flip flip Öle & Betriebsstoffe für Ihr Auto Jetzt informieren Book Spring Store 2017 Cloud Drive Photos UHD TVs Mehr dazu Hier klicken HI_PROJECT Mehr dazu Mehr dazu Shop Kindle FroheOstern BundesligaLive wint17

Aufgrund der positiven Rezensionen hier bei amazon, hatten wir das Buch für unsere Nichte bestellt. Ein paar Tage später fanden wir das Buch in der Mülltonne und fragten sie, was los sei. Darauf antwortete sie, daß das Buch eine zensierte Fassung sei und nicht die originale Version des genialen Geschichtenerzählers Mark Twain (1835-1910).

Tatsächlich, diese Fassung ist aufs übelste zensiert - umgeschrieben!

Zwei Beispiele:
- Der Dorfarzt Dr. Robinson wird nicht von Indianer-Joe mit dem Messer von Muff Potter ermordet, sondern nur KO geschlagen.
- Indianer-Joe stirbt nicht in der Höhle, hier überlebt er um verhaftet zu werden.

1 hilfloser Stern für diese Fassung. Zwar hat das Buch schöne Bilder, doch diese Zensur ist eine Beleidigung, nicht nur für Leseratten; sondern auch ein Faustschlag für alle Literaten, deren Werke bevormundet bzw. zensiert, oder gar verboten werden!

Schade ums schöne Geld. Zur Entwertung, ab in die blaue Tonne!
3232 Kommentare| 10 Personen fanden diese Informationen hilfreich. War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden
am 9. Juli 2013
I have just finished this book and definitely consider it as one of my best readings ever. Of course, I knew some of the Tom Sawyer / Huck Finn content before, but I never read the book before on the whole.
For me, there really is no question why this writing is a true American classic; since it does not only provide a vital and funny adventure story (I had to laugh several times, the irony is splendid), but also enables a profound insight into the institution of slavery and people's lives during this time.

Tom Sawyer is an extremely funny story and depicts a childhood, which everybody would like to remember to. Huck Finn reads as a thrilling adventure story, although I find it has A FEW lengths (e. g. when he gets involved in the feud). I really liked the fact that "Mark Twain" did relate the two storys to each other, so they hardly could be read isolated (in my opinion). At least I would not recommend to read only one of them.

A major critical point for me was that Tom Sawyer reappears at the end of Huck Finn: despite that this part was absolutely amusing, I found that Tom Sawyer does not really fit into Huck Finn's story. Until this point, Huckleberry Finn seemed to progress and alter, now they seem like kids again. I did not really get the point of this - was it just to round the narrative?

When it comes to the writing style / vocabulary, for me as a native German speaker (although I study English) it was not always easy to find out some word's meaning due to the fact that it's often outdated vocabulary.

Nevertheless, that does not touch on this great reading experience.

Five stars for this great work! And hard to believe that this one is sold for a few euros...

Concerning the quality of the printing, I cannot say that its poor quality. I have paid much more for other books that do not have higher quality that this edition, so, nothing to moan about here.
0Kommentar| Eine Person fand diese Informationen hilfreich. War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden
Dieses Kindle ebook entsammt dem deutschen Gutenbergprojekt und ist public domain. Gutenberg Bücher dürfen nicht von Dritten verkauft werden. Man sollte es auch nicht unterstützen, dass Dritte mit der Arbeit Freiwilliger versuchen Geld zu verdienen. Daher bitte das Buch direkt mittels des Tools epub2go.eu (Gutenberg ePub Generator von Furtmeier.IT) beim Deutschen Gutenbergprojekt herunterladen, bis der Anbieter das Buch entsprechend der Gutenbergregeln vertreibt, d.h. kostenfrei anbietet.
44 Kommentare| 14 Personen fanden diese Informationen hilfreich. War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden
am 12. Februar 2011
Open Letter to NewSouth Books
In regards to censoring a Mark Twain classic

January 5, 2010

Dear Randall Williams and Suzanne La Rosa, co-owners of NewSouth Books;

Censorship in any form, however benign in appearance, however easier on the ears and eyes, however sincere in intention ' violates the natural endowment of free expression. Your publication of Mark Twain's classic in censored form will send the wrong signals to the publishing industry, the wrong message to young readers in public schools. Enlightened minds are not nourished by Orwellian safeguards.

On your website you state: 'A new edition of Mark Twain's Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, forthcoming from NewSouth Books in mid-February, does more than unite the companion boy books in one volume, as the author had intended.'

Let's examine the last part of your proclamation ' 'as the author had intended.' As a Mark Twain enthusiast, I highly doubt he would have intended for you to take it upon yourselves to censor his work. True, he had intended to publish the two stories in one volume. But this doesn't grant you the moral authority to step in and replace 'the N-word' with 'slave' (including their plural companions). In effect, you're claiming he would have intended for you to sanitize racial slurs on behalf of two ethnic groups so that you could publish his two stories in one volume.

Secondly, making use of Twain scholar, Dr. Alan Gribben, and his 'preemptive censorship' doctrine doesn't excuse yourselves from the fact that you and your publishing company have now embarked on your own rafting adventure down the Mighty Mississippi of Censorship. According to Dr. Gribben's explanation, he can no longer bring himself to utter the N-word (as it is not comfortable for him) during readings of Twain therefor justifying an assuasive form of censorship. As he explains:

'Through a succession of firsthand experiences, this editor [Dr. Alan Gribben] gradually concluded that an epithet-free edition of Twain's books is necessary today. For nearly forty years I have led college classes, bookstore forums, and library reading groups in detailed discussions of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn in California, Texas, New York, and Alabama, and I always recoiled from uttering the racial slurs spoken by numerous characters, including Tom and Huck. I invariably substituted the word 'slave' for Twain's ubiquitous n-word whenever I read any passages aloud. Students and audience members seemed to prefer this expedient, and I could detect a visible sense of relief each time, as though a nagging problem with the text had been addressed. Indeed, numerous communities currently ban Huckleberry Finn as required reading in public schools owing to its offensive racial language and have quietly moved the title to voluntary reading lists. The American Library Association lists the novel as one of the most frequently challenged books across the nation.'

While sincere and reasonable in his assertions, I would argue that most censorship begins with a sincere and reasonable discourse against language in order to maintain some level of personal comfort. In doing so the door is left wide open for the next book to be censored. And the next. But in NewSouth Book's case, your case ' you're selling two birds in one tome. So I ask you, what's next?

NewSouth Book's other justification for publishing a censored version of Mark Twain's The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn seems redundant at best:

'At NewSouth, we saw the value in an edition that would help the works find new readers. If the publication sparks good debate about how language impacts learning or about the nature of censorship or the way in which racial slurs exercise their baneful influence, then our mission in publishing this new edition of Twain's works will be more emphatically fulfilled.'

Are we to believe just because your publishing company is censoring a book that you're adding a new perspective on the issue of censorship or shedding light on the baneful influence of racial slurs? It's plain to see how sparking a good debate could be good PR in emphatically improving your profits, but intellectually speaking, you're bringing nothing new to the table but a censored book. Why should any new discussion about censorship and language caused directly by your publication not be traced back to the source of the commotion in the form of moral outrage? Mr. Williams and Miss La Rosa, you are contributing to the problem, not the solution.

In a time when everything Twain is a hot commodity, I ask that you do the right thing and restore Twain's words verbatim in his works as he originally intended. The profits that you may gain by circumventing the issue of censorship in some communities may only spurn a larger community of literature and Twain fans against you in the form of boycotts and negative press. On the contrary, NewSouth Books could be pioneering strategies in getting formerly banned books like Twain's back into schools. A forward could be penned in defense of free expression and how embracing it ultimately benefits a free society despite the existence of racial slurs lurking inside and outside the cover of a book. To share a nation's literary heritage with as many people that are willing to engage with it, unabridged, uncensored, is all a free society can really hope for.


Craig Boehman

The Argument from Comfort

'Am I surprised, then, that Dr. Gribben has edited a version of Huck Finn that replaces the n-word with slave? Not really. Nor can I muster much righteous indignation against the idea.'

-Rick Riordan, author of the Percy Jackson & the Olympians series

It amazes me how flippant and lazy the justifications have been in the defense of (or the not-so-much- against) the censoring of Mark Twain. I read the above quotation while scanning the news for Twain updates this morning in the author's blog. As it turns out, a few prominent authors are sounding quite a bit alike.

The underpinning logic behind the current censorship debate is comfort ' or lack thereof. It is a doctrine that is firmly rooted in the psyche of many educators, including Dr. Alan Gribben and his former student ' teacher and author, Rick Riordan. The argument itself seems sensible and touches on the problem of censorship and its denunciation. Teaching literary texts with racial slurs can be 'tricky', especially with African Americans. Most will agree with this assertion. Another example might highlight a minority group of whites sitting in a literature class in the Philippines discussing the work of a Filipino author whose protagonist hurls racial insults against American soldiers during the Spanish American War. Most uncomfortable too, understandably. Mr. Riordan reiterates the appeal to comfort in his current blog:

'On the other hand, I have taught Huck Finn in the classroom ' unedited, unabridged. I have taught the book with African American students. It can be done well. It can be a positive experience. But it is a tricky, tricky proposition. I know that it can make students extremely uncomfortable, even with the most careful preparation and conversation. Faced with such a challenge, many educators and curriculum gurus will probably choose the path of least resistance. Rather than teaching Huck Finn in the original, they will simply remove one of the most important texts in American literature from their classrooms. Because of this, I can understand that in some cases, in some classrooms, an edited version of the novel might be a welcome teaching tool, and an appropriate choice.'

And an excerpt from Dr. Gribben's introduction in Mark Twain's The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn expresses the argument from comfort based on experience in the classroom as well:

'Through a succession of firsthand experiences, this editor [Dr. Gribben] gradually concluded that an epithet-free edition of Twain's books is necessary today. For nearly forty years I have led college classes, bookstore forums, and library reading groups in detailed discussions of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn in California, Texas, New York, and Alabama, and I always recoiled from uttering the racial slurs spoken by numerous characters, including Tom and Huck. I invariably substituted the word 'slave' for Twain's ubiquitous n-word whenever I read any passages aloud. Students and audience members seemed to prefer this expedient, and I could detect a visible sense of relief each time, as though a nagging problem with the text had been addressed.'

I can almost sense their subconscious disgust at this mediocre and intellectually deprived stance on keeping things comfortable as a justification for censorship. They know the responses that are likely to be slung back at them. 'Then don't teach it at all.' ' 'Perhaps someone better qualified should be teaching it.' ' 'Let the book continued to be banned from most schools until educators, school boards, and parents can themselves come to terms with the material.' ' 'Better to not teach at all than to teach a white-washed history.' ' 'Since when is teaching anything of importance supposed to be comforting?'

Fallacies in play

Those who argue from comfort are well aware of the dilemma they put themselves in. This is why we see them digging themselves deeper into the hole by committing other fallacies of logic by appealing to authority and popularity to try and lend more beef to their position. But these tendencies only weaken their position even further. Dr. Gribben appeals to popularity for 'further proof' for his justification of substituting the N-word was necessary:

'In several towns I was taken aside after my talk by earnest middle and high school teachers who lamented the fact that they no longer felt justified in assigning either of Twain's boy books because of the hurtful n-word. Here was further proof that this single debasing label is overwhelming every other consideration about Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, whereas what these novels have to offer readers hardly depends upon that one indefensible slur.'

Mr. Riordan chimes in as well on the popularity slant when it comes to 'easing our minds' and downplaying the act of censorship:

'And let's remember, tinkering with a classic text is hardly a new idea, nor is it usually done with as much delicacy and careful consideration. There are dozens of abridged 'young reader' versions of Huck Finn in print that hack huge portions out of the text and also clean up or dumb down the language. There are numerous graphic novel versions. These are commonly used in classrooms without generating national headlines, and take much greater liberties with Twain's story for worse reasons.'

On authority

The appeal to authority is essentially stating that a person presumed to be an authority on a subject claims something to be true. An great example of this fallacy would be taking Sarah Palin as an authority on her pro life abortion stance concerning rape. She once stated that she would personally 'choose life' even if her own daughter were raped. Citing Palin as an authority on this would be erroneous as she has not had this tragic thing happen to her daughter, and if it had happen, it wouldn't have been her 'choice' to make regarding whether or not her daughter decided to keep the child (not if her daughter was of the legal age to make the decision for herself). It's Palin's opinion on that matter. Having a strong opinion on this is perfectly fine but it doesn't lend credibility to her assertion as an authority that abortion is wrong even in the case of rape. For this we'd look to a mother who had endured this sad experience. We'd probably lend more weight to this mother's argument on the issue of abortion regardless of whether she agrees with Palin's own view or not. A proper authority figure has experience and/or credentials.

Doctor Gribben appeals to authority in another way that isn't quite so apparent or committal. On one hand he may be agreeing full heartily (with presumed authorities) that censorship is indeed wrong while simultaneously tipping his hat to those that advocate censorship. To make matters worse, he does so without fully embracing either camp. Again, from Dr. Gribben's introduction:

'Over the years I have noted valiant and judicious defenses of the prevalence of the n-word in Twain's Huckleberry Finn as proposed by eminent writers, editors, and scholars, including those of Michael Patrick Hearn, Nat Hentoff, Randall Kennedy, and Jocelyn Chadwick-Joshua. Hearn, for example, correctly notes that 'Huck says it out of habit, not malice' (22). Apologists quite validly encourage readers to intuit the irony behind Huck's ignorance and to focus instead on Twain's larger satiric goals. Nonetheless, Langston Hughes made a forceful, lasting argument for omitting this incendiary word from all literature, from however well-intentioned an author. 'Ironically or seriously, of necessity for the sake of realism, or impishly for the sake of comedy, it doesn't matter,' explained Hughes. African Americans, Hughes wrote, 'do not like it in any book or play whatsoever, be the book or play ever so sympathetic. . . . They still do not like it' (268'269).'

Have any of these 'eminent writers, editors, and scholars' themselves been the victims of censorship? Have any of them censored another author? While we may take note of their literary credentials and think highly of their opinions and knowledge in their fields, this in and of itself doesn't make them authorities on censorship. What they have done is asserted ' like Palin's strong opinion on abortion ' their own opinions on the subject. It makes no difference whether or not their conclusions agree or not with those who are censored (or doing the censoring). If we are to hold authorities on any matter in high regard, we must remain true to the very sense of the word, authority. Granted, Dr. Gribben is just making his case. But he is also in effect not making his case as 'eloquently' as his NewSouth Books publisher proudly claim on their website. While he 'noted' those who defended the use of the N-word, he makes a somewhat noncommittal mention of the African American author, Langston Hughes, at the end of the paragraph. There isn't much of an argument here for the pros and cons of censorship. And none of the names dropped could reasonably be associated with an authority on censorship, including Hughes, whose opposition to the use of the N-word only provides insight into why Gribben may also want to do away with it for his own purposes, chief among them is for the benefit of the book's wider appeal ' to the detriment of understanding great literature and American history for this same audience. Needless to say, there is no need for such an audience anywhere in the world. These audiences are merely created by the censors. This is what Dr. Gribben does not comprehend. He's creating an audience that is comprised of victims, victims of his censorship, all in the name of his other cited reason for censorship, comfort.

Dr. Gribben does emphasize in several places in the introduction his rejection of censorship and his advocacy of Twain uncensored and unabridged. No PhD is going to censor a book without going to great lengths to justify it. But he is advocating the censorship of Twain for his own private audience. He's 'Robbin Hooding' the discomfort from the literary richness of Twain's work and bestowing comfort back unto the poor(souls).

The bottom line is Dr. Gribben wants to have it both ways. He's both against censorship and kinda sort of for it, too. NewSouth Books is allowing him to edit is book and censor it too. And in the process, he's gaining the new perspective that none of those folks he mentioned in his introduction possess ' the perspective and the authority of the censor. And in the meantime, expect more pundits in the teaching profession to 'kind of' come to his defense with arguments containing larger gaps in logic than what any of us should be comfortable with. While being against censorship for me is 'just an opinion', albeit a strong one and an opinion I hold with much righteous indignation, I'm quite content for one who's not an authority on the matter.
0Kommentar| 5 Personen fanden diese Informationen hilfreich. War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden
am 18. Juli 1999
Huck Finn is, along with Faulkner's Sound and Fury, the greatest American novel. The novel is a hillarious slap at romantic chivalry, a great adventure story, an evolution of a man coming of age, as well as a plea to end slavery. I too was forced to read this novel in high school (this year), not once but twice. I am indebted to my teachers. The sinking of the Sir Walter Scott, Huck's decision to endure perdition in order to save Jim, and Tom and Huck's quioxic rescue of Jim are some of the most fantastic scenes in literature. The vernacular is well employed by Twain, not in a racist way, but in a tolerant one. As Huck travels farther into the slave country, he realizes that Jim is a man just like himself. Huck even says that "I knowed he was white." Huck understands the implications of disagreeing with the orthodox barriers of the time (Walter Scott), but he knowingly violates these supposed values to set Jim free. A boat accident occurs and the response to the question of whether anyone was killed is "Nome. Killed a nigger." Twain is satirizing the stupidity of this response, not advocating a racist dogma. Jim and Huck discuss the fact that frenchmen talk in a different manner from themselves, but frenchmen are still men. Huck and Jim speak differently, but both are men. This is the messege of this timeless classic. All American novels come from one novel, Huck Finn. If I'd a know'd how hard it was to write a review, I wouldn't a written one in the first place.
0Kommentar|War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden
am 6. November 1998
The book I read was Tom Sawyer. One of my favorite parts in the book was when Tom's Aunt Polly was calling Tom to do some work and she got a hold of him, finally. She asked him if he would paint the fence. He said no at first. But then she made him do it. Well, when he went outside and started painting he got really bored because he was watching all the kids playing at the end of the street. So when some kid came up and started talking to him, Tom conned him into painting the fence so Tom could go and play with Huck. Huck's his best friend. The thing I liked about the book was that it had a lot of action in it. It seemed like there was alway's something going on. I also never got bored reading it. Another thing I liked about it was that it wasen't too short and it wasen't too long. You will have to read the book to see all the mischief they get into.
0Kommentar|War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden
am 8. Juli 1998
All right, this is a rather subjective viewpoint. I could say, IN MY OPINION--but what's the purpose. Surely one of the best known and most readily acknowledged American classics, there is more to this book than all the tame discriptions and virulent hate mail imply. It is a rather bleak, desolate tail about two people running away from the world. The only problem is, they have no where to go. Let's ignore the so-called contoversy surrounding this book. It is idiotic, as nowhere in this book is it implied that the racist attitudes of some of the characters is a good thing. Twain was a master of dialect and speech patterns and this was, ultimately, a story about the evils of slavery and the hopelessness of many who tried to run away. Huck grows to truly love Jim. In the end, he is his only friend, the only person he trusts, the only person who has ever been good to him. Cherished characters like Tom Sawyer are distorted into manifest destiny oriented monsters, politicians of the day always trying to trick people and bend them into their will for a laugh or a selfish end. Yet Huck remains a conscientous person, seeing the evils of slavery, the cruelty of Tom's behavior, the ills of the world, the pointlessness of what his own life has thus far amounted to. A word can be used with many meanings. The controversy of this book, raging since its publication, is based solely on the USE of this word, not its context, not its implications within the narrative. This book is one of the most savage indictments of institutional racism one could ever hope to come across, yet people who refuse to read it out of fear of getting their feelings hurt or their political agendas ruffled, are missing out on this point. Twain suffered through this book. He set it aside for several years after a certain point, not knowing how to end it, getting more and more unhappy with the state of the Reconsruction. There is a rather bleak punch-line at the end of the book. Huck still wants to live his brief happiness w! ith Jim, run away again to escape society's expectations of how people are supposed to be. He thinks about "light(ing) out for the territory ahead of the rest". Twain knew, by the time he wrote the book, the territory was no more, already plundered by the government and the corporate interests. Huck's next journey would be just as pointless, just as ultimately meaningless as this river ride down the Ole Miss.
0Kommentar|War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden
am 10. November 1999
It is said that there are two great moments in all of American literature; one occurs in <Moby Dick> when Ishmael joins Queequeg in observing a pagan ritual. The other is found in <Huckleberry Finn> when Huck decides against turning Jim in, even though his soul would rot in hell for it. The point is that Huck really believed that he was going to be damned for helping Jim (which was why the decision was so difficult to make), but was willing to face the consequences anyway.
The major letdown of this book is that last part with Tom Sawyer. The book's tone changes suddenly; it becomes almost juvenile. Those last chapters are what's keeping me from giving this book the full five stars.
As for the dialects, I had surprisingly little trouble with them even though English is not my first language. A suggestion; if you come across a word you really don't get, try reading it aloud. If that doesn't work, read the whole sentence aloud. You'll be able to deduce what the word is supposed to be.
0Kommentar|War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden
am 8. Mai 1999
i am so sick of stuffy headded losers who can't see past their own nose to recognize a good book. i know i am being mean and all, but this was truly a good book. i enjoyed the plot and the characters (i am still a bit confused about all that happened with the king and the duke, though). i subplots made the book all the more interesting to follow. it's character development wasn't blatently obviouse, and the attention to detail made things vivid when they needed to be. i think maybe it takes a lot more dedication and brain to read this book and truly get full benefit. you can't just read it off and on or you will never get the plot. i liked this book (okay, so i'm not all the way done yet, but i'm close) a lot. a real lot except for the whole, er, umm...idea of what black people should be called. couldn't we find a nicer word? oh well. it sotra adds to the story.
0Kommentar|War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden
am 14. August 1999
To everyone who said this book was simply a children's story--you obviously don't understand this book. It is a brilliant satire about slavery and about the conventions of society. When I first read this book I didn't quite understand it either and just blew it off as another tedious book we had to read for school. But after reading it and discussing it in AP English, I discovered just how brilliant it was. Huck is caught in an eternal struggle between doing what society tells him is right and doing what he feels in his heart. It's a classic Pikaresque type novel, and a funny one at that. A lot of it's humor is in it's irony. And it pokes fun at religion, war (mobs), slavery, and society in general. I suggest those of you who disliked it should read it again. It is a truly great novel.
0Kommentar|War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich? Missbrauch melden