Offensive Terms and Characterizations in Huck Finn Research Paper

Critical Literary Analysis

Both John H. Wallace and Allan B. Ballard present a literary argument for how Jim and other blacks are portrayed in Mark Twains Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. They particularly focus on the use of the term nigger in the novel and decry the fact that a novel with such language should be taught in schools where blacks might be made to feel uncomfortable by the language. Ballard recounts his own suffering as a student having to hear his classmates utter that word during readings of the book in class: he notes that in his class, some of the whites snickered, others giggled while he himself saw none of the merits of the work and could only later recall the sense of relief I felt when Iwould flip ahead a few pages and see that the word nigger would not be read that hour (8). Wallace likewise views the novels language as problematic and its presentation of Negro culture as shameful. This paper will discuss the literary argument between John H. Wallace and Allan B. Ballard on how Jim and other black individuals were viewed in Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

John H. Wallace has been one of the most vocal critics of the novel. He described it as the most grotesque example of racist trash ever written, arguing that when it is taught in classes the proliferation of the term nigger in the book is humiliating for black students (16). When the book is read in class, it is no better than mental and emotional bullying of blacks: It constitutes mental cruelty, harassmenttension, discontent, and even fighting against black students when it is read aloud in the classroom and while sitting with their white peers (Wallace 17). His problem with the novel is the effect it has on the consciousness of students, regardless of their race. For whites, it can give them a powerful ego trip, while for blacks it can be a kind of negative reinforcement of their sense of inferiority. Thus, Wallace asks: How much pain must a black child endure to secure an education? (22). Two solutions to this problem that Wallace provides are: first, teach the book at the graduate level, where the inflammatory language is less likely to be felt so negatively because the minds and emotions of the students are matured and disciplined; second, if high school educators feel it should be taught then they should at least use the adapted version that Wallace provides, wherein the story is maintained but the inflammatory use of certain terms like nigger is removed. This is Wallaces view of the book.

Ballards view is somewhat similar, but also more condemning: his critique of the novel is that reinforces systemic racism. Ballard states, for instance, that

the presentation of the novel as an American classic serves as an official endorsement of a term uttered by the most prejudiced racial bigots to an age group eager to experiment with any language of shock value. One reporter has likened the teaching of the novel to eighth grade kids to pulling the pin of a hand grenade and tossing it into the all too common American classroom. (8)

No matter how the novel is presented to young minds, Ballard says, it gives an impression because what those young minds see and hear are words that denigrate and undermine. Those offensive terms can be couched in defensive rhetoric and excuses can be made, but the works main characteristics still assault the senses of the young individual to whom they are exposed. Those who fail to see this point must forget that they too are likely to protest to media that is full of violence or sexuality being presented to young readers or viewers; if such exposure is bad for their own kids, then the exposure of racist terms is also bad.

Wallace and Ballard both adopt a negative position towards Twains novel. Where Wallace differs from Ballard is in the fact that the novel might be taught at a higher grade level or in an alternate form. That is why he created his adaptation of the novel for high school teachers who feel it has merits. Wallace wants teachers who believe in the books value to have a form of the work that is without racist terms, so that blacks are not offended. Ballard, however, dismisses the book outright as a contrivance of a racially discriminating society, where blacks are subjugated and denigrated. He sees no merits in the work at all.

The Other Side

There are counter-arguments to the critiques of Wallace and Ballard. Nat Hentoff, for instance, defends Twains book and laments the softness of those who cannot get past the fact that people used and (still use) insensitive language. Hentoff complains, Whats going to happen to a kid when he gets into the world if hes going to let a word paralyze him so he cant think? (8). The answer to that question, of course, is that he will call for safe spaces and join the cancel culture movement like so many of today. But is not such a climate a tad stifling and a tad narrow? Does it not run the risk of cutting the present generation off from the artifacts of the past that describe a peoples history, a peoples perspective, and the culture of the past. Yes, the term nigger is offensivebut Mark Twain was not using it to offend anymore than Dave Chappelle is today when he uses the term in his stand-up. Twain, as an artist, was representing a reality and to avoid the use of the offensive term would have been to project a false reality.

Likewise, Peaches Henry argues that one can present the realities and artifacts of the past in a controlled environment so as to learn from them. The experience of Ballard does not have to be the experience of all; in fact, by understanding Ballards and Wallaces position, an educator can better address the…