Forum
Please register! If you are registered, please log inagain !
[NB: your old dvd forums / digitalfix login will not work]
I think it's as well having a separate thread for this. Publishers Puffin books have seen fit to censor certain works by Roald Dahl. Predictably, some instances of this censorship are to prevent us all getting worked up over gender - in this instance of small, entirely fictional and fantastical factory staff. But when words like 'fat' and 'ugly' are removed from well-loved children's books because they are apparently corrupting the minds of our little darlings, we don't need to sit up and take notice, we need to stand up and shout NO!
Dahl was apparently a racist and anti-semite. I don't use the word 'apparently' because I dispute that, I just haven't read up on it in any detail. And one must wonder if this is the only reason Puffin are doing this. Okay, he had objectionable opinions. All that needs to be done if they wish to highlight that, is to put a disclaimer on the cover of all future Dahl publications by Puffin and allow potential readers to make their own minds up. The way they do with repeats of politically incorrect old tv shows. There - job done. They've made their point and they can carry on making profits from publishing the stories.
So they want to stamp out the word 'black'. I grew up reading books and comics and watching films in which the baddies traditionally wore black, and the goodies white. It didn't make me think black men were bad - or, if you're been battered senseless with the woke stick, it didn't cause me to harbour negative thoughts about anyone of African origin, whatever their gender and sexual orientation. It's 'baddies wear black, goodies wear white', not 'baddies are black, goodies are white'. As simple as that. Let's credit our children with enough sense to grow up and not think the white folks are saints, and the black folks devils. Let them think that certain witches in their stories are fat old hags.
It's just common sense to oppose Puffin and any other (as there surely will be) self-appointed moral guardian jumping on this bandwagon. Because if you don't, you must go through every single published work there is, for any age, and remove any word or description that somebody somewhere might, in any circumstance you can think of, find ever so slightly offensive. Not just the ones written by dead racists. And to be on the safe side, you'd better ban Star Wars because Vader wears black and Leia wears a white dress.
It's interesting to look at the list of books banned by various countries at various times - some of them are of the time - Lady Chatterley's Lover, Lolita, Ulysses many political Marx, Hitler or indirectly political - Orwell etc, Some are odd Jayne Eyre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments
But better than the very selective lists you see in America - either at school or district level - which are very politically motivated - Newspeak here we come (with a touch of groupthink) - it's all doubleplusgood!
Ah, more from the conservative outrage machine. There are millions of copies of the original Dahl books. They can be found every-bloody-where. Is anyone currently burning them? Have they been removed from libraries? Are they actually "banned" in any way? Who cares, it's just something to be upset about.
Yes, this is such a minor news story that I barely care either way.
It makes sense to me to update old children's books to better reflect today's attitudes, to make them more relatable (and saleable), but Puffin seem to have gone a bit far this time. But personally, I'm really not that bothered.
BY FAR the bigger problem is the newspapers stirring up outrage for clicks, and not having to retract their lies (whatever happened after Leveson? Did anything really change?)
James O'brien's phone-in about Dahl/Puffin is interesting, and his viewpoint might surprise one or two of you (the whole ep is good, but this issue starts about 40mins from the end) ...
Irony?
Where does JO'B cause outrage in the same way as the UK tabloid press? Do you seriously think they are comparable?
Of course, he speaks passionately about the many things that wind him up, which is often the Tory govt and Brexit, so the only people he outrages are the few remaining Brexiters and the occasional Boris fan. When he goes viral, it's not for any outrage but due to him wrapping a caller in knots.
this is such a minor news story
I dont think it's minor at all, and literature, for children or otherwise, should not be censored or 'updated'. Publish as written, or leave it alone. If this catches on (but I don't think it will) it's a green light for selective rewriting of pretty much any text to fit agendas.
I do wonder how much of this was just a PR exercise.
I can't see that. You'd want a PR exercise to generate good publicity, especially if you're a big publisher of children's books. I think it was just spectacular naivety, not foreseeing such a negative backlash. Although two separate editions is far more sensible, I still think it's unnecessary, and I wouldn't be at all surprised in a few years to see the sanitised editions discontinued following poor sales, and sensitivity readers where they belong, in proper jobs.
A rush of people trying to buy the non-edited versions before they're gone, and others falling over themselves to show how progressive they are by buying the new versions.
A rush of people trying to buy the non-edited versions before they're gone, and others falling over themselves to show how progressive they are by buying the new versions.
Or the vast majority not giving a toss that a small number of words have been changed.
