Racist terms in old books - should they be removed?

[LunaNorth]

I’m a big fan of books from the 1930s and 1940s, but I’m not a fan of being confronted by the n-word, or terms like ‘working like a black’ within an otherwise totally innocuous crime novel, such as the Josephine Tey I’m reading right now.

On the one hand, I fully understand the need to show society as it really was, and not try to whitewash the past. There’s no way I’d suggest removing such language from something like To Kill A Mockingbird, or Of Mice and Men.

But on the other, nobody picks up an old crime novel in the hopes of being educated about race relations in the 1930s, do they? So you end up being yanked out of the narrative and feeling a bit guilty for even reading it in the first place.

I dunno. I’m probably massively wrong, and I’m happy to be told so, but leaving phrases like ‘n*** brown’ in a book, with no disclaimer or warning anywhere, smacks a bit of condoning it. And how the hell do you recommend or lend the book to anyone without looking like a massive racist? ‘Here, read this, it’s a cracking little crime novel, but of the old racist language in it, but don’t let that bother you.’ No, can’t do it.

I picked up the book after hearing a podcast about it, and nothing at all was said about the language. Should it have been?

I’m normally the last person to recommend censorship, but I don’t see the point in letting such language hang about in light fiction books, really. It’s like finding a razor blade in your sandwich.

Or am I completely wrong?

@GreenHairThingy
I think you are right in that things need to be left intact so that we can learn from them. Art of all kind is a window on its time.

Was it a new buy op? If so then the Disney Disclaimer would work. If it's second hand it's too much for charity shops etc to monitor.

I guess the one option is to do what my friend did with 50 Shades and destroy it so no one else can read it, but that leaves an uncomfortable feeling.

I think for me it would depend of the character or the author is using the language

So is it in the authors descriptions or is it the characters words

@Chocolatier9

OP - out of interest, have you read Josephine Tey’s “The Franchise Affair”?

I ask because the snobbery that suffuses that book made me wince, rather than any explicitly racist phrases - yet the snobbery is integral to the storyline. Would that make you as uncomfortable?

Not getting at you or anything by the way - I’m genuinely interested. This thread has got me thinking about the topic generally and I like Josephine Tey.

Plus what was the podcast in question?

The podcast was Backlisted, which I love, and it was a great episode. Val McDermid was on it.

I want to read more of Tey now, and I don’t think I’d be offended by snobbery if it was integral to the plot. That’s what made me think the racism could be excised from Miss Pym Disposes - it was in no way necessary to the plot. It would just be a case of describing a dress as ‘brown’ rather than ‘n* brown’.

But I can see now how that would be a bad idea.

If the past is “improved” , how will anyone know there were injustices?

Yes, can you imagine rewriting Gone With The Wind to remove all the racism? That would be far far worse.

In the Restoration there was an actor-manager who rewrote all of Shakespeare's plays to make them cheerful and simple. They gave King Lear a happy ending! Cordelia and Edgar got married! This was not a fringe activity - it was how the plays were performed for years. I can see the same impulses at work here. Though obviously not through the lens of racism, sexism and ableism etc - it was still with the mission to 'correct' past works of their mistakes and wrong thinking.

Novels are supposed to have conflict and unpleasant characters. You are supposed to feel, see and experience the world through other people's eyes. They are also an imperfect record of historical attitudes and ideas. It is really important they stay intact. With warnings if necessary.

It is a mistake to appoint our generation as the arbiters of what is acceptable as if racism was something that happened in the past and we are all cured of it now. We have our own blindspots and prejudices. I have read plenty of horrendously racist, sexist, able-ist books written in the past ten or twenty years. Not trashy fiction either - respectable award-winning stuff with lovely reviews.

@SleepingStandingUp

Was it a new buy op? If so then the Disney Disclaimer would work. If it's second hand it's too much for charity shops etc to monitor. I guess the one option is to do what my friend did with 50 Shades and destroy it so no one else can read it, but that leaves an uncomfortable feeling.

I think for me it would depend of the character or the author is using the language

So is it in the authors descriptions or is it the characters words

It was a new buy, and the language was in both the narrative and the dialogue.

No. They reflect the period in which they were written. What's the actual point of whitewashing history?

@Chocolatier9

OP - out of interest, have you read Josephine Tey’s “The Franchise Affair”?

I ask because the snobbery that suffuses that book made me wince, rather than any explicitly racist phrases - yet the snobbery is integral to the storyline. Would that make you as uncomfortable?

Not getting at you or anything by the way - I’m genuinely interested. This thread has got me thinking about the topic generally and I like Josephine Tey.

Plus what was the podcast in question?

I read The Franchise Affair on the back on MN book thread recommendation about ten years ago and wanted to throw it on the fire. The classism and horrible treatment of the young girl shook me. It was definitely not a relic of its time - it was clear where the author's sympathy lay.

Just thinking this thought as I sit here ignoring the housework.

Enid Blyton - I adored these stories as a child. I bought my own children a few of my favourites and the language has been changed.

I would not have wanted to read the original stories to my children. So in that instance I am pleased that stories have been updated accordingly.

I'm now confused as that goes against what I said previously.

Thanks OP. Off to look up Backlisted.

That’s also interesting about The Franchise Affair not being a relic of its time - when I read it, I assumed many people must have been that appallingly snobbish then and it was accepted - otherwise surely Tey’s editor would have told her to tone it down a bit?

Just thinking this thought as I sit here ignoring the housework

I hear you green! .

I read The Franchise Affair similarly. Those attitudes would have been widespread but it did jar a bit.
I recently read To Love and Be Wise and some of that is quite cutting in terms of social pretensions and really quite funny. Brat Farrar is one of my favourites and is interesting in terms of class. I won’t say more in case anyone hasn’t read it and plans to read it.

I will look up Blacklisted too. Thanks.
Maybe as I also avoid housework.

I highly recommend the Beowulf episode. It’s a joy.

Haven’t RTFT but no, offensive words/terminology absolutely should not be removed.

We can’t cancel out huge swathes of human history and heritage (for better or worse) and it’s never a good idea to go down the path of burning books.

@LunaNorth

I think a disclaimer is a good idea, yes. I have the Britbox channel, and a lot of programmes on there have disclaimers.

Just a bit of warning can help people make an informed decision.

Wouldn't checking the decade the book was written in give you a good idea that it may have terminology in it that's not considered acceptable today?

Shouldn't we just keep in mind that anything written or filmed before (insert date of when these things became publically unacceptable) is likely to contain things that today we find offensive, but in that era
standards of behaviour and acceptability were different.

Why does everything have to have a warning these days?

Please no no no.
As an adult woman I am more than capable of understanding that times and attitudes change.
Gone with the Wind is the perfect example.
Maybe years ago people saw it as the tragic fall of a way of life.
Now it reads as an illustration of hubris and collective delusion.
I enjoyed reading it but probably not for the same reasons some people enjoyed it when it was written.

I don’t agree with disclaimers either. At some point the whole thing becomes ridiculous.

No definitely not and they are a product of their time as much as anything else. In hindsight much literature is homophobic or sexist or racist and we look beyond that. Otherwise you might as well burn the books

We all still eat meat but in 100 years it will be viewed like racism now.

It is a tough one, I recommended a couple of the modern James Bond books on an online book club, it was for an older teenage boy to read. In my post I warned the Mum that the original Flemming books are very much of their time with racist and misogynistic views expressed and she might want to avoid those.

I read Live and Let die a few years ago and found the language and views quite shocking despite expecting them to be of their time. I am not normally sensitive and normally read such books with historical context in mind but found it quite unpleasant.

I got a right mouthful from another member about censorship but I couldn't honestly recommend the books without clarifying.

It would just be a case of describing a dress as ‘brown’ rather than ‘n brown*

n brown was an actual shade you could choose for sewing cotton. Like Saxe Blue or Erin Green, in the days when cotton reels were made of wood.

Dewhirst's Sylko shade D217 was named n brown. My mother had some in her sewing box and the name of that colour was also used at the haberdashery counter when describing a shade of brown fabric she wanted to purchase. In those days, guessing mid to late '60's it was never intentionally used as a derogatory term, it only described the actual shade. Hence its use in the book.

If you google 'Old Sylko cotton reels (full n word) brown' you'll see an image of one on a flickr account.

As soon as it was recognised how offensive the name of the colour was, the name was changed and rightly so.

No. They reflect the period in which they were written. What's the actual point of whitewashing history?

To make white people feel more comfortable with their cultural past.

Disclaimer, I am a white person.

@Cam2020

No. They reflect the period in which they were written. What's the actual point of whitewashing history?

To make white people feel more comfortable with their cultural past.

Disclaimer, I am a white person.

Well, yes, quite. No good reason to do it.

If you alter books then you are at risk of hiding the past and not allowing future generations to learn by it.

But also I tell my children that often the terms that they are shocked by, when I was little were considered to be the PC term. No doubt that the terms they use carefully to not offend some may well be offensive to their dc.

I'm in two minds about updating:
Part of me says leave them as they are, once you start changing bits, you won't stop and you end up with some the rather poor versions that some of the updated EB books became, with some changes "just because", and some where they're twisting themselves so much to not say something that they're unreadable. One I remember particularly was one of the adventure ones. Original version, something like: Jack thinks "If I was Lucy Ann, I'd just sit down and cry, but as I'm a boy I'll have to grin and bear it."
Now you could alter that to "as I'm older, I'll have to grin and bear it..."
No they changed it to something like: "The girls would be brave and keep going, but it's a good thing I'm a boy because I can cry if I want to..."

However I remember reading a chalet school and suddenly coming across "working like a **". It jarred. I think altering that sort of thing to "working hard" or "working like would have improved the book.

No they changed it to something like: "The girls would be brave and keep going, but it's a good thing I'm a boy because I can cry if I want to..."
Christ alive, have they really?! What try hard shite

@MargaretThursday

If you alter books then you are at risk of hiding the past and not allowing future generations to learn by it.

But also I tell my children that often the terms that they are shocked by, when I was little were considered to be the PC term. No doubt that the terms they use carefully to not offend some may well be offensive to their dc.

I'm in two minds about updating:
Part of me says leave them as they are, once you start changing bits, you won't stop and you end up with some the rather poor versions that some of the updated EB books became, with some changes "just because", and some where they're twisting themselves so much to not say something that they're unreadable. One I remember particularly was one of the adventure ones. Original version, something like: Jack thinks "If I was Lucy Ann, I'd just sit down and cry, but as I'm a boy I'll have to grin and bear it."
Now you could alter that to "as I'm older, I'll have to grin and bear it..."
No they changed it to something like: "The girls would be brave and keep going, but it's a good thing I'm a boy because I can cry if I want to..."

However I remember reading a chalet school and suddenly coming across "working like a **". It jarred. I think altering that sort of thing to "working hard" or "working like would have improved the book.

This is kind of where I’m at with it.

So firmly on the fence I have splinters in my arse.