Huck Finn Petition Goes to School Board

The Oregonian ^ | 10/29/02 | Clifton R. Chestnut

[ThreeYearLurker]

I didn't even read all of your previous post.

You are obviously a product of the publik skool system, who is unable to further his or her education.

[Welsh Rabbit]

Anything in there about not being able to figure out boats?

Bite your tongue, man! We whites are genetically evil oppressors, and it is not in our place to question civilizations that could not figure out how to master the sail or invent the wheel! < /sarcasm off>

[MacDorcha]

oh, and dont start with "i can tell" when i say my age. i can tell you that my life experience is about level with a 30 year old. and btw, me being fresh outta college, would have a more recent memory of the basics of grammar. so how exactly would you "tell" i was 18? plenty of people of all ages share the same chatroom speek (also, i dont use AOL) so it doesnt prove anything about my age, and just showed you made an assuption. oh, and ask around, you'll see i can get quite angry, so please, dont take offense unless you mean offense. other than that, that's who i am. like me or hate me. i wont back down unless you provide me some info on a subject that i hadnt thought of AND convince me that it is true over my assumptions. since what you said would be labled "flaming" me, im not going to listen to you.

[Portnoy]

My apologies on the use of the word Frickin. Please substitute it with "Razing Fracken".

[MadIvan]

Banning Mark Twain is an utter crime. Reading Tom Sawyer and the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn gave me a lot of delight as a lad and I recommend it for everyone else. This kind of literature should be pushed, not banned.

Let's not forget, Huck doesn't care if he goes to Hell, he's going to help free Jim no matter what.

Regards, Ivan

[Brookhaven]

Williams read an alternate book on baseball legend Jackie Robinson

The irony here is the core message in Huck Finn is anti-slavery and anti-bigotry.

The book also gives a great insight into how whites actually thought about blacks at the time. Just as the student claims you can't understand something because it is "an African American thing", you can't really understand a time in history until you understand how the people then thought. Huck Finn, written by someone in that period, gives a great insight into how whites actually thought about blacks and slavery.

[MacDorcha]

right, thats exactly why im a CIS major Psycology minor, and ill be graduating a year ahead of schedule. because i obviously cant continue my education. ugh. i can't believe someone like you has conservative beliefs.

[MacDorcha]

"me being fresh outta college"

my bad, wasn't paying attention, that is "high school" not college

and before you say anthing about it. you made an assumption.

[Welsh Rabbit]

Don't be so hard on Mac; it's not his fault if public schools don't see the importance of teaching pupils the importance of grammar and punctuation nowadays. At least he wasn't brainwashed by liberalism.

PS- I know my English is far from perfect, so don't bother pointing out any grammarical errors I made in previous posts (or this one).

[jude24]

Funny how they're going after the most eloquent criticism of racism ever written.

[FLdeputy]

"You have to be African American to understand what we've been through,"

Well, that and alive in the 1800s...

Jinx… You posted exactly what I was going to post…verbatim. LOL

Liberal HooHaa!

[Rebel_Ace]

At the risk of sounding as though I am "piling on", a calmer and less vitriolic way of stating ThreeYearLurker's criticisms might be the following:

The FreeRepublic is largely an arena where ideas are expressed and debated in written form (with occasional graphic enhancements). Readers learn of, and make judgements about the authors from the actual text they present. When people post replies or offer arguments about a topic that contain consistant and repeated errors of grammar, syntax, spelling or other writing conventions of the English language, the following is often inferred:

(1) The author is ignorant of the proper rules of written English. -or-

(2) The author is aware of the proper rules of written English, but is too sloppy and lazy to follow them.

(3) If (2) above applies, if the author is sloppy about his or her writing, what other thought processes might they be equally sloppy about?

So, consider your posts and replies to be the "resumes" for your ideas here in this forum. If you want to be taken seriously, write with care. If you want to leave the impression that the inside of your head is as untidy as a typical teenager's bedroom, then continue to write as you do.


Example of an occasional "Graphic Enhancement"

[mafree]

If this proposed "sensitivity training" includes some critical thinking so that kids can appreciate Huckleberry Finn for its deeper message then maybe I could support such a thing. Otherwise, these folks need to get a life.

[demosthenes the elder]

seems pretty simple - the delicate little flower OBVIOUSLY either did not read the assigned material or is so deficient in his reading skills that he failed to comprehend the thrust of the entire book. Either way, the kid needs to fail that class, and that year, and have to repeat a grade - and this time READ the bloody thing.

[demosthenes the elder]

"Funny how they're going after the most eloquent criticism of racism ever written. "
because it was written by a dead white man. the PC Powers That Be have a vested interest in keeping Americans polarized. In this case, this is manifested in keeping young Blacks ignorant of the fact that many whites have, for a great many years, found slavery disgusting and felt great sympathy and respect for blacks. Indeed, one of the two principal causes of black liberty from bondage was the abolitionist movement - a WHITE group. The PC fascists cannot afford to let young blacks know this - it'd ruin their control of a voting block.

[MacDorcha]

two exapmles come to mind:

1) Einstein couldn't figure out how to find his own home. he is one of the most celebrated minds ever, and yet, he lacked basic life skills. would you question his logic?

2) serial date-killers tend to rely on making a good first impression. they depend on making themselves look good, and people fall for it. point im trying to make here? don't rely on an assumption

and before you try and even question why i would put Einstein up on a post that is in personal defense.

first: some of Einstein's theories are full of loop holes, and are even in some cases being disproven (this does not change the fact that his logic for what he saw, was supperior to most any one in the modern/post modern era.)

second: i qualify for MENSA. they seem to think i display all the makings of a properly functioning mind. why would i bother with what random people online see me as? according to them i'm in the top 2% of the worlds brain power. according to the tests, im in the top 0.5%!

so, what was that number three supposed to hint at now? oh yeah, you assume more than you should.

(i may be arrogant, and i may be obstinate, but im not ignorant.)

[Rebel_Ace]

Golly, for someone in the top 2% (or 0.5%) you REALLY have a hard time grasping the point being made, and taking a little criticism.

The conventions of written English have been developed over time, and learned by those wishing to read and write, to make communication between people easier and more precise. Writing that follows those conventions is less likely to be misunderstood, and is more likely to read with the correct meaning taken.

Since you seem to not care to capitalize and punctuate, readers of your posts are more likely to misread them, rendering whatever message you intended lost.

It is SIMPLE COURTESY to write to others in the standards of the language that we share. Since you are taking the time to post things here, you must have at least some small desire to communicate with the "lesser minds" that you encounter here, otherwise, why would you bother. While I personally use slang terms and other idioms in my conversational speech, when writing here I attempt to be as clear as possible. That means proper spelling, syntax, punctuation and where applicable, formatting.

Let me give you an example using your style of writing, and show you where misunderstandings could easily occur:

You might write something like this:

that is not something i did recently

Since there is no punctuation and capitalization to help the reader, and since you are not infallible (check your own spelling of "exapmles", the reader now must check the prior context of your post to determine if you meant:

(1) "That is not something I did recently."

- or -

(2) "That is not something it did recently."

Where "it" refers to some other subject mentioned earlier in your post or posts.

So, for Pete's sake, use a little courtesy and make the effort on your part to move your little pinky fingers to press the SHIFT keys, and use a comma or period.

I will leave you with one final thing to think about: With no other evidence presented, which statement carries more weight?

i know the rules of english and i can write really well

-or-

I know the rules of English, and I can write really well.

[MacDorcha]

Det var en guy en gang, som prøvd betvile et geni på et levende poststed. Han prøvd forkleine guy ved å snakke ned til ham om regel av English språk, vokste som han opp i. Morsom ting er, guy rettende det smart, som ennå mindre omsorgsfull guy gjør ikke en gang vet enda et språk. Spesielt Norwegian.

i know English perfectly well, i just don't care online. do you know a little of this language? how about Gaelic? some Hebrew? maybe a little Japanese? i do. simple courtesy says that you would read for content, and not flame based on a general laziness on my part. i put punctuation where it needs to be for my point, i just don't put in caps letters, and sometimes neglect to place apostrophes. i am NOT going to Hell for that. and yes, proper names still have caps, and for making my point more clear, i will put some words in all caps. i have no trouble GRASPING the point, it's GIVING A DAMN that seems to elude me. checking my previous posts is fine by me, it means that they know the FULL context of my statements.


o, and "for someone in the top 2% (or 0.5%) you REALLY have a hard time grasping the point being made," is wrong.
it should be "for someon in the top 2% (or 0.5%), you REALLY have..." see what's missing? try and make yourself correct before correcting others, i may be more inclined to listen.

[Hemlock]

A sure sign that a book is worth reading is when a lot of people try to ban it. This book is the foundation stone of much of American literature, a worthy target for socialists and their useful idiots.

[Rebel_Ace]

Even your simple correction requires proofing:

"...o, and "for someone in the top 2% (or 0.5%) you REALLY have a hard time grasping the point being made," is wrong.
it should be "for someon in the top 2% (or 0.5%), you REALLY have..." see what's missing? try and make yourself correct before correcting others, i may be more inclined to listen..."

Well, it appears that there is at least an "e" missing in the word "someon", and "o" is considered an archaic variation of "oh".

Laughing out loud, MENSA-Boy! Tell you what, tally up all the errors in my posts, for spelling, grammar, punctuation and syntax, and then tally up the errors in yours, and come back with totals to compare.

You boast of a superior intellect, and arrogantly assume that what you have to say is so important that it transcends the need to following the conventions of standard writing. When you find that no one takes you seriously, you'll clean up your writing.