fireun: (gaara wtf)
[personal profile] fireun
 [livejournal.com profile] otterdance  has an excellent discussion on the editing of Huck Finn.

When we get to the point where we are editing works of literature that reflect a period we are really missing the point of writing. And reading. Have dialog with your students instead of washing over anything that could inspire discussion. We aren't teaching at this point if we take away anything there is to teach. Editing works to fit modern asinine feelings of what is and is not appropriate is a failure of gross proportions to take something of value from these works, even if that value is nothing more than a discussion of why a certain word/topic/idea is offensive/hurtful/inappropriate. We cannot learn and grow if we merely decide to wash things away.

Date: 2011-01-04 10:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] oracle-dreams.livejournal.com
Very interesting but also an ages old dilemma. Very similarly, I was watching a show on Ovation - Secret Museums.

http://www.ovationtv.com/programs/1052-secret-museums

They were discussing the depiction of sex in art and the hidden galleries etc, that showcased them (the Victorians ones are so intriguing!) throughout the ages. It always goes back to, the supposed urban myth, that the vatican has the largest collection of porn in the world. Of special interest, the vatican employed artisans specifically to castrate all the classical statues and paste their more modest fig leaves in place. The myth says they kept the penises. This show SHOWED drawer after drawer of those severed penises. What a show that would be, on so many levels...

Anyway, censorship isn't going away. Just as criminal now as it was then and still just as prudish.

Date: 2011-01-04 10:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] amethyst-clan.livejournal.com
oh for the love of gods...
-facepalms-

Gods forbid we teach our children critical thinking skills.

Date: 2011-01-05 07:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fireun.livejournal.com
We can't teach them anything if we dont give them something to think and talk about. The whole correctness mindset is infuriating.

Date: 2011-01-08 08:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] amethyst-clan.livejournal.com
Oh, come on now. Why would we want our kids to think?? -bitter-

Date: 2011-01-04 11:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bleedtoblue.livejournal.com
Editing is just not the same thing as censoring, removing the "offensive passages" is censorship.

Date: 2011-01-04 11:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] oracle-dreams.livejournal.com
The vatican did not remove sensual nude human bodies, they just editted the bit they didn't like. You can look at them but only in their context.

Date: 2011-01-05 01:42 am (UTC)
jecook: Mirror Kirk laughing and words "I'm sorry, I can't here you over the sound of how awesome I am" (flaming sarcasm)
From: [personal profile] jecook
Um, the 'editing' that was occurring was removal of words considered offensive.

You did read the entry she linked to, yes?

It's funny- people seem to get all offended when the majority group uses slang words to reference minority groups. No one seems to be offended when the reverse happens.

Oh, did I mention I love standards, because there are so many of them?

Date: 2011-01-05 02:09 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] oracle-dreams.livejournal.com
Um... I did. I thought I offered a parallel example that resonanted with me.
The *N* word = ancient greek willies. Both castrated in the name of PCness...


Date: 2011-01-05 07:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fireun.livejournal.com
It funny- 'editing' is acceptable (in most cases, at least more acceptable) while 'censorship' is such a negative flash word. Depending on who is talking about this topic, one or the other words is used. I find it almost fascinating.

And you are right, there really is a conceptual difference between censoring and editing, but I think it is a distinction that is missed much of the time.

Date: 2011-01-05 06:13 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sorion.livejournal.com
Why don't we stop reading altogether...? Works of art always have to be read in the context of their time. Simple as that.
And here my grandmother always complains about the language of the youth... ;)

Date: 2011-01-05 07:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fireun.livejournal.com
Works of art always have to be read in the context of their time.

Exactly. We are doing the works, and ourselves, a distinct disservice by editing/censoring away the things we don't approve of in our modern context.

Date: 2011-01-05 02:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] libwitch.livejournal.com
The only thing that surprises me (sadly) is that this is NEWS to some people - its been done before. Perhaps not in this format. But movie/tv adaptions have been edited; and since the book has been banned many many times for this very reason, logic only follows that this would happen.

I am not saying it is right, but society is actually THIS STUPID.

Date: 2011-01-05 03:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fireun.livejournal.com
I know. *hangs head*

March 2015

S M T W T F S
1 234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 25th, 2025 01:02 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios