The Day They Came to Arrest the Book

“‘Mind you, this young Frenchman admired a lot about America, but he also wrote: “I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and real freedom of discussion as in America.” […] It was one thing to dissent against the British in 1776, but by 1831 de Tocqueville found very few Americans who dared to dissent publicly against popular opinion in this new nation.’”

History teacher Nora Baines quotes De Tocqueville’s Democracy in America to point out that, less than 60 years after the Revolutionary War, US citizens were reticent to speak out against public opinion. This reluctance to take a stand for independence of thought, Hentoff implies, tends to allow the loudest individuals and groups to make decisions for the entire nation. Hentoff also demonstrates through the storyline that citizens tend to follow the path of least resistance and that they can be swayed by illogical arguments.

“I brought that Huckleberry Finn home, and my father is calling Mike today for an immediate appointment. You know, I figured Miss Baines was a decent lady, but she doesn’t give one damn about how somebody black like me feels having to read ‘n*****,’ ‘n*****,’ all the time. And not in some Klan piece of garbage, but in a school book!”

Gordon McLean expresses his discomfort and anger over the use of racial slurs in Huckleberry Finn. He criticizes Nora's use of the book, claiming she did not consider the feelings of her Black students (or disregarded them if she did). Gordon makes a logical fallacy here; he says that Nora is not a "decent lady" because of her decision to use Huckleberry Finn in class, casting judgment on her character and assuming her intentions. Both Gordon and Nora feel strongly about their positions on literary censorship, and these early lines from Gordon establishes them as opponents in the debate.

“No, that won’t work—excusing only my son from having to read the book. It wouldn’t be fair, in any case, because that book is a basic part of the course. If Gordon doesn’t read it, he’s going to know only part of what everybody else is studying. […] There is only one thing you can do, Mr. Moore. Huckleberry Finn has to be eliminated!

[…] And it has to be eliminated not only from the curriculum. That book cannot be allowed to remain in the school library for any child who may come upon it.”

Carl McLean, Gordon’s father, makes a powerful case to the principal that the offensive language in Huckleberry Finn justifies banning the book from the school. This is one of several conversations in which Carl denies any possible value in the book because of its depiction of the treatment of Black people and frequent use of racial expletives. This scene is also an example of Mike attempting to placate parents instead of following proper review protocol or standing up for the school’s educators.

“Freedom to publish is useless if people are not allowed to read what is published. And that certainly includes students. […] Show me a book that offends no one, and I will show you a book that no one, in the whole history of the world, has ever willing read. […] I am supposed to throw Huckleberry Finn out of my classroom! Have you no shame, sir? At long last, have you no shame?”

Mike, trying to avert a public controversy, attempts to coerce Nora into removing Huckleberry Finn from her history course. Their discussion evolves into a debate over the intention and reality of the right of freedom of speech. In her questions about shame, Nora paraphrases the famous challenge of US Army attorney Joseph Welch to Senator Joe McCarthy when McCarthy wrongly implied that Welch had a Communist on his staff. Disproving the assertion, Welch replied, “Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?” This quote has been cited for decades as a bulwark against those who imply guilt where there is none.

“‘You know,’ he said, ‘a teacher who acquires a public reputation for creating controversy—even with the most noble motives—injures her credibility as an emotionally dependable, fair-minded guide to the young. I would be very distressed, Miss Baines, to see you undermine your fine reputation over these many years when, after all, this simply requires a brief period of self-restraint on your part until the democratic process at George Mason is allowed to—’” 

After failing to persuade Nora to stop teaching Huckleberry Finn, Mike subtle threatens to corrupt her reputation. Mike successfully used this same tactic against Karen Salters, the former librarian. As their exchange concludes, Mike turns demeaning and condescending, implying that Nora’s strong emotions are unprovoked. He later uses similar language to denounce Karen after she reveals his unethical practices in Barney’s article.

“‘My parents don’t trust me for one second. […] I feel like I’m wearing a collar. What about you?’ […]

‘No,’ Barney said, ‘not really. I mean, so long as my grades are okay and I don’t come home walking sideways. Or upside down. They take an interest, you know, but they’re not all over me.’

‘Barney, I’d like you to come home to dinner some night,’ Gordon said, ‘and tell my folks just that.’”

This discussion between Gordon, Barney, and Luke begins with a question about whether individual freedoms are out of control. Gordon and Luke find the question ironic since they feel they have no real individual freedom. Gordon, whose father leads the charge to ban Huckleberry Finn, says his parents are completely controlling, while Barney’s parents allow him great liberty within boundaries. Hentoff uses the contrast to show that Barney, the child taught to use his freedom judicially, can be trusted to think for himself.

“No Government craziness is impossible if people just let it happen. Freedom does not come with any guarantees, you know. You can lose it just by not paying any attention to those who are taking it away from you.”

Kent Dickinson, a young ACLU attorney, addresses two classes of high school students on the importance of personal liberties, especially free speech. Dickinson holds that US exceptionalism is rooted in the individual freedoms granted in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights, liberties that no nation previously enshrined in law. Here he warns that those rights are only preserved by protecting them from zealous individuals and restrictive governments. This directly reflects Hentoff’s personal opposition to real-life city and state legislation that inhibited personal freedoms.

“That freedom to question […] is a marvelous vision. But are those who hold it out to you being honest about themselves? Do they really want you to think for yourself! […] Is it possible that while they sing you songs of freedom, they are actually preparing you for their own orthodoxy, their own standard time to which everybody must march?”

Rather than contradicting the vision of personal freedom advocated by Dickinson, Matthew Griswold, a conservative religious advocate, attacks the integrity of those who support personal freedoms. He portrays them as manipulative individuals intent on brainwashing young people into adherence to their positions. In doing so, Griswold creates a false narrative that demonizes his opponents without evidence or example. These fallacies are called Ad Hominem and Appeal to Fear (or Scare Tactics). 

“‘Who appointed you the censor?’ Luke asked.

[…] ‘I made a choice some time ago to do something about getting harmful books out of the schools, just as I would if you had rats in the basement of this school and nobody in charge here was doing anything to get rid of them. It is a citizen’s privilege, and his responsibility, to pitch in and help when something’s gone wrong with anything he supports with his taxes. […] We can all appoint ourselves, young man, and we should.’”

Griswold makes his case for having a mandate to change the curricula of George Mason High School based on his personal beliefs. Since he lacks a concrete connection to George Mason, he uses his status as a taxpayer to claim his right to challenge the decisions of educators—and to threaten to replace elected officials who do not hold his views. This is an example of the Undistributed Middle Fallacy, in which a proponent offers a conclusion which lacks a necessary logical progression from the premise: i.e., “All As are Cs. All Bs are Cs. Therefore, all As are Bs.” In Griswold’s case: “I disagree with the existing curriculum. Qualified individuals decide whether the existing curriculum is wrong. I vote for those individuals. Therefore, I am qualified to determine a suitable curriculum.”

“‘No group should have veto power over what books we can read,’ Barney volunteered.

‘Exactly.’ […] ‘Think, Kate. If Huckleberry Finn is going to be thrown out of school because it offends some black parents, what’s to stop other groups of parents from getting up their lists of books they want out of here? Catholics, Jews, feminists, antifeminists, conservatives, liberals, Greeks, Turks, Armenians. Where does it end, Kate?’”

Kate spurs this conversation with librarian Deirdre Fitzgerald concerning the suitability of Huckleberry Finn. Unlike Gordon, Kate’s complaint is the novel’s depiction of women as foolish and ignorant. Deirdre demonstrates that, regardless of an individual or group’s objection to a book, excluding any text because certain people find it unacceptable opens the door to censor any book that any group or person may find objectionable.

“‘But Miss Baines […] that word is there. All through the book. I can’t even bring myself to say that word, but good Lord, how can you expect a black child—’ Forster shook his head and then went on. ‘I know your answer, Miss Baines. Mark Twain was against slavery. But that word, that word.’”

Reuben Forster, chairman of the school board, acts out the potential comments of those involved in the upcoming review committee’s hearing. Here he practices a response to Nora’s defense of Huckleberry Finn by citing the single greatest objection to the book: the pervasive use of the n-word. Ironically, Hentoff’s characters use and discuss this word as well, putting this novel in the same category as Huckleberry Finn: a book arguing for personal liberty and complete freedom of speech, one that makes itself questionable because of its use of a racial expletive.

“‘I do think we’ll all be a lot more effective if we stay a lot more cool. And’—she turned to Nora Baines—‘if we stay less personal. This is a principle we’re fighting for. Turning everybody on the other side into a personal enemy really goes against that principle, Nora. They have a right to think as they do. They have a right to be wrong.’”

As those who favor retaining Huckleberry Finn discuss the upcoming review committee session, Deirdre cautions Nora not to malign those on the other side of the issue. The “principle” Deirdre describes is the personal freedom to believe as one wishes without penalty; in this case, being permanently vilified by Nora for voting to censor Huckleberry Finn. Deirdre asks Nora to recognize that condemning those who condemn the book is making a blanket judgment of their unworthiness, just as they have judged Twain’s novel.

“Five of the other six black students rose and moved toward the door, as did three white students, including Kate. […] McLean and the eight other students left. Miss Baines rubbed her forehead, rubbed her chin, and looked at Steve Turney, a thin, bespectacled black student who remained.

‘You want to know why I didn’t go with them?’ Turney said. ‘Simple. I haven’t made up my mind yet. I’m the only person I allow to make up my mind.’”

Gordon refuses to participate in Nora’s class as long as Huckleberry Finn is present, whether he has to study it or not. He asks others to join him, which leads to nine students exiting the room. The remaining Black student, Steve, explains he will not be coerced into making decisions. In this, he reacts against the Bandwagon Fallacy: individuals joining a movement or holding a position because others are doing so without examining the beliefs and principles espoused, which is a purely emotional response.

“Do you understand what I’m trying to tell you, Barney? In your way of putting it, I have sold out a little every once in a while in terms of the paper. But look at what I’ve saved. Look at what we have gotten in. If I stay—and I’m quite sure I won’t if you print that attack—the paper will be a lot less free than if I don’t stay.”

Maggie Crowley, the faculty advisor for the student newspaper, discusses with Barney the article he wrote criticizing Principal Mike for not supporting advocates for Huckleberry Finn. Though Maggie does not insist that Barney remove the attack, she expresses certainty that Mike will remove her as faculty advisor, which will further impede the liberty of the newspaper. Their discussion makes clear that the student paper possesses only a qualified degree of free speech. Hentoff implies here that journalists must weigh the importance of their truths against the potential consequence of greater censorship.

“‘Does the First Amendment mean that schools should be free to perpetuate racial bigotry through vicious, harmful stereotypes? If this is what the First Amendment really does mean, sir, then maybe it would be healthy for all of us to have a little less of it crammed down our throats.’

[…] If I hear you right, you’re saying that we might be better off with a little less freedom to say and write terrible things about each other. Well, that’s a mighty tempting notion. The one thing I don’t quite understand, though, is who is going to decide exactly how much of our freedom it’ll be good for us to lose.’”

This exchange begins with Kate speaking to Dickinson about the need to protect young people from the sexual and racial stereotypes in Huckleberry Finn. In response, Professor Stanley Lomax points out that the surrendering of any degree of freedom is a slippery slope that potentially removes the rights of the individual at the discretion of those in power. Lomax is an articulate Black man who points out the necessity of deciding truths for oneself. Hentoff portrays him as the adult version of Steve, who prizes independent decision. Surrendering the right to determine the truth, Lomax implies, ultimately means surrendering one’s freedom.

“‘Your organization wants morality in the schools. Well, this is a very moral boy. Despite all the pressures on him to return Jim to slavery, Huck couldn’t do it. He was too moral to do it. Don’t you see?’

‘The message of this book comes through very clearly,’ Mrs. Dennis said. ‘And that message is that a child ought to decide for himself what’s right and what’s wrong. I do not send my children to school to get that kind of teaching.’”

Deirdre attempts to explain to Mrs. Nancy Dennis, a member of Parents for Moral Schools, the development of Huck Finn’s character that leads him to understand that the legal and proper action—returning Jim to slavery—is wrong. Huck displays the highest morality, something he had never been taught. Confronted with the suggestion that the novel implies children can make morally sound decisions on their own, Nancy states that she does not want her children to think for themselves—she wants them to obey her. In this, Nancy emulates the exact oppressive authority Huckleberry Finn stands against.

“Under your so-called solution, I am forbidden to assign this book to my students—no matter how strongly I believe, in my professional judgment, that it is important for their education that they read this book. […] The next thing I know, I shall have to present you, and Mr. and Mrs. Dennis, and God knows who else in this town, with a list of books for each of my courses before I am allowed to enter the classroom. PRESERVATION OF AMERICAN VALUES! Good God, sir, are you an agent of the Soviet Union?”

Nora is furious about Griswold’s idea to sequester Huckleberry Finn within the school while banning it from the classroom. She points out that hiding the novel will result in self-appointed censors—who are not educators, historians, or literary scholars—appropriating the right to decide appropriate curricula for the classroom. Nora points out the irony that Griswold’s organization, The Citizen’s League for the Preservation of American Values, supports the suppression–censorship–of books. Her accusation implies that this is characteristic of the Soviet Union, not America.

. “The best weapon against fools is to make them look as foolish as they are. And the biggest fool—as well as the biggest coward in all of this—is Mr. Moore. He could have turned this all around if he forcefully reminded people, especially the review committee, what a school is for. It’s for opening the minds of the young—not locking up books. But he doesn’t know what a school is for.”

Here, former librarian Karen Salters tells Barney the truth of her departure and condemns the principal’s behavior. She believes that schools are meant to teach young people to open their minds. This echoes Deirdre’s statement to Nancy about Huck Finn learning to think for himself, Barney’s affirmation that his parents allow him the freedom to learn, and Steve’s decision to judge Huckleberry Finn for himself. This passage also highlights Hentoff’s observation that educators are weakened when administrators do not support them.

“‘Is this story libelous, Mr. Moore?’

‘I just told you,’ Moore said. ‘It holds the school up to ridicule, and it holds me up to ridicule.’

‘But even if a story holds someone up to ridicule […] it’s libelous only if it’s not true. […] Are you saying this story is untrue?’”

Principal Mike attempts to prevent Barnie and Maggie from printing their interview with Karen, infringing on the freedom of the press (and, by extension, their freedom of speech). Despite having constitutional rights on their side, Barney and Maggie recognize that Mike is ruthless, so they must be ruthless in return. They know that Mike cannot truly reject the article as libel because Karen told the truth, but they must be prepared for the consequences of publishing the interview and placing Mike in a precarious position. Earlier, Maggie urged Barney to sacrifice truth for freedom; now, she recognizes that taking a principled stand has become necessary, regardless of the personal cost.

“‘Dad, do you think he’ll get away with acting as if none of it ever happened?’

‘Nope,’ his father said. ‘He smiles too much when he lies. […] Besides, it’s going to get to the folks around here that Moore isn’t really answering Karen Salters’s charges. […] Folks around here aren’t stupid. They’ll see through that unctuous hypocrite.’

‘Maybe,’ said Barney’s mother. ‘Or else they’ll run that unctuous hypocrite for Congress.’”

Barney is astonished when Mike lies in a nationally televised news interview, saying he never tried to stop the story from being published and implying that Karen lives in a dream world of books separated from reality. Barney’s dad predicts that local residents will see through Mike’s façade, while Barney’s mother suggests that such a consummate liar might end up in Congress. Hentoff implies that untruthful statements and manipulative machinations are the currency of lawmakers, and that the general public are inclined to support those whose statements align with their preferences, regardless of fact.

“Kate was saying that the state must teach what is right and therefore must exclude from the classroom and the library all ideas that are wrong, that might poison students’ minds. Well, with all respect to Kate, this is the educational philosophy of dictatorships. It must not be ours. In our system, it should not be the role of teachers or librarians or principals to restrict ideas but rather to illuminate and analyze them, good and bad, so that students learn how to do that for themselves for the rest of their lives.”

As the publicity over the controversy grows national, the major figures are interviewed on national TV: Here, Deirdre responds to Kate’s idea that schools should protect students from immoral or offensive content. Deirdre posits that schools are meant to apprise students of the variety of ideas in the world and provide them with the intellectual tools to weigh these concepts. This returns to Hentoff’s theme of The Purpose of School; through Deirdre, he states that education means exposing students to the world and empowering them to evaluate all they learn.

“…the way to fight censorship—not only here, but anywhere—is to let the whole story hang out, from the moment of the first attack, so that it gets in the papers and on television and on radio. Again and again and again. The reason Mighty Mike got away with locking up books before is that he did it in the dark. […] The censors can’t stand light.”

These comments from Nora follow Karen’s belief that fighting fools means exposing their folly. Nora mentions the extent forms of media in 1982, reminding the reader that this novel is set before the advent of the internet and social media platforms. Modern-day media platforms enhance the public’s awareness of various issues; however, they must also contend with the rapid spread of misinformation, which is exceedingly difficult to combat.

“…I do not believe that all the people complaining about this book have read it all. If they had, and if they can read, they wouldn’t have been saying what they said about it. Second, many of those complaining about this book say they want to protect me, as a black person, from certain words in this book. Well, it is too late to do that for me. I have already seen and heard those words. And since they are not new to me, and believe me they are not, I know when those words—I mean particularly ‘n*****’—are directed at me.”

As the support for the retention of Huckleberry Finn grows, Steve delivers these lines to seal the victory for supporters of freedom of speech. In doing so, Steve displays the lengthy, systematic exposition of The Day They Came to Arrest the Book’s real intent and virtues. Steve confronts the book’s critics as ill-informed moral crusaders focused on the wrong issues. He is Hentoff’s example of the rational, free-thinking young person in whom education achieves its highest purpose.