Posted by shagme on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 6:10 PM:
My child came home and said they watched the movie
Ruby Bridges...she said it used the N word more than once...
If we can't have the word in a classic book, then why is my child hearing it at school in a movie?
My child is in the 4th grade!
Replies (77)
Its different if the government schools us it.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 6:30 PM
Well I'm not very happy about this...I know it was a common word years ago...but come on, do our
kids have to hear it in a movie...at school. When
we preach to them that it is a bad word and should never be used, EVER!!
-- Posted by shagme on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 6:37 PM
Ruby Bridges was the little girl who was part of the integration of schools in the South. I'm sure the people who were using the word were not portrayed as good people. It's not enough to tell a child a word is "bad", they need to know why it's bad.
-- Posted by FSM06 on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 7:26 PM
we preach to them that it is a bad word and should never be used, EVER!!
-- Posted by shagme on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 6:37 PM
Then they turn on some rap and it is repeated there over and over.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 9:10 PM
The only movie I got to watch in school had to do with loose lips and ships.
What great lessen was this movie to teach?
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 9:17 PM
I agree it is a good movie, but not to be shown in a school setting...or at least let the parents
know what is going on...
-- Posted by shagme on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 9:26 PM
Regret...I don't allow rap music or any other music with foul words...I'm still the parent.
I say what goes here!
-- Posted by shagme on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 9:44 PM
shagme, do your kids know the meaning of your "handle" in 1970's-1980's slang?
-- Posted by dr.pob on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 10:07 PM
When Ruby Bridges went to school, that racial epithet was used as commonly as the "f" word is today. As parents we need to teach them that certain words exist, give the definition thereof and the reasons why we shouldn't say them.
It's unfortunate that we have to teach our kids about the ugly parts of life, but if we pretend that side doesn't exist, we're not doing them any favors.
-- Posted by redpen on Wed, Jan 12, 2011, at 10:08 PM
dr pob...yes they do! I've taught them that words like that are demeaning and wrong...just as I was taught as a child!
-- Posted by shagme on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 6:16 AM
Was the film part of African American History Awareness Month? Or history in general?
I'd suggest the school could have/should have asked for parental consent. I also support offering Twain's writings with and without the n-word.
So many preach parents should be their child's moral guide v. the child's school, here are fine examples where parents are left out of the loop.
Anyone using the N-word today, knows better and is doing so to be abrasive.
-- Posted by ho ho ho on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 9:17 AM
I believe Mark Twain's works should be left alone! If it offends you don't read it.
Allowing the word to be thrown around loosely by the black entertainment community while being deemed politically incorrect for a person of any other race is the height of hypocrisy in my book and as racial as it gets.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 10:19 AM
"Evil is of such frightful mean, to be hated needs but to be seen.
"But seen too often, familiar with its face, we first endure, then welcome, and then embrace."
Taught to me as a child by my Grandmother.
-- Posted by voyager on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 10:45 AM
Sorry shagme,
the "N" word is STILL very common today. It can still be heard often among those that were once called it. It is common in their music (if that's what they want to call it) and it is commonly used in every day converstions among them. I have also heard it in some conversations among the white community but very seldom. As for censoring any book, much less Clemens books, I stand strongly opposed to such ridiculous ventures.
-- Posted by GREYWOLF on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:08 AM
It's just a word. It was commonly used in the old days, when I was growing up. It usually referred not so much to colour as to an demeanor. Yes, there were white people called by the term when they exhibited the same demeanor.
However, it was also used, usually derogatorily, to refer to all persons of colour. I say 'usually' because that was more common among younger folks. Older folks simply used to term to refer to all persons of colour, with no malintent. The section of town I grew up in which housed most of the black population, properly called 'Newtown', was identified with the term by many people, again not necessarily derogatorily.
I have no problem with expunging it from the current lexicon, but to alter books of a different time to suit the sensibilities of those of today is absurd. What we're seeing is actually a move to further alter the meaning of the word, and thus to make it appear necessarily derogatory, even when it was not intended so.
The origin of the word, of course, comes from a mis-pronunciation of the word 'niger', latin for 'black'. Such mispronunciations were, and are, common among folk along the Mississippi - witness the pronunciation of the towns of New Madrid and Cairo, for example.
Cadillacman:
To suggest that there are words that are appropriate for use only by one race or group is to further drive a wedge between them, and move us further from Dr. King's goal of a 'colour-blind society'. It is simply wrong. To suggest that one group can use a term that must be expunged from the lexicon of another is the height of discrimination.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:32 AM
Have_Wheels_Will_Travel,
Twain's stories are required reading in some schools. That is why both editions should be printed. Not a school's responsibility to teach a child unacceptable word usage or its history. It should be the parents choice. IMHO
-- Posted by ho ho ho on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:32 AM
Caddy,
In all your brilliance, can you explain the do's and don'ts of using the word 'Honky'?
Is it Ok for a black man to call a white man a Honky?
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:33 AM
Who said anything about censorship? I believe it has been suggested that BOTH versions should be published, thus allowing (parental) CHOICE. Which is what our country was built upon, was it not?
-- Posted by ho ho ho on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:34 AM
Odyssey,
Any changing of an author's words written in a book yesterday or a hundred or so years ago, cheapens the work in my opinion.
There was a movie for children based on a book from years ago made by Disney a few years ago. It was called Song of the South, and it was banned in this country but not in Europe. So what happens, somebody gets a copy from England, converts it from PAL format and sells multiple copies at the flea markets around the country.
Censorship stinks. I will go back to what I said before, if you do not like something, do not read or watch it. And so far as schools go, if parents do not want their children to watch something or read something, talk to the schoolboard.
But to teach children that this doctored version of Huckleberry Finn is a work of Mark Twain is deception and has no place in our schools. It is no longer classic literature and should be dropped from the required reading list if that is to be the case.
JMO
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:45 AM
Who said anything about censorship? I believe it has been suggested that BOTH versions should be published, thus allowing (parental) CHOICE. Which is what our country was built upon, was it not?
-- Posted by Odyssey on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:34 AM
If an author's work is to be altered. Then take his/her name off the book as well... because it is no longer the work of the author. It has simply been plagiarized and the name of the person or committee doing it should go on the cover.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:49 AM
Have_Wheels_Will_Travel, Copyright rules are quite clear on the issue you have described.
-- Posted by ho ho ho on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:53 AM
Odyssey,
Copyright laws no longer apply to these kinds of works. The copyrights have long ago expired and the works are in the public domain. I just recently downloaded an audio version of Huckleberry Finn because I had not read it since in school and wanted to hear it read me.
The public domain situation was clearly explained by the reader, a lady in St. Louis who was volunteering her time to put these books out free to the public.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 12:13 PM
Caddie, You realize you just made the same point that the late Senator KKK Byrd made about there being white and black ......s. His remarks were not well recieved by any.
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 1:05 PM
Caddy,
The 'case' will not be closed on this in our lifetimes.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 1:19 PM
To say any particular word is allowed to be used by persons of one race, but not by others, is racism. Period.
c-man gets it right: it began as a mis-pronunciation of "Niger". Early bills of sale for slaves from Africa gave their region of origin, such as "Libyan" or, in the case og Nigerians, they would be listed as a "Niger". Just ike if you were indentured, from say Belgium, your paperwork said "Belgian". Nigerians, for a while at least, seemed to make up a large portion of the African slave trade.
As for censorship: sorry, if a government entity decides that any media should be changed or banned because it's contents are offensive to some group, whoever they are or for whatever reason, that is censorship. Whether it is Mark Twain, the Rebel flag, or that stupid peace symbol (which I abhor for personal reasons, but would NEVER ask to be banned).
As for Americans who happen to be of African descent: don't take this wrong, but it's way past time to get over slavery - do not forget, because it is part of history we never want to repeat - but move on and view the use of words you may not like in the works of writers like Mark Twain with the proper historical perspective. He wrote in a manner that was of his time - that is how people spoke, the language they used. It is not of our time, but a part of our history. It is up to us to teach our children why it is considered rude to use that phrase today. And, if someone calls you by that word in a derogatory manner - by all means, if an arse whoopin' is called for, whoop away!
By the way: it is also time for hyphenated Americanism to become a thing of the past. IMHO.
Gotta run.
I'm out.
-- Posted by Little_Mac on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 1:27 PM
Little_Mac
I totally agree.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 1:30 PM
Have_Wheels_Will_Travel, I guess the tongue and cheek went over your head. Re: 11:53 AM post
-- Posted by ho ho ho on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 3:14 PM
Have_Wheels_Will_Travel, I guess the tongue and cheek went over your head. Re: 11:53 AM post
-- Posted by Odyssey on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 3:14 PM
I don't think so. I certainly did not recognize your statement as tongue in cheek... I recognized it as an exercise in trying to tell me that I did not understand the copyright laws.
We were discussing Mark Twain's works and specifically I think the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Your 11:53 post is copied below. You mentioned copyright laws and I tried to explain to you they do not exist on Mark Twains works any longer. Unless they have been renewed in some way. They are therefore in the public domain.
The whole issue is altering classics because they do not meet the criteria of the politically correct world of today. I am against doing so as I believe it destroys the work of the author who wrote in the tone of the day.
Let me go a step further... I am opposed to all mandated politically correct BS foisted off on us by a bunch of self styled do-gooders in today's world.
Have_Wheels_Will_Travel, Copyright rules are quite clear on the issue you have described.
-- Posted by Odyssey on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 11:53 AM
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 3:43 PM
Have_Wheels_Will_Travel, Did YOU not mention "simply been plagiarized"? ie the tongue and cheek humor regarding copyright laws.
-- Posted by ho ho ho on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 6:17 PM
pla·gia·rize /ˈpleɪdʒəˌraɪz, -dʒiəˌraɪz/ Show Spelled
[pley-juh-rahyz, -jee-uh-rahyz] Show IPA
verb, -rized, -riz·ing.
--verb (used with object)
1. to take and use by plagiarism.
2. to take and use ideas, passages, etc., from (another's work) by plagiarism.
--verb (used without object)
3. to commit plagiarism.
Odyssey,
What has plagiarism have to do with copyright laws. I fail to see your point.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 8:42 PM
Have_Wheels_Will_Travel, Try to keep up now. Plagiarism, much like an expired copyright infringement is not enforcable by law. Plagiarism is generally an "academic" term. If one offers proper credit when employing another's work, it is not plagiarism. Thus, why I found humor in your uninformed post.
-- Posted by ho ho ho on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 9:01 PM
infringe,
How about you trying to keep up. My point was, if you are going to take an author's work and change it and have it printed in the new format, you may just as well steal his work and put your name on it. It is no longer his. I don't care if you give him credit or not. Maybe a better word would have been to mangle and destroy his work.
That is what I was trying to say. If you are too dense to keep up... well I cannot help it.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 9:26 PM
I just know a bunch of "back guys" I work with and am friends of. I am a "white guy" or ("white boy" by their wives) when they describe who I am. It doesn't bother them nor I. I never thought of using the "n" word around them. Sometimes I poke Cadi or one of the Race baiters just to stir their pot.
Where I grew up there was a lot of hate in the generations before mine and a little carried over but in all we learned to get along. Later in life I moved to Cape were things were a little more civil and the divide was worse up here. I never could out figure why.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 10:09 PM
Reader's Digest used to 'condense' books, apparently for people who liked to read, except that they just didn't like all those words.
There was a lot of humour about them at one time. Someone released a spoof 'Reader's Digest Condensed Bible' that had only eight commandments and seven apostles.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 7:57 AM
Canadian station to air Dire Strait's 'Money For Nothing' nonstop for one hour, to protest song ban.
The song contains the word 'f****t', which the government has decided is offensive. Never mind that the song has played for 25 years, suddenly, it has become an issue...
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 8:36 AM
'Money for Nothing', by the way, was composed in a hardware store, using the actual words of a delivery man who was watching MTV while waiting for his load to be readied for shipment. It is a snapshot of America, if you will.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 8:40 AM
It is all about choice. Listen or read which ever version you like.
-- Posted by coke zero on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 8:47 AM
I am a high school communication arts teacher and teach American literature. I believe in order to effectively teach American literature, I must also present the historical context of our readings. There are many words, phrases, and entire works that have entirely new meanings in modern contexts and could be could considered offensive to African-Americans, Native Americans, women, those who suffer from mental illnesses, etc. I address those issues before and as my classes are reading early American literature, Hawthorne, Poe, Irving, Thoreau, Emerson, Stowe, Frederick Douglas, Kate Chopin, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Alice Walker, Twain, etc. Most of my students choose not to read the "N word" when reading aloud in class, and I am thankful they are uncomfortable using the word (as they should be); however, I believe actually removing the word--or any others--from these works of literature is unthinkable. It's comparable to painting over works of art that include possibly offensive images. These authors' works reflect America as it was, not as they wanted it to be, and most of them were far ahead of their time in recognizing the injustices of which we all speak. Children need to know how and why our country exists in its present state; that's the only way to move toward a country of truly educated and productive citizens.
-- Posted by Just a teacher on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 9:31 AM
I don't care what people choose to call themselves. I'm not in the business of telling people what they can call themselves.
-- Posted by Spaniard on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 8:59 AM
Agreed, but at the same time, they cannot dictate what they are called by others.
-- Posted by Acronym on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 9:45 AM
Just a Teacher,
I believe you are correct. If we have to sugar coat life for children as they grow up, they just may have a problem dealing with reality later.
I liked your reference to defacing works of art by painting over offensive scences. I suppose there are some that would want David to be dressed in at least a pair of "Fruit of the Looms" every morning so he is decent.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 9:51 AM
A lot of words begin with the letter N and qualify as N words. Which one you have in mind?
By the way, some of us of Scottish descent could make a ruckus and demand being called Scottish Americans or even Scot-Irish Americans. But we don't. Know why? Because we do not suffer from an inferiority complex. We are a self assured people and know our own worth.
-- Posted by voyager on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 10:24 AM
I seem to remember a stink when Mr. Ashcroft Draped the naked statues in the Department of Justice.
I do, however, see that Design Toscano, a mail-order company offering reproductions of famous works of art, frequently offers 'draped' versions of famous nude statues. Curiously, they usually offer 'draped' versions of the ones revealing naked males more often than those of females, I gather male nudity is more often seen as offensive than female nudity.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 10:26 AM
Shapley,
I think we should start a movement to make sure all naked male statues be covered. From some I have seen, they could be embarassing to some of us and we simply cannot have that.
What are our children to think... they got cheated, and then their mother explaining to them, it is a family trait?
Oh dear, some of the thoughts this conjures up.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 10:52 AM
SHAPLEY HUNTER saved me a lot of typing. The term was/is not always in reference to the BLACK, or COLORED, or AFRICAN-AMERICAN, or whatever the preference.
What gives ME the right to say this? I was raised around, and worked with, "The Other-Race" from birth. Even though white, I was considered a ni**er as well, simply by association, from the higher-classed land owners of the time, while in the fields. Hell no I didn't like it---I still don't, even though I sometimes catch me referring to MYSELF as such, still today---but ONLY while in private "self-discussion". Guess it's a "hang-up" I'll never outgrow.
Let me give you a sample. In the mid-60's, a wealthy Bootheel landowner, who also owned land in a more northern-part of the state as well as in S. Illinois---and I'll not honor him by mere-mention of name---would load us all into the back of his truck at feed-time and take us into town for food, at a "Mom & Pop"-store in the area.
He'd herd us all inside, and announce to the stores' owners: "Y'all give these heah ni****'s whatever they want t' eat, an' put it on MY-bill."
The "Pop" of the store took him aside, and told him: "I'll kindly ask you to not use that term in my store, as we've tried to not use that name around these parts anymore."
To which Mr. "S" replied: "I'll call 'em whatever I please, wherever I please, 'cause these ni****'s, no matter their color, owe me their well-being, and the shacks they live in. They know what side their bread is buttered-on!"
Then, as well as later in life, I would fight against "them". As well as along side "them". And then get patched-up, with "them". Guess that's why I consider a little-piece of "them" still stuck in "me".
And to this day, I stick with this creedo: "Not all ni****'s are Black, just like not all Blacks are ni****'s---they come in ALL-colors and races."
Prejudiced? Yeah, maybe I am---whatever you want to think.
Or maybe I'm just JEALOUS, of those who've NEVER been called a NI****...???
-- Posted by donknome-2 on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 10:56 AM
Donknome-2
I have never met you... that I am aware of, but just listening to you, I believe I could be very comfortable having you covering my back.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 11:07 AM
donknome-2 wrote:
"Or maybe I'm just JEALOUS, of those who've NEVER been called a NI****...???"
I've been called one, because I did n-work when I was younger. Certain jobs (mostly done by illegals nowadays, I think) were given that name. Now, I'll grant you I was called that in a collective sense, which is to say that all of us working those particular jobs would be lumped together as such. However, the name carried over to a very minor extent. Certain people at school, when they found out you were doing such work, would call you by the term. That was their way of saying they were better than you, because they didn't do n-work. (At least they claimed they didn't.)
Alas, $1 and hour was $10 or $12 at the end of the day. It gave you an appreciation for hard work, and a desire not to do it for the rest of your life. In the terminology of the day, it was said that you worked like a ***, sweated like a ***, and were even dirty as a ***, all of which was a way of saying you earned your bread, as I saw it.
I'm not trying to offend anyone, here, I'm just trying to put the word in the historical context I had heard it. There was a certain amount of pride in earning your bread in those days. Maybe that's why I didn't see it as such a derogatory term.
Like Roy Clark, though, I can say that I never picked cotton. ;)
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 11:27 AM
My God! They DID read it all!☺
WHEELS: Yeah, we'd hit it off jus' fine, without a doubt!
SHAPLEY: A PERFECT sum-up of what I was "ranting" about---couldn't have said it better myself!☺
(P.S.: I never PICKED cotton, either---but I sure as hell hauled a lot of it to the gin! Still do on occasion---but NOW, I do it from an air-conditioned tractor-cab! Talk about "Movin' On Up!"...!)
-- Posted by donknome-2 on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 11:43 AM
Well, I picked and chopped cotton along with just about every kind of work there was to do on a farm and did it right alongside some really good people of all colors.
Donknome, we also now use cab tractors, too, but still have some old ones we bought in the 50's just for sentimental sake and they can still do a pretty good job.
Shapley Hunter
Are you familiar with the Wine Tree?
-- Posted by Acronym on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 11:57 AM
As far as I know, there was no cotton raised in Bollinger County. Sounds like I didn't miss a really great experience not picking it. ☺ ☺
We had plenty of cockleburrs for a boy to hoe though. It's a damned wonder I didn't make them extinct in Bollinger County as many as I had to cut out of the corn.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 12:03 PM
Acronym wrote:
"Are you familiar with the Wine Tree?"
The one on Russell Street? Yes. I remember it.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 12:31 PM
By the way, some of us of Scottish descent could make a ruckus and demand being called Scottish Americans or even Scot-Irish Americans. But we don't. Know why? Because we do not suffer from an inferiority complex. We are a self assured people and know our own worth.
-- Posted by voyager on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 10:24 AM
Right on!
Spaniard, if you or others wish to call yourselves a Whatever-American, go right ahead. My opinion is that it divides us. It draws lines and boundaries between people of different heritage. We were at our best when we were the great melting pot, not when we began the great multi-cultural hogwash we now find ourselves in.
We were made up of the best of all the cultures of all the people who came here. Now we are so busy differentiating ourselves and setting cultural boundaries and establishing National Whatever Heritage Month and saying the people from Whateverland were oppressed so now we have to treat them like they are special...it's disheartening to me and many others.
Dr Martin Luther King envisioned a colorblind society; a society in which we all brought our own unique talents and abilities to the table and joined them together, without consideration of the race or creed or cultural heritage of the participants, in a grand effort to improve our society to the benefit of all. Instead, we drew new boundaries to seperate me from you from cadillacman from the Whatevers. Even though we do not have much of the blatant, institutionalized racism of the 50's and 60's, it still exists in other forms. Walk into the wrong neighborhood in Miami or South Central LA and you'll be shot for being white. Because those are "African-American" or "Cuban-American" neighborhoods and they do not want you there.
Remember the post-Rodney King riots? Reginald Denney (sp), the truck driver who was dragged from his truck and beaten nearly to death with a brick? Know what his crime was? He was white in Watts. What do you think the reaction would be if I were to stop cadillacman as he was driving through my neighborhood, drag him from his car, and bash in his skull with a brick? I would be charged with a hate crime because, under such legislation, his life is worth more than Reginald Denneys (sp) because of the color of his skin. (Of course, I do not know c-man's real name, so for all I know, he lives in my neighborhood.) This legislation is supposed to bring the country TOGETHER? This is where multiculturalism has gotten us. In many ways, we are more divided today than in the post-war years. We are more concerned than ever about the color of a person's skin and less about them as a person. So, just for grins, how about we all try just being Americans, again, for a while?
There is nothing wrong with practicing your unique cultural heritage. We still see persons of Scottish descent running around in kilts, some from Erin's Isle still speek Gaelic, German descendants still wear lederhosen, those from Asia and India practice their unique religions - Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. That's how we keep our family history alive.
But, if you and others prefer to be hypenated, if you need it to feel like you have worth, feel free...just do not expect me to give you special treatment or consideration because you prefer to do so. If you really feel the need to "hyphenate", how about American-Whatever instead?
And ask your self this: what are you first? Do you consider yourself an American first, or a Whatever first? Where is your allegiance? If America calls, if America needs you and your talents in time of national crisis, will you answer the call? Or will you turn away because you are a Whatever first and an American last?
Just one American of French-German-Swiss descent's humble opinion.
Must go now.
All have a nice weekend, stay safe if you travel, enjoy the long weekend if you're so lucky, and watch for Ole Man Winter - he's supposed to be sneaking 'round again Sunday night and Monday.
Peace.
I'm out.
-- Posted by Little_Mac on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 12:34 PM
Cotton was grown just north of Advance over the Bollinger County line. That was my first and only time picking cotten, I quit or was fired before making it through a row. I did keep the old dog company while he guarded the wagon.
-- Posted by Old John on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 12:41 PM
Cotton's not a hill crop. It's usually grown in flat river-bottom land.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 12:47 PM
Vote NO,
I'm assuming your questioning whether or not I'm actually teaching my class. 1/2 day of school today, and I did not have a class at the time I posted.
-- Posted by Just a teacher on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 12:57 PM
Shapely Hunter,
Yes, the one on Russel Street, I remember you using the term "Newtown" on one of the threads.
We grew cotton well north of Sikeston growing up, but no one in my area grows it anymore, just wheat, beans and corn.
I remember people pulling off the side of I-55 in New Madrid County, jumping the rails and pulling up cotton as they had never seen it before.
NM County is truly an interesting place.
-- Posted by Acronym on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 1:12 PM
Old John,
I never got more than 100 yards off Hy91 when going to Advance. So I must have missed that one. I always claimed to be from the 1st county north of cotton country. Guess I will have to change that.
Or maybe I should be like some on here.... can you give me a link to that? ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 1:20 PM
By the way Old John, did you ever hoe cockleburrs?
I didn't get fired from that job, I couldn't quit either, or my Dad would have gotten "fired" up.
I even tried chopping off a stalk of corn 'accidentally' from time to time. That didn't get me fired either, but it did get an 'explanation' of how it would be done.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 1:26 PM
-- Posted by Just a teacher on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 9:31 AM
Very good post.
-- Posted by Acronym on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 1:45 PM
As a comm arts teacher, I must also correct myself (should've reviewed, huh?)..."you're" not your :)
-- Posted by Just a teacher on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 2:56 PM
Acronym wrote:
"NM County is truly an interesting place."
Yes, very interesting. It was, at one time, sort of a small section of the Deep South brought up river to Missouri. The sign says (or used to say, if it's still there) "Where Southern Hospitality Begins". That's probably true, but Southern Hospitality ain't always all that it's cracked up to be.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 3:39 PM
"you're" not your
Hmmmmm.
That is a common error with another teacher I know.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 3:52 PM
Wheels, I don't remember a lot about that cotten patch but is wasn't but maybe part of the 40 acres north east of 91 and the County line. I know it was once owned by the Westbrook family.
Doubtful that was a good crop given the soil and standing water in places, and it would have been aways to any market.
We didn't do much chopping but I did a whole lot of weed hooking. Mostly in the bean rows and we had our share of cockleburrs.
-- Posted by Old John on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 3:58 PM
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 3:39 PM
I agree, I have tried to explain NM County to other people, but you just really have to live it.
I wish I had written about some of the individuals I knew down there as their kind no longer exist.
-- Posted by Acronym on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 5:26 PM
Southern Hospitality ain't always all that it's cracked up to be.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 3:39 P
You got that right.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 6:32 PM
...many words, phrases, and entire works that have entirely new meanings in modern contexts...
[from Justateacher's ealier post]
Does the word "democracy" have new meaning in modern context? I understand that in the time of the our country's founding, expousing one to be a supporter of a democracy was was reason to duel.
Today the word is used to decribe the basis for our system of government.
The president referred to our democracy three times in his Tuscon speach and just this morning J Emerson used democracy in the same context.
At one time it bothered me that children are now commonly called kids and double negatives are routinely accepted in today's vernacular. Just not sure I can be comfortable with the use of democracy in place or representative republic.
-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Jan 15, 2011, at 11:30 AM
I don't think the term 'democracy' has changed so much, although the use of it has never been exactly accurate. Greece is known as the 'birthplace of democracy', but the democracy that gave rise to the term was a far cry from true democracy. It was, however, more democratic than the tyrannies were common at the time.
Similarly, Solon, the 'father of democracy', did not truly establish one. What he did was to prevent tyranny by enacting democratic reforms. Even that is not technically correct, since he was given largely dictatorial powers to enact reforms to forestall tyranny, which eventually came anyway. It was only after his time that a more democratic system rose, which was credited with being based on the 'laws of Solon'. It is supposed that some of those laws were not Solon's at all, but that lawmakers after his time thought their measures would be more popularly accepted if they were credited to him. We see the same thing today with quotes credited to Jefferson, Lincoln, and Tocqueville.
True democracy, on a large scale is rare throughout history. However, we've generally allowed the term 'democracy' to be applied to any form of government that permits popular elections and multi-party voting.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Jan 15, 2011, at 8:11 PM
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the democracy.......?
The country was founded as a republic and as of 1892 it was still a republic. I think it is a republic yet.
-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Jan 15, 2011, at 11:25 PM
So was Ancient Greece, the 'birthplace of democracy'...
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Jan 15, 2011, at 11:57 PM
Shap, I wasn't there, don't know. I do remember a quote by someone: Democracy is a terrible form of government, but all others are much worse. Or something like that.
-- Posted by Old John on Sun, Jan 16, 2011, at 12:14 AM
Mob rule is what the Democrats want.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Jan 16, 2011, at 9:28 AM
Old John,
As the bumper-sticker says: Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sun, Jan 16, 2011, at 11:30 AM
Does that mean democrats like a free lunch?
-- Posted by Old John on Sun, Jan 16, 2011, at 11:39 AM
We_Regret:
I don't think the Democrats want mob rule, what they want is for the mob to maintain the image of rule while being ruled. The Romans Senate, and the Roman emperors, did much the same.
Rulers always understand that the mob, by mere virtue of its numbers, must be placated if they are to remain in power. They also realize that the power of the mob, if it can be harnessed, can be a powerful tool for maintaining power. Thus, they seek to satisfy the mob's demand for security, and to even feed that demand with false claims of injustice.
In the case of the Democrats, they use the idea that, if one person or group of persons has bettered their lot to the point that they possess a 'disproportionate' amount of property or goods, they have done so at the expense of the rest of the mob. The mob, fueled by this rhetoric, turns their ire towards the producers, rather than the rulers. When the Democrats are out of power, they cite 'unjust laws' which promote this inequity, thus directing the mob's ire towards the rulers (Republicans), with the goal towards using the power of the mob to remove them from office.
We've seen it time and again, and it is a practice as old as that which we call 'democracy', whether it be republican democracy or some form of democratic despotism.
The power of the mob is much like the power of fire - a powerful ally when you can harness it for your purposes, but it will burn you as easily as your foe if it is mishandled.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sun, Jan 16, 2011, at 11:41 AM
Ther I can finally agree with you. Dang it!!!
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Jan 16, 2011, at 6:16 PM
I don't appreciate the use of the "N" word. I cannot believe that soceity still sees that as an acceptable thing to put in the media. This is just a stupid idea that needs to be put out now before it spreads too far and racial slurs become common practice in everyday life.
-- Posted by ZachLevi10 on Thu, Jan 27, 2011, at 4:37 PM
ZachLevi10 wrote:
"This is just a stupid idea that needs to be put out now before it spreads too far and racial slurs become common practice in everyday life."
It's probably about 5,000 years too late for that...
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Thu, Jan 27, 2011, at 4:41 PM
Having recently read Mark Twain's book because I saw it in our library and had never read it, I was not impressed. I don't know why his work ever became a classic in any sense. Let's compare his work to that of Treasure Island. NO CONTEST. If I were an editor of his works, I wouldn't take out just one word. I would take out words, concepts, disjointed plots, storylines, etc. There are so many better books out there. Happy reading!
-- Posted by eyegotya on Thu, Jan 27, 2011, at 5:31 PM
Menu
My child came home and said they watched the movie
Ruby Bridges...she said it used the N word more than once...
If we can't have the word in a classic book, then why is my child hearing it at school in a movie?
My child is in the 4th grade!
Replies (77)