Hot take: 'To Kill a Mockingbird' vs. 'Huckleberry Finn' which ban was more wrong?

I was talking to my book club in Portland last week, and we got into it over these two novels. Both got banned from some school libraries in the 80s, one for racial language and one for 'promoting racism' - but I think 'Mockingbird' handled its themes way better with Atticus as a clear moral center. 'Huck Finn' left more room for misinterpretation, like when they canceled it in a Texas district back in 1988. Do you think one of these bans felt more justified than the other, or are they both overblown?

2 comments

2 Comments

caseys3016h agoMost Upvoted

Got thrown off by the whole 1988 thing, the Texas ban on Huck Finn actually went down in 1985, not 88, but the point still stands. Both bans were overblown in different ways, but I think Mockingbird gets more heat now because people see Atticus as too perfect, like a white savior type, while Huck Finn has Twain's satire that kids totally miss. Huck Finn's language is rough, sure, but Twain was showing how dumb racism is, not promoting it. The bans always felt like adults picking the easy route instead of trusting kids to handle tough stuff with good teaching.

ryang6516h agoMost Upvoted

Ha! I got banned from my own high school library for a week in 9th grade for doodling in a copy of Huck Finn, so I'm clearly an expert here. On a serious note though, the bans always felt more about adults being scared of hard conversations rather than the books themselves. The Texas thing was such a mess because they missed the whole point about Jim being the real moral compass, not just a sidekick. Honestly, both bans were trash takes, but Mockingbird's ban always stung more since Atticus is basically the dad we all wish we had.