Should Offensive Language be Removed From Works of Classic Literature?

The debate between whether or not foul language should be removed from classic forms of literature has evolved throughout time. This debate also seems to be one that may never decipher between right and wrong. This debate stems from many years of people feeling as though some of the words in classic literature are derogatory and shouldn’t be seen by future generations. However, some people also feel that if bad language is removed from books, it is censoring freedom of speech. Today, both sides will be reviewed.

Side one: Yes, offensive language should be removed from classic literature.

Some of the top reasons people felt that offensive language should be removed from classic literature found when doing research on this topic were the issue of racial slurs, fear that children could mimic the language, and lastly that people felt the bad words could be replaced by another word. Racial issues within books has been a dispute of readers for years. According to an article from Red Tricycle “Laura Ingalls Wilder's world-famous series that follows the 19th-century pioneer family has been around for ages. In a bit of irony, many American schools have blocked the books due to the racist language. Native Americans are consistently demonized, minstrel shows are performed, and Black people are referred to as “darkies.” Considering the fact that these books have a lot of young impressionable readers, this could be an issue.

However, this alludes to the next reason why groups feel that offensive language should be removed. The next reason is that some people are afraid that impressionable children will mimic the behavior that they are reading about. Lastly, groups believe simply that other words could be used instead of the bad language originally used. According to a study done called Editing the Classic “Proponents of editing the classics argue that removing offensive words or passages from classic literature is an appropriate way to introduce certain works to younger readers. Indeed, they contend, allowing children to read sanitized versions of great books may make them more inclined to read those books unedited when they are older.” This could potentially be a way to solve the issue of children learning about the offensive language at a young age, while still giving people the ability to someday read the real version.

Side two: No, offensive language should not be removed from classic literature.

The other side to this debate claims that removing bad language from books sensors free speech, mis-represents history, and also states that books should be thought of as more than just bad words. Some groups believe that removing the language from books actually censors authors. According to an article from Nothing in the Rule Book, “In 1945, American novelist and diarist Anais Nin discussed the act of censorship and its effect on originality in her personal diary, writing: “The important task of literature is to free man, not to censor him, and that is why Puritanism was the most destructive and evil force which ever oppressed people and their literature: it created hypocrisy, perversion, fears, sterility.”

Next, it is believed that removing the language from literature misrepresents history by changing how real people actually acted and spoke. According to an article from Teach with Class “Migrant workers in a California field in the 1930s do not sit in the bunkhouse saying “fiddlesticks” when something tragic happens. This would be a horrible misrepresentation of character and would do an injustice to the historical context of Of Mice and Men.” Lastly, it is argued that people should simply look at books for the message and not just bad language. Common Sense Media argued that “A character's language may add realism to the story, or it may seem gratuitous or distracting -- your kid can evaluate.”

Regardless of either side, not all books with bad language are going to be banned entirely. This is a decision that parents and teachers will have to present to themselves when thinking about what they believe is important for the next generation to be reading.