|
|
Post by John Green on Feb 19, 2023 19:23:32 GMT
"Yesterday, the Telegraph reported on how new editions of classic children’s books by Roald Dahl are being published after substantial alterations made according to the urges of a morbid and absurd class of people known as sensitivity readers. The Telegraph reports: Language related to weight, mental health, violence, gender and race has been cut and rewritten. Remember the Cloud-Men in James and the Giant Peach? They are now the Cloud-People. The Small Foxes in Fantastic Mr Fox are now female. In Matilda, a mention of Rudyard Kipling has been cut and Jane Austen added. It’s Roald Dahl, but different. It’s important to be clear that these changes are not just presumptuous and self-entitled — they patently degrade the quality of the text. Witness how Dahl’s mild comic surrealism gives way to a joyless lecture.... No one would deny that Dahl was a rather scabrous and even sadistic writer. But part of the fun of reading him, as a child, is grappling with the darkness — beginning to comprehend the shadows one has glimpsed around the world. These small-souled artistic vandals are flattening out those interesting quirks in the grip of a paralysing fear that someone, somewhere might read it and then take or give offence. If Roald Dahl cannot even say that Mrs Trunchbull has a horsey face — because nobody has unsightly features or because we are forbidden from noticing them — what else could be changed? If books like Matilda and films like Gone With the Wind are being sliced and diced, what could happen to less famous and more genuinely provocative media? Hell, look at how Dahl’s publishers have decided that authors as illustrious as Joseph Conrad and Rudyard Kipling — referenced in Matilda but now replaced with Jane Austen and John Steinbeck — are too dangerous to even mention in front of kids." Thanks for the link, John. |
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 19, 2023 20:37:33 GMT
This is a subject that’s come up here before, and I don’t think there’s an answer that will please everyone.
I generally take the view that I’m not bothered about things like the watershed or warnings about content, etc but I’d like to make my own decision as to whether to watch, read, etc something. For the record I don’t like excessive violence or gore, but wouldn’t ban/edit them.
Things do change though. I think Agatha Christie’s biggest selling novel is probably “And then there were none” which has had a number of titles over the years, I won’t put the original UK title here! It’s probably for the best that it’s not known by that any more as it would unnecessarily distract from a good story.
There is a danger in trying to sanitise, I was gonna say whitewash!, the past. It was a different country and some things are definitely better now. Historical literature, film - and TV, can give us a window, and provide an insight into, the past.
As an example I’ll use the Sherlock Holmes story, I think, “The Blue Carbuncle”. A hat is handed in to 221B Baker Street and Holmes makes various deductions about its owner, one of which is that he was very intelligent. The reasoning was large hat -> big head -> big brain -> very intelligent. That’s essentially Eugenics which was popular across quite a wide spectrum of society until WW2. I first encountered that at school, many years ago, when we studied that story in, I think, Eng. Lit. We discussed it in class and as we could all think of smart people with small heads we agreed that the Great Detective hadn’t been right in that aspect. The teacher explained that it had been a popular late Victorian idea but didn’t mention Eugenics, probably because there wasn’t time. I only joined up the dots much later. That aspect of Holmes’ reasoning could be relatively easily edited out, and probably not noticed, but it’s part of the environment Holmes, or rather Conan Doyle, lived in and can be used as a subtle educational tool.
|
|
|
|
Post by sonnybh on Feb 19, 2023 21:31:49 GMT
The Sherlock Holmes story The Cardboard Box was controversial at the time it was published for featuring an infidelity, & wasn't reprinted for a time, but one of the more popular passages was added to later printings of one of the other stories.
From what I remember when things had calmed down The Cardboard Box was included in the short story collections but had the borrowed passage replaced by some different text.
These days the original texts have been reprinted in the most recent collection, the ones I have seem to be this way.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 20, 2023 10:20:38 GMT
The Sherlock Holmes story The Cardboard Box was controversial at the time it was published for featuring an infidelity, & wasn't reprinted for a time, but one of the more popular passages was added to later printings of one of the other stories. From what I remember when things had calmed down The Cardboard Box was included in the short story collections but had the borrowed passage replaced by some different text. These days the original texts have been reprinted in the most recent collection, the ones I have seem to be this way. |
|
|
|
Post by mattg on Feb 20, 2023 11:42:20 GMT
It should also be noted that in a time in which Dahl’s egregious descriptive style is now allegedly ‘problematic’ and outdated the stylistically similar Horrible Histories continues to thrive across multiple mediums. HH of course has been hugely successful in conveying to children the gorier aspects of human history as well as the many infamous personalities responsible in a fun, irreverent thus accessible fashion that Dahl’s fans would immediately recognise. The justifications cited for this pathetic attempt at ‘purifying’ Dahl’s work just don’t pass scrutiny. Not that Puffin cares of course. Regardless, as censorship increasingly impacts the arts, creative impetus and indeed western society itself it’s disheartening to observe many simply content to bury their heads in the proverbial sand in denial. Perhaps the first step to acknowledging a problem that ultimately affects us all is to recognise it as transcendent of petty tribalism of ‘Conservative vs Liberal’ of which many myopically persist in defining it by…  |
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,717
|
Post by RWels on Feb 20, 2023 12:16:55 GMT
It should also be noted that in a time in which Dahl’s egregious descriptive style is now allegedly ‘problematic’ and outdated the stylistically similar Horrible Histories continues to thrive across multiple mediums. HH of course has been hugely successful in conveying to children the gorier aspects of human history as well as the many infamous personalities responsible in a fun, irreverent thus accessible fashion that Dahl’s fans would immediately recognise. The justifications cited for this pathetic attempt at ‘purifying’ Dahl’s work just don’t pass scrutiny. Not that Puffin cares of course. Regardless, as censorship increasingly impacts the arts, creative impetus and indeed western society itself it’s disheartening to observe many simply content to bury their heads in the proverbial sand in denial. Perhaps the first step to acknowledging a problem that ultimately affects us all is to recognise it as transcendent of petty tribalism of ‘Conservative vs Liberal’ of which many myopically persist in defining it by… Ehm yeah exactly. I hear that some idiot in Florida is just as keen on banning books, just for different reasons. It seems more a tug of war to impose one's will, rather than a true case by case basis as it should be. |
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 20, 2023 12:37:10 GMT
It may be relevant that Netflix, I believe, now own the rights to Dahl and are presumably looking to capitalise on the name to attract viewers to their streaming service. The problem we have nowadays is that a very tiny number of complaints can cause large organisations to react.
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,717
|
Post by RWels on Feb 20, 2023 20:28:13 GMT
It may be relevant that Netflix, I believe, now own the rights to Dahl and are presumably looking to capitalise on the name to attract viewers to their streaming service. The problem we have nowadays is that a very tiny number of complaints can cause large organisations to react. Surely these humble people are speaking for everyone though(!)! |
|
|
|
Post by garygraham on Feb 20, 2023 20:41:33 GMT
A missed opportunity. They could leave it alone and add a section at the end discussing how times have moved on. Educational and interesting for kids... Whereas it's quite dishonest to censor some books but not others.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 20, 2023 23:38:28 GMT
It may be relevant that Netflix, I believe, now own the rights to Dahl and are presumably looking to capitalise on the name to attract viewers to their streaming service. The problem we have nowadays is that a very tiny number of complaints can cause large organisations to react. Surely these humble people are speaking for everyone though(!)! With many things the polls suggest otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 21, 2023 0:33:22 GMT
A missed opportunity. They could leave it alone and add a section at the end discussing how times have moved on. Educational and interesting for kids... Whereas it's quite dishonest to censor some books but not others. I agree, things move on and we have to accept that. There almost seems to be an aim not to offend, or risk offending, anyone. It inevitably means that virtually all characterisation and description has to go. Describe someone as, say, “intelligent and quick witted” and you’ve, supposedly, alienated all those who are thick and can’t think on their feet. Describe them as “tall, dark and handsome” and you’ve ****ed off the short, blond and ugly. What’s forgotten is escapism. Many would like to be the Doctor piloting - sometimes! - the Tardis, opening locked doors with the sonic screwdriver and triumphing over the baddies by the end of the programme, but we never will. Or Sherlock Holmes recognising ash as being from a particular brand of cigar - that only the villain smoked - and putting the pieces of the jigsaw together to help Inspector Lestrade make an arrest. There’s so much “wrong” there! Holmes is a white, western male. Smoking is a big no-no and it’s bad to show the police up as unimaginative plodders! When I was young I was taught that sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me. In those days you’d go crying to your mother that something wasn’t fair, and be told that the world wasn’t fair. Many years ago I spent ages in a library - no internet then! - finding the quote, attributed to Voltaire: “I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it”. Nowadays if someone whose views, actual or alleged, offend some, is simply going to be in a building there are likely to be protests and calls for them to be banned for causing “harm”. The answer to those who objected to certain things on TV used to be to remind them that there’s an “off” button, you don’t have to go to a cinema or theatre - and pay! - to see a film or play you disagree with. Voting with your feet is actually a very powerful weapon, if something doesn’t get an audience it won’t survive - go woke, go broke! |
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,717
|
Post by RWels on Feb 21, 2023 8:02:10 GMT
Surely these humble people are speaking for everyone though(!)! With many things the polls suggest otherwise. Actually, we may be wrong about that. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/20/roald-dahl-industry-classics-parentsIt's suggested that it's purely a calculated business decision, that is made to keep a generation of parents onboard. For parents read buyers, whose money is the most important thing obviously. But, apparently (if the publishers have got their resaerch right) there are enough parents then who would not buy it. If so, then from a devil's advocate perspective, you can see where the publisher gets the idea. |
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 21, 2023 11:23:59 GMT
With many things the polls suggest otherwise. Actually, we may be wrong about that. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/20/roald-dahl-industry-classics-parentsIt's suggested that it's purely a calculated business decision, that is made to keep a generation of parents onboard. For parents read buyers, whose money is the most important thing obviously. But, apparently (if the publishers have got their resaerch right) there are enough parents then who would not buy it. If so, then from a devil's advocate perspective, you can see where the publisher gets the idea. There are always going to be some in favour of almost anything. |
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 21, 2023 12:17:19 GMT
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,717
|
Post by RWels on Feb 21, 2023 13:33:35 GMT
Is that a worthwhile link to open? Or is it just people bashing it without any more background or analysis?
|
|
