Week 9 Discussion

In my view, the authentic language in literary texts should not be removed. Literature reflects its time so I assume changing the language risks may lose important historical and cultural context. In a story like A Good Man is Hard to Find, set in the early 1950s, reflect and even hold up a mirror to a society where racism was not just present but often routine. The grandmother’s casual racism is part of what builds her character and shows how deeply ingrained prejudice was in that society. Editing out offensive words might put the story simpler but it also waters down its message. Besides, I think we can understand the roots of racism and how it was woven into everyday life by learning its ugliness through the story.

It is hard to find a balance both accuracy in history and current sensitivity when deciding whether or not to change literary writings to remove uncomfortable stuff. Flannery O’Connor, whose writing often reflects the racial tensions of the deep South, uses language purposefully to highlight the terrible realities of the times rather than to support them. Removing or changing these terms runs the danger of weakening the force of her social criticism and confusing the historical setting of her works.However it’s also important to recognize the impact that some words may do to readers in the present day. Even in literary or historical contexts, some argue that using slurs of race can insult and disengage listeners, especially those who are usually left out. Offering critical openers or comments that place the language within its literary and historical contexts might be a solution that enables readers to interact with the book while understanding the reasons for its controversial parts. In the end, keeping the original language keeps the integrity of the work while providing chances for meaningful conversation on racism, history, and the function of literature in reflecting and questioning cultural standards.

When it comes to literary works that include offensive language, like racial slurs, there’s a tricky balance between preserving historical context and being mindful and considerate of the audience. In Flannery O’Conner’s writing for example the use of harsh language reflects the reality of the time and place she’s writing about the American south in the 1960’s. Keeping that language in the text helps readers understand the characters and the social issues O’ Conner is addressing. It makes the story feel authentic and shows how normalized racism and prejudice were in that time in society. That said offensive language can be hurtful to readers now in days. It might  make people feel uncomfortable, and some might not even want to continue with the text because of it. One possible solution is to keep the original language but provide context, like content warnings. This way, readers can better understand why it’s there and how it fits into the story without overlooking the uncomfortable parts of history.

I feel like the authentic language should be kept in the interest of the historical context and characterization. As a person of color myself. I feel as though America has watered down the racism and all instances of it from back in the days so i think it really should stay and not be blocked off as just a common bad word but people, us reader, we should be reminded of the offence and origins of such a slur especially fora story like this one, because if you’re not familiar it’ll be very difficult to get how subtle some of the phrases are and can easily fly over our heads even in todays perspective where there’s a lot of micro aggression. Simply censoring the words is not enough; we should be reminded of America’s history, especially in the context of “A Good Man is Hard to Find”, where the granny really can’t see anything wrong with her way of thinking, because that is the reality of America.

Literary texts shouldn’t be edited to remove offensive language because it takes away from their authenticity and historical context. Writers like Flannery O’Connor used language to reflect the harsh realities of their time, and censoring it changes how we understand the story and its characters. I have mixed feelings about this. Some of the language definitely makes me uncomfortable, but I also think it’s important. It forces us to face the past as it was, not in a way that’s easier to digest. If we erase offensive language, we risk erasing history and the deep-rooted issues, like racism, that were prominent at the time and still exist today. These texts aren’t just about the past; they’re still relevant now. Reading them as they were written helps us see how much progress we’ve made and, more importantly, how much further we need to go in addressing racial tensions and inequality in society.

I feel like, to answer this question, it’s very dependent on who the language is offending, the context of the work, and the importance of the language to the work. If I had to choose, however, I’d say keeping authentic language whether offensive or not is important in preserving historical context and characterization. If we begin to scrub away all offensive language in literature, many pieces of work lose their depth. Offensive language is part of our history, and sugarcoating or painting over all bodies of work is a way of erasing that history a history that has too much depth to ignore. While I understand that it may make people uncomfortable, literature is a form of art, and art can make you uncomfortable. It can make you think, and most importantly, it can spark conversation. Literature, like A Good Man Is Hard to Find, opens the door for discussions that need to be had rather than glossing over them and pretending this isn’t a part of American history. The “offensive language” in A Good Man Is Hard to Find holds so much depth that, through the grammar and word choices, we gain a better understanding of how complex the character is. It also helps establish the timeline. While it isn’t the basis of the story, it contributes to a deeper understanding of the characters and their world. Tianna Gonzalez I entirely agree while I do believe the language can be offensive censorship is very harmful especially when dealing with literature. Instead of being used as a tool to not offend I feel like censorship is used as a way of glossing over history and not acknowledging what we’ve been through. That’s another great point that I also tried to touch on literature that uses uncomfortable words can sometimes spark very important conversations […]

In my opinion I think offensive language in literature should remain unchanged because it provides an honest reflection of the time period, capturing the historical realities, social norms, and ideologies that were present. Although such language can be deeply uncomfortable to read, it plays a vital role in portraying how people communicated and thought during that era. It can also help modern readers recognize that, unfortunately, some of those beliefs still exist today.By censoring this type of language, we risk dulling the story’s emotional and historical impact, and we lose valuable insight into the characters their values, attitudes, and behaviors. However, I also believe that authors need to be thoughtful about how and when they use such language. Context matters. There’s a difference between using offensive words to reflect historical truth or character development and using them in ways that feel unnecessary or offensive without purpose. Authors should ensure that their use of language is meaningful and not simply provocative or disrespectful.

To my perspective I believes that the authentic language should be kept in place in the interests of historical context and characterization. Keeping the words as they were originally written gives a truer picture of what life was like when the story takes place. It helps readers get a sense of the common beliefs and behaviors of that time, even if those beliefs and behaviors seem wrong or hurtful now. I believe that changing a book, even to take out offensive words, ruins what the author was trying to say and how they wanted to say it. The words an author uses are part of their unique way of writing and how the story affects the reader. I also believe that they should always let students know that there are offensive words in the reading before they read it.

I have mixed feelings about reading literature that contains racial slurs as a 20-year-old Black woman in college, especially when such insults are targeted at me. In my opinion, including racist insults in literary writings is unacceptable, regardless of their historical context. I say this because it is unsettling to see expressions that have historically dehumanized people who are similar to me still expressing such sadness and disappointment.The language used in stories such as Flannery O’Connor’s expresses the general mindset and brutal reality of the era. Removing or restricting those words may make the story more appealing to some people, but it also has an impact on the recognition of the real experiences of those who lived through that time. It’s very critical and important to realize both the historical significance of certain words and how unpleasant they may be.

In this week’s reading, I was shocked by Flannery O’Connor’s work. In this day and age, we are not often exposed to writings with such vulgar and discriminatory language. In my opinion, literary texts should offer an alternative version cleared of offensive language. This would make the text more accessible and digestible for a wider audience, potentially opening it up to children and individuals from diverse cultures. That being said, I also believe the original text should remain an option, allowing writers, readers, and artists of all kinds the freedom of expression. I feel it is important to express one’s art in any way possible without hurting others. In the case of this text, while some parts were offensive, they were understandable due to the setting of the story. It is easier for me to accept the use of racial stereotypes, discrimination, and even slurs when considering the story’s context, set in the Deep South during the early 1960s, a time when in which such language and attitudes were deeply embedded in the culture. This context allows readers to dive deeper into the narrative, encouraging a greater understanding of the culture and time period in which the story is set. Providing access to the original text gives readers the choice to explore the story in its authentic form and to engage with it on a deeper level.

I believe that, in most cases, literary texts should retain the original language to preserve the historical context and authenticity of the characters. When a story is set in a particular time and place, the language used by the characters often reflects their beliefs, societal norms, and the struggles of that period. In the case of Flannery O’Connor’s writing, the offensive language might be uncomfortable, but it’s important because it shows the attitudes and realities of the time in the deep South during the 1960s. That said, it’s also crucial to handle these texts with care. Readers should be given context and guidance about why certain words were used, to avoid misunderstanding or misinterpretation. Educators and publishers can offer resources that help explain the social and historical background, so the language isn’t just seen as offensive, but as part of the broader discussion about race, power, and history. The balance is to respect the original work while also being mindful of its impact on modern readers.

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.

i believe that although the language is offensive it should be kept inside of literary text to keep the authenticity due to historical context.  The language is offensive and harmful but depending on the context, it is a reminder of history and why these terms shouldn’t be used now.  i also think that keeping these slurs in literary texts helps individuals have the uncomfortable but important conversation about issues related to hate, prejudice, and discrimination. i also understand people wont agree but i believe hiding the offense langue does not change the fact that it was said. i politically believe that the censorship is a way to hide and not acknowledge the harm that was done in the past. The more we censor and hide, the more we forget.

As a Black person, it did make me uncomfortable seeing that type of offensive language being used in the literary text. But now, as I grew up, I realized that it is necessary to include that language. Not only does it make the literary piece more authentic and its historical context. It makes the piece more heartfelt and gives insight into the cultural norms faced in a particular period. Historical texts show how people were viewed based on their race and gender. The reader can engage with the text and understand its historical significance. I feel like censoring offensive language could get rid of the message that the author is trying to portray. It removes the character’s behavior. We learn more about the context in which the story is told and the type of language being used, even if it’s not offensive. Rather than censoring offensive language, I think it should be used to help better grasp the issues it raises.

I believe that literary texts should be kept as they were written, even if they include offensive terms. It is important for readers to understand the context and history behind them, as that allows for reflection on the past. Even if the language may be hard or harmful, removing it could reduce the impact of the text and weaken its message about the harmfulness of racism. These words, as uncomfortable as they may be, serve as a reminder of the injustices that have existed and continue to exist. Preserving the authenticity of the text helps us learn from history and not repeat the same mistakes. Although I understand why many people think otherwise, as it is a very hard and painful thing to do, confronting such language can be deeply unsettling, especially for those directly affected by its history. However, rather than erasing these words, we should use them as an opportunity for discussion, education, and awareness.

I don’t think it’s okay to keep racial slurs in literary texts, even if they are part of the historical context. These words, while they might reflect the time and place in which the story was written, still carry a lot of pain and harm. They can make it difficult for some readers to connect with the material or feel comfortable engaging with it. It’s true that understanding history and the issues of the past is important, but I believe there are other ways to show that history without using harmful language that can hurt people. There are many ways to express the prejudices and social problems of the past without causing harm or alienating readers today. We can still learn about the past, the prejudices, and the way society works without needing to keep language that has the potential to hurt people. The impact of these slurs should not be ignored. In the end, it’s about finding a balance—preserving the meaning and context of the text without causing unnecessary harm to those reading it today.

I think literary texts should keep their original language, even if it includes offensive words, because it preserves historical context and the author’s intent. Writers like Flannery O’Connor used specific language to reflect the time and place they were writing about, and altering it can water down the reality of that era. While some words are offensive today, censoring them might make it harder to fully grasp the social and racial tensions of the time. That being said, there should be discussions around these words so readers understand their impact without normalizing them. If a school or platform chooses to censor certain terms, it should come with an explanation rather than just erasing history in my opinion. Part of literature is meant to challenge readers alongside education, and keeping the original language helps us engage with it critically. Instead of removing words, we should use them as opportunities for meaningful discussions about history and progress.

I believe in the freedom of speech and I also believe that we still live in a world where hatred exists. Context is the difference between hate speech and writing. Fundamentally utilizing certain language can be informative and even in certain times “educate” and “teach” those reading the literature or perhaps watching the movie. History is important to know and should not be censored. Through history, there is a great opportunity to create change in those who may hold ignorant opinion and hatred if they learn the truth, suffering and what has truly taken place in our not so distant past. We cannot pretend it did not happen, we must do something about it. We cannot create change by censoring, be create change by awareness. Unfortunately the United States has made some decisions to try and censor other events from the books because it does not look good. However we must be accountable so we can be better, better now and better in the future.

I think it is best to leave a story fully unedited to capture the author’s message conveyed through the story. The writing process is already lengthy, with several drafts and endless hours of writing development. If we censor a word, we are missing one of the author’s intentional decisions in making the story. This can lead to a missing detail in character analysis. For example, through the use of a slur, we are given a better sense of the grandmother’s character when she berates the children for not having enough respect, and yet turns around and insults a child with a negative assumption that they are incapable of owning pants. These offensive slurs do not reflect current times, but they give us an insight into the grandmother’s past. It is a reminder of the history that failed many people who couldn’t fit into idealized standards. If these slurs are omitted, then we do not get to fully experience what life was like for those discriminated against during those times. It robs students of important lessons, like the negative effects that discrimination has on people’s egos as well. The grandmother highly believed she was above reproach when she tried to manipulate everyone around her to do her bidding and thought she had the right to be racist towards those of a different skin color.

I think that literary text should omit terms that are derogatory, as long as it is clear to the reader what the word has originally been. I think that language such as the “n” word, especially if not written by a person of color, has no place in literary text in modern day. A word of that nature, used years ago when the original text was written, would have been used in a degrading way, especially if written by a white person. Reading things like this in a classroom setting, or in an educational institution, is almost giving people a pass to say the words out loud, even if they are white, which I find there is no reasoning for. I believe that if it is clear what the word was to the reader, that maintains historical context, while the lack of the full word being present reminds the reader that saying this word is not necessary, nor acceptable, especially if they are not black.

Do you think literary texts should be cleared of offensive language, or do you feel the authentic language should be kept in place in the interests of historical context and characterization? Literary texts should be open to offensive language because the writer is telling the truth about something true. Reading a passage or book makes me more interested to read more because I like reading offensive words; the offensive words make more intrigued to tell whats going on an passage. I feel the authentic language should be open to the readers because being honest to the reading is very outgoing to read. Also, whoever the person writing has to be very intellectual in the way its writing because readers might take it personal. In my personal opinion, the offensive language is a truthful way to express the moment of situation grabbing the readers’ attention to read. Also I wouldn’t take it offensive because it was truthful to tell the situation.  

I agree with all the students in this class. Students under adult age shouldn’t read any passage that has offensive language. It’s important to keep the original language. Keeping that language can help you read better and find diligent experiencing. I believe that offensive language on the other hand can cause uncomfortable feelings and situations. But still, it’s our pick or choice if we want to read it or not. But now I’m in college, so I might don’t want to have that privilege of choice to choose a text that has some kind of language. When you read that kind of language, it causes you to catch a blind eye of angry problems such as racism, sexism and intolerance. Unfortunately, it can still be an uncomfortable experience for living through such difficulties. But still, you can learn that if you go through other’s shoes.

In my opinion , when reading stories or passages dated pre civil war It is important  to keep the original language even if it is offensive because it keeps the authenticity. In history the people who lived through racism and prejudice did not have a choice to turn a blind eye to it , as readers and as students it is important to gain a full perspective on the experiences individuals faced during that time . for this reason I do not think racial slurs or derogatory language should be omitted . it is part of our privilege to pick and choose weather we want to read that language , unfortunately for those who came before us they had no choice at all . It may be uncomfortable for us to have to read but I can only imagine it was even worst to live through . to educate ourselves is to put ourselves in each others shoes . 

I think that texts should keep their authentic language in place of historical context and characterization. Although, that kind of text should be marked, what I mean is it should have age limit.  I think it would be inappropriate, for example for nine years old to read offensive language, however I strongly believe that adult should still explain to a kid that curtain offensive words were used back in time and explain what it means and why writers would choose to say those words. I do think it totally fine for college students like us to be able to read everything, we are grown people and do understand that writers use specific words in their texts to make us feel the time, feel it what it was like back then. Those words would help use dive deeper into the meaning of the text and also would be the reminding of what words we should not use in day-to-day life.

If I hadn’t read O’Connor’s essay in Activity 1, I would have missed some key insights into “A Good Man Is Hard to Find.” In her essay, O’Connor explains that the grandmother’s final moment with The Misfit is significant because it’s an act of grace. Without this explanation, I might not have understood how important it is when she reaches out to him and calls him “one of my babies,” showing unexpected kindness even in a dangerous situation, and after hearing his freinds killing her family. O’Connor also talks about how violence in the story serves to reveal people’s true personality, which makes the family’s encounter with The Misfit so crucial. It forces the grandmother to confront her beliefs and gain clarity. Additionally, O’Connor’s discussion of creating complex characters helped me see the grandmother as more than just a hypocritical figure because when I was reading, I kind of hated her. I thought that she was a racist by calling the black boy on the window “pickaninny” the word I just discovered. I also thought that she was  hypocrite, manipulative, in short a bad person even thought she seemed to do not know that she was one; I realized that she’s someone capable of change and growth after reading activity one. These insights from the essay help me appreciate the deeper themes and moral questions in the story, like redemption and the complexity of human nature.