I believe that offensive language in literature should be kept in its original form because it reflects the time period and the realities of the time as well as social beliefs and ideologies that were held during that era. While the words are very uncomfortable to read, they do serve a purpose in showing how people thought and spoke during that time in history, and they might give us a perspective on how some people still hold similar beliefs. Censoring these words risks erasing or softening the impact of the story and it would also prevent the reader from really getting information about the character’s characteristics and beliefs. But I do believe authors should be cautious of the settings and different situations in which these words are being used in their stories to avoid the shift between useful information about history and characteristics and turning into a distasteful use of a very hurtful word with no good reasoning behind it.
Powered by:
top
2 thoughts on “Andreany Estevez-week 9”
I completely agree with your perspective. Keeping offensive language in its original form can help us understand the past and the mindset of the people from that time. It’s important to see how certain beliefs shaped history, even though the words can be uncomfortable. You’re right that context is key, and authors should use such language carefully, ensuring it adds value to the story and history without crossing into unnecessary harm. It’s all about balance and awareness.
I agree with your answer and like how it clearly shows your point of view. To how the original language captures the time period, social ideas, and character development, you offer strong proof. Focusing on their use in literature, I also appreciate you pointing out the pain that these words may bring about. Your last point about writers being aware of how they employ nasty language is a nice mix. It acknowledges that even if historical truth is crucial, language should still have a significant function in the narrative instead of being utilized carelessly.