Last week, the Biloxi School District removed Harper Lee’s classic novel “To Kill a Mockingbird” from its eighth-grade language arts curriculum after complaints from some of the students’ parents.
The district didn’t say how many parents complained or the exact nature of those complaints, saying only that the book made some of the parents “uncomfortable,” but it widely believed the objections were based on the frequent appearance of “the N-word” in the novel.
That decision has created a firestorm of criticism all across the nation, but the school district is absolutely correct on one point: Few publications ever consent to printing the actual word. Uncomfortable? You bet. There is probably no word in the English language as provocative as this one.
Yet while the school district may be correct in acknowledging the power of the word, it is absolutely wrong in its actions.
Since its publication in 1960, Harper Lee’s beautifully-crafted, poignant story of race relations and injustice in the Deep South of her youth has struck an emotional chord with readers for generations.
It remains one of the most popular books in American literature. It also remains one of the most controversial.
Biloxi’s decision to remove the book is hardly unique. According to the American Library Association, “To Kill A Mockingbird” ranks 21st on its list of most banned books.
If you appreciate irony, consider that Ray Bradbury’s “Fahrenheit 451” is also on the list. The 1953 novel presents a future American society where books are outlawed and “firemen” burn any that are found.
“Harry Potter” (No. 1 on the list) notwithstanding, what most of these banned books have in common is that they deal with uncomfortable themes, written in the stark, often disturbing language that provides the essential authenticity the subject matter demands.
Twain’s great classic, Huckleberry Finn, contains roughly 400 uses of the actual “N-word,” yet anyone who reads the book must immediately recognize the novel is a powerful indictment of racism.
The same is true of “To Kill a Mockingbird,” despite its many references to the actual word.
So let’s be honest in our discomfort.
If “To Kill a Mockingbird” meant that those Biloxi eighth-graders would never be exposed to such a hateful word, you could make some argument for its removal.
That is not the world we live in.
So if the word, in all its ugliness, endures could there possibly be a better context to consider the word than what we find in Lee’s novel?
In the novel, first-grader Scout is confronted by a classmate who says her father, Atticus, an attorney in town charged with defending a black man against rape charges, a “n—-r lover.” It is her first exposure to the word and later that day, she asked her father what it means.
The exchange follows:
“Scout,” said Atticus, “(N—-r lover is) just one of those terms that don’t mean anything–like snot-nose. It’s hard to explain–ignorant, trashy people use it when they think somebody’s favoring Negroes over and above themselves. It’s slipped into usage with some people like ourselves, when they want a common, ugly term to label somebody.”
“You aren’t really a nigger-lover, then, are you?”
“I certainly am. I do my best to love everybody… I’m hard put, sometimes–baby, it’s never an insult to be called what somebody thinks is a bad name. It just shows you how poor that person is, it doesn’t hurt you.”
Our children — black and white — will encounter this word and these sorts of situations for the rest of their lives. Given that, is there a better context to consider the word than is provided by this exchange between a father and daughter?
Some things are worth the discomfort. It is often necessary for our consciences to be pricked and our assumptions to be challenged. That is often the function of great literature.
Comfortable people never change things.
Look around. We could all stand to be a little less comfortable.
Slim Smith is a columnist and feature writer for The Dispatch. His email address is [email protected].
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 35 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 35 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
