True, kids do miss some things adults do, but my point was not about reading. It was about our ability to teach them and their ability to learn from us. My statement about underestimating kids was more about expecting a few books to have more power over them than everything the rest of the world is teaching them. Do we really have so faith in our ability to teach them, and their ability to learn from us over a few books? This is the reason books get banned. Harry Potter is a good example. Even if Harry Potter was what people who banned it said it was, all those people were completely undermining their own authority and the authority of the bible. I get your point about being more creative, but in the case of the story if the original poster, isn't it set at a time when nearly everyone called First Nations People "Indian"? "Injun" was just developed out of accent and regional dialects, the way "Acadian" turned into "Cajun". At the time, the term First Nations didn't even exist. What's so creative about denying our history or that cetrain types of people exist? If I write a story about a Jewish person, set in the 30's, am I being creative if I pretend that people were not throwing the word "Kike" around all the time, or that there were signs on beachs that said, "No dogs or Jews allowed"? I didn't learn the n-word until I was twelve, and I can tell you, by then, attitudes are already established. You can't make someone racist by teaching them a few words when they are ten-thirteen. I trust children, and believe me, I would much rather have my kids learn about racism from reading a book than seeing swastikas spray painted on tombstones in a Jewish cemetary. I knew about Hitler, but that was how I learned that antisemetism still existed.
It might be good idea to speak to a publisher and see what they say about this? Just send an anonymous enquiry around. Because in the end, if you want to get published, THEY will have the first choice. Not the general public.
It blows my mind that this is even a question. Who are you to change history? Kids are going to grow up not realizing how rampant racism used to be. That's a dangerous way to do things. Go ahead and use those terms, let the kids make the decision if those are the right things to say or not. Ignorance will not help us overcome.
I agree with this statement. When I was a child, it always bothered me that the "grown-ups" would consider me some sort of frail and ignorant thing, and I vowed I would never subject other children (mine or someone else's) to that treatment. So it would never be a question for me. If your conscience bugs you, include an Aesop about racism or something like that. Or, as an alternative, look at Stephen King and his Dark Tower seires. Susanah (or whatever was her name) got into an argument with... the other guy (it's been a long time since I read it) because he referred to her as "black," which is perfectly acceptable now, but it was racist for her, since she came from another time period.
I just asked a good friend of mine who is 1/2 Choctaw and 1/2 Chickasaw if the word "injun" is derogatory or offensive. He laughed at me and said the problem with this country is everyone is too worried about being politically correct. Say what needs to be said for it to make sense for the setting of the writing and don't worry about it.
I don't use expletives, Cogito. That doesn't mean I have to like it when innocuous words like 'injun' become, somehow, offensive.
This right here. I lived in the US since '92. From an outsiders point of view, I have to say. I have never seen a more insecure bunch of people when it comes to touchy subjects. There is no swearing, no indecency, no drinking in public places, no derogatory names for other people because of the color of their skin or what temple they happen to worship in. Should you be caught doing or saying any of that, you will be dragged to a tree, by a mob with pitchforks and torches, and hung, or hanged, whichever. A lot of times, it's not even offensive, like in the quote, the friend is clearly affected by the term, and seems to not care. Something like me being german, and enduring nazi jokes, from my jewish friend, who happens to be a lawyer. We basically sit in two glass houses firing rock cannons at each other. Would I put that in a book? I don't know, I'm thinking about it. We've been having some good times with making fun of the thin-skinned political correctness of america these days. And if you listened in on some of our conversations, you might shed a tear or two, either of laughter or disgust, I don't know.
Haven't read all the posts on here, but I will point out both Laura Ingalls Wilder in her Little House books, and whoever wrote 'Indian in the cupboard' used the word 'Injun', both books have been read by your intended age group (I was that age when I read them ). Just a thought xxx
I would hardly call 'injun' an innocuous word. It may carry no import or emotional impact to you, but as a descriptive of individuals of a particular race, to those of that particular race, that word may be highly charged. Highly. I am not an African American, I am Puerto Rican. Just because the 'N' word would never be directed to me does not mean that I can just brush off the impact it has on a large portion of the population. I can't pretend that it is innocuous because it has no role in my personal dynamic. The choice to use such language is my responsibility, but should I choose to use that kind of verbiage, the accountability will occur regardless of my personal viewpoint. It has an autonomous reality. This paradigm is the reason that, in the world of law, ignorance of the law is no defense. Now, to respond to the OP... I would say, just be ready to defend the reasoning for using these taboo words. You are going to offend someone. You are. And you may very well be ready to do so. Just don't be surprised when someone gives you a look like they've just smelled something really bad. Even the "classics" have come under attack, from time to time. I've offended people with things I have written, sometimes on purpose, to make a point. But I knew what I was about when I did it and was ready with my thick skin on. My stories always have gay protagonists, and I always write them in a no nonsense, no big deal, we're just like everyone else kind of way. More than once I have gotten reactions to the tune of, "But you make it seem so normal, like you want me to think it's normal, and I don't believe in that." This reader is offended at some level. I know that that is going to be one of the reactions to my work. I take responsibility for the fact that that particular accountability is going to show its face. I don't pretend to be all damsel in distress when it happens. I explain that this is my way of showing that being gay is normal, and that I understand if they don't believe in that, but it is what I believe in.
I am the farthest thing from naive when it comes to the impact of words. I know they are not just words. I just finished reading a book set in a Puritan village, where anything that had a one in a billion chance of causing a child to become "evil" was something that children should never know existed. The Puritans branded, banished, shunned, drowned, burned a lot of innocent people out of ignorance and not knowing how to teach children to make choices when faced with good and evil. Although it is the most extreme, it did remind me of what you said here, Cogito. It's the idea that if you expose them to every choice, they'll automatically make the "evil" choice. If you want to give real power to the good, you have to see and understand the bad.
I like what Rei said there. It's like a test, to see if the kids get it. Imagine, if you're a parent (which I admit I'm not), and your kid reads this book, containing the 'injun' word, for example. Now your kid comes to you and asks you, "hey mom/dad, how about them injuns." How do you feel? What do you say to your kid now? Maybe this is a great opportunity to, you know, talk to your kid and instill some of those values. And all because of one little word. How powerful is that? This is what I meant by my earlier post. People as a whole just seem to be so afraid to touch these kinds of subjects, and children do not get an opportunity to learn about taboos unless it's in a negative way somewhere down the road, from a source now completely out of your control. I find it infinitely more acceptable to discuss these types of things as they happen, instead of waiting until the little hellion* gets arrested for saying or doing something stupid. (*not saying your kids in particular are like this, it is just an example, and just my opinion to boot.)
I personally think that adults underestimate children. Sure, kids don't fully grasp everything adults do but they understand more than we think they do. It's amazing to me sometimes what my friends 2-year old son has learned to do and say without anyone ever teaching him...it just happens. And I had teachers and adults when I was in the 10 to 12 range who looked down on me and condescended to me saying I couldn't understand because I was too young. I remember being in 5th grade and trying to check out a book marked with a 9th grade reading level and having the librarian tell me that it was 'too mature' for me. I was so mad...the next day one of my parents, I think my mom, called the school and told them to let me check out any book that I wanted. Because I could understand complex ideals at that period of my life--I knew how to stand up for people who I felt were being mistreated. Kids *do* get what adults get, sometimes to a fuller extent because they haven't been exposed to as much social culture at the younger ages...they watch less tv, less news, and deal with less worldly problems. As you can tell, I'm a bit miffed that people think children don't understand what adults do...one thing my mom always told me is that you should never underestimate someone because of their age, it always comes back to bite you in the end. Anyway...as for the topic of whether using Injun is okay in a novel, I'd say that if it's a historical viewpoint then you should. Especially since when you originally wrote the novel you didn't even know that it *was* considered an offensive term. I don't know who said it, but someone made a good point--people in this country are much to sensitive to the use of words. Isn't there that saying that we all learn as children "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." If you let words like that get to you, it says more about you than it does about the person using them (in my opinion) because it demonstrates a lack of self-esteem and self-worth. Now if the person using them is doing so out of hatred, then something needs to be done about it...but there are hundreds/thousands of people who use words like that just to prove to themselves there's no reason to be afraid of them. Anyway, this post is getting long so I'll stop now. ~Lynn
I have never met anyone offended by the word 'injun.' Also, I never said that words can't have more impact than just being a mere word. You are being presumptuous. And what about the word 'race'? Why isn't THAT offensive? It has MORE meaning than a different enunciation of 'indian'. The word 'race' implies that there are 'sub-species' to humans, and, taken further, could imply that one 'race' is inferior to another. If we're going to assume that EVERY word that could potentially be offensive probably IS offensive to someone, then we should just do away with speech altogether. This is the first time I've heard of injun being offensive. Why should I change habits based upon some random person suddenly stating that it arbitrarily offends him? What if black people suddenly find the word 'black' offensive, in and of itself? Then we should all just dance around the word. Let's just use the word 'onyx'. Bah.
This is a fallacious "slippery slope" argument, aka reductio ad absurdum. The use of derogatory epithets is often inappropriate. Context and target audience are important considerations, as is how derogatory the term is, and how much of the group targeted by te term finds it offensive.
