Drowning under a zero-tolerance wave

It started with an innocent question from a high school student: Why did the Washington Football Team have to change its name? The answer, it turns out — at least in the judgment of some— w as less than innocent.

Mary DeVoto, a Mother McAuley High School teacher of 41 years, was fired for violating a zero-tolerance rule of ever speaking a word that I assume I can’t print here for the same reason. (I won’t test that theory and put my editor in the uncomfortable position of deleting the word — or its writer — from this publication.)

DeVoto was teaching Native American culture to her World History class when a student asked why the Washington Football Team had to change its name from — another word I assume I shouldn’t print here.

She explained that the R-word is as offensive to Native Americans as the N-word is to Blacks — but she used the full word that the N stands for. A student recorded the moment and posted it on social media, which of course went viral.

But the school, it seems, takes a zero-tolerance attitude toward that word. And zero is a force to be reckoned with. Multiply any number by zero, and zero wins, hands down.

After being removed from her teaching duties, administrators claim that she used the word again — several times — while trying to explain things at her hearing. In the end, administrators decided to terminate her employment.

DeVoto argued that it is necessary to reveal the “ugly underbelly” of our history, not just “the wonderful things” and admitted that she “did not present that lesson well.” She was mortified that so many people were offended, and wanted to be given the chance to apologize to her students and use it as a learning opportunity.

As of this writing, she has not been given that chance, despite petitions with thousands of signatures urging the school to do so.

Because, I guess, we have come to the point of zero tolerance for certain words that make anyone uncomfortable, regardless of context or intent. Anything that makes anyone uncomfortable — a statue, a speech, a work of art, or even a single word — is fair game for banishment.

Because in these delicate times, comfort trumps uncomfortable truth.

DeVoto’s situation hits home for me, because as a teacher of American Literature for many years, I taught Mark Twain’s outstanding “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” a book that many consider to be the greatest novel ever written in America.

In it, the N-word appears a total of 219 times.

Ironically, while many consider it offensive and uncomfortable to read that word in print or hear it read aloud, “Huckleberry Finn” is considered to be the most positive force in American literature to help White readers understand the ugliness of slavery and prejudice in general. Written in 1884, it exposed the “ugly underbelly” of racism that should have been ended two decades earlier with the end of the Civil War. But racism persisted, prompting Twain to write the novel to expose the ugliness of slavery to generations that weren’t around to witness it for themselves.

In it, young Huck comes to love the slave Jim, with whom he floats down the Mississippi on a raft, and learns that Jim is more purely good and loving than any other person or institution in his life — including the church, which taught that it was a sin to help a slave escape.

“All right then, I’ll go to hell,” Huck says at the book’s powerful turning point, when he decides that his love for Jim is more compelling than the prejudiced teaching and upbringing he has received from his family, neighbors and church.

Still, “Huckleberry Finn” is under fire today, because it contains a word that makes some people uncomfortable and offended. Many powerful forces demand that future printings of that book delete the N-word, or change it to another word—or even ban the book altogether.

Call the n-word obscene if you will, and I would agree with you once it is removed from context, but is that reason to ban it from a mature, open discussion in our schools?

According to current laws, obscenity in a book requires that “the work as a whole lacks literary or artistic value.” In other words, context is everything. When the literary value of a story lies in its ability to address difficult, uncomfortable subjects like slavery, then an uncomfortable word should not be considered an unnecessary obscenity to be purged.

“Huckleberry Finn” is a work of art, and art is at its best when it challenges our comfort. Any zero-tolerance effort to wipe it clean of an offensive printed word—or even to punish anyone who might speak that offensive word aloud in an educational setting—is to destroy its power to enlighten. “Comfortize” art — or education — and you reduce its value to zero.

I have been retired from teaching for almost 20 years, and I can’t imagine trying to teach that novel today. Back then, when I read passages from the book in class, I spoke the words exactly as written, out of respect for Twain’s art.

It was a different time, but was I wrong to do it then in any case? Should I have known better? Do I owe students, parents and school administrators an apology for not being more “woke” in an un-woke time? If I taught today, would I have the courage to stand up to the overwhelming zero-tolerance wave to purge an uncomfortable word, regardless of context?

Some questions are best left unanswered.

TR Kerth is the author of the book “Revenge of the Sardines.” Contact him at trkerth@yahoo.com.

---