, but as long as it doesn't affect the original, is there a
- It's Censorship I Can Stomach, writes Dave Rosenthal at The Baltimore Sun: "I'm not big on censorship, but this word is so weighted that it gets in the way of a true discussion of the merits. but any teacher who assigns the new version should be required to explain the self-censorship. That way, at least, the tough prose won't be completely white-washed."