Let's call censorship "a nice throw blanket" instead.

So we have all heard by now that the book, Huckleberry Finn has been stripped of its truth by a publishing company who is playing God with our history as of late. The very people whose role it is to protect words and ensure that they are distributed by demand are now taking up their own agenda and removing the offensive words from the pages of a book written by an author long since dead. They do this to protect who? Me? I don't remember asking for this. Apparently this will make it more friendly to people in the 21st century. Wha-wha...huh?

People have been fighting to keep censors from our history for ages and now they're losing? What??? Just like that? What right does a publisher have to decide if I am too fragile to read certain phrases. Even if they are disgusting and provoke horror, terrible connotations and worst of all: offense. They have their work cut out if this is their new itinerary

Most of us find the word removed from Huck Finn to be a completely repugnant and cringe-worthy one. The n-word (among others) is a terrible word. It's vile. However, these terrible words are critically important words. They are words that we have only just begun to move away from in our culture. They are words that society in general has just started to understand and be ashamed of- but we must remember why we are moving away from them. We must remember why we are ashamed of them. We have got to feel the shame when we read them, particularly in the context presented in Huck Finn. We have to talk about them.

We must remember them the same way we have to remember the horrors committed by human beings in our wars and struggles. What else will we pretend did not happen if we allow ourselves this? These are not nice memories, but there they are. These are the ghosts of things that humans have done and said to one another. Should we forget, we are in peril of allowing history to repeat, which might sound affected, but avalanches begin with pebbles. We owe it to humanity to preserve even our ugliness, not erase it and be afraid to look it in the face.

We have been in the unfortunate habit of pretending that we are without fault. Now we've come so far as to begin to destroy the evidence. What is the purpose of this? To fool future generations into believing their history is unflawed? Censoring and 'nicing up' literature and changing the way our past is perceived is highly dangerous and borderline propaganda. To what end?

I find it repellent, particularly since this book was written during a time in which sadly, the word was used an an every day part of speech.... and yet recent titles by authors such as Chuck Palahniuk can use the very same word in his books for pure shock value. Should this be allowed?

Yes.

It has to be allowed. It does not, however, have to be acceptable. It is up to the person reading to decide right from wrong, to learn from the context, to allow themselves to feel the political climate of the book. To know what ideas people are putting out and compare them to the world around us now. If we allow others to think for us and paint history with a prettier paintbrush, will we be surprised when reality hits us square in the face with its ugliness?

Removing the uncomfortable words from books is robbing the people who have worked so hard to put an end to bigotry of their victory- because in 300 years, when all the books have been made nicer, our children's children will not know why it was so wrong to use the n-word, after all- there are no records of it being wrong. I fear that this is the easing in of future censorship to come. This sets a precedent and our complacency about it is what will dictate the outcome of this. I thought we knew better.