He linked to this story on CNN: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/01/04/new.huck.finn.ew/index.html that reports that the latest edition of Huckleberry Finn will lose the N-word, which will now be replaced with the word "slave". But Roger Ebert feels entitled to suggest what word is better and what he would rather be called. Because, you know, he's totally been there? Here's an excerpt of CNN's story:
"What is a word worth? According to Publishers Weekly, NewSouth Books' upcoming edition of Mark Twain's seminal novel "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" will remove all instances of the N-word -- I'll give you a hint, it's not nonesuch -- present in the text and replace it with slave.
The new book will also remove usage of the word Injun. The effort is spearheaded by Twain expert Alan Gribben, who says his PC-ified version is not an attempt to neuter the classic but rather to update it. "
Some twitter users are not pleased, while others (mostly white, just sayin') totally agree with him, because they are so in the position to use the word and decide its use.
Despite people's shocked tweets he has not apologized or cleared missunderstandings.
It's not that I agree with people updating Mark Twain's work, which is supposed to reflect the reality people faced back then (and I don't believe in trying to erase history, it's the only way we'll learn), but I just *really* hated that he felt the right to use the word, that he felt the right to choose which word is better (did he forget he's white?) and that he would actually say which word he would rather be called when he will never be called neither. What was he thinking? SMH.
People need to think before they tweet and they need to think more before giving their opinion on races issues.Tweet him your opinions: @ebertchicago.