The censoring of Roald Dahl

[Trollheart]

Comments?

Roald Dahl books changed to remove "offensive" words

[Toy Revolver]

Comments?

Roald Dahl books changed to remove "offensive" words

you make knives dull enough and they become spoons

[Janszoon]

Comments?

Roald Dahl books changed to remove "offensive" words

I think my main comment would be: who gives a shit?

[Toy Revolver]

people who care about the sanctity of literature

don't ban books don't burn books don't change the words

it's important and always wrong

[jimmy jazz]

Comments?

Roald Dahl books changed to remove "offensive" words

I read most of his books as kid and loved them. I can't remember anything offensive in them.

Removing the word 'fat' is pathetic really, if I remember correctly in either The Twits or Matilda it was the wife that was fat and the husband that was skinny and he was described as such, I wonder if that was removed also.

[Guybrush]

If you start cleaning up Roald Dahl, where do you stop? There's adult on child violence and various nasty things.

I don't worry so much about them being edited as long as the books very clearly state that this has been done. In other words, I would like to be able to find the X-rated snapshot-of-that-time immoral children's book if I want it.

There are so many children stories and authors who I'm sure would love not to have to compete with the long dead for readers. Can't they just read those authors' books instead?

[Toy Revolver]

I don't worry so much about them being edited as long as the books very clearly state that this has been done. In other words, I would like to be able to find the X-rated snapshot-of-that-time immoral children's book if I want it.

i was thinking that too but even children's books need edges - if you want kids to read the experience needs some sauce

[Guybrush]

Of course. My kids love spooky, weird stuff (much like their dad) and I don't mind. What I think is generally important is separating fact from fiction and separating humour from values. That doesn't mean you should joke about anything, but you should generally be allowed to laugh at things that are horrible. I believe it's healthy to be able to sometimes laugh at absurdity and tragedy.

Some people seem to think laughing at something means condoning whatever it is that made you laugh. I'd be in trouble then, having just enjoyed Meet the Feebles 

The scene in Matilda comes to mind where the teacher picks up the girl by her pig tails and throws her out of the schoolyard.

[Marie Monday]

I don't worry so much about them being edited as long as the books very clearly state that this has been done. In other words, I would like to be able to find the X-rated snapshot-of-that-time immoral children's book if I want it.

i was thinking that too but even children's books need edges - if you want kids to read the experience needs some sauce

yes, and also I don't think it's healthy to only feed a child books that pretend no bad or messy things exist.

I agree books shouldn't be edited (although I also agree it's not that bad when the editing is clearly declared somewhere). And with Roald Dahl I don't even see why one would want to do that (from what I can remember). His books contain violence and macabre things but in a way that the average kid can cope with just fine; I think censoring stuff like that is a kind of gross moral prudishness. The main issue with his books is that they're often just mean-spirited (because from what I know, the guy himself was like that) but in the exact same petty way that every child also is and recognises as such. I don't believe it will negatively influence a child, if anything it will relieve them to know adults can be like that too.

This doesn't justify panic about 'wokeness going too far' though. Right-wing media just seizes on anything like this and then amplifies it, takes it out of context and screams about it, making it all sound much worse than it is. Thats why so many men scream about 'wokeness' like it's the biggest threat to their existence, even though they've never personally had any issues from it and there are plenty of actual threats in their lives

[Toy Revolver]

it's not just roseanne being taken off her own show or these books being censored or a professor being forced to apologize when he did nothing wrong or a great journalist being fired or hate forest being removed from spotify or the turner diaries not being available hardly anywhere or a kid losing his scholarship for rapping along with a song or a popular tv cooking personality from kentucky losing her show

obviously it's the collective

when other people start having a say on what i have access to i take that seriously and i'm glad there's a conservative backlash against it - liberals should be for free speech as well and not just in the confines of the first amendment - and nods to the fact that the right are the most dangerous aggressors against free speech and thought but being less egregious than your opponent doesn't get you a pass

[Guybrush]

It's weird how in the US, this censorship seems associated with the left and liberals (?). How is it liberal to be for censorship?

If I Google the definition of liberal, this comes up immediately:

willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas.

Here in Norway, I consider myself a leftist liberal. But to me, that also means I'd defend others right to hold and express views that I find offensive.

[Janszoon]

In the US it's just right wing cranks who like to accuse the left of censorship. Meanwhile, it's the right who is actually trying ban stuff. 

[Toy Revolver]

How is it liberal to be for censorship?

a lot of younger people feel that personal and psychological safety and comfort trumps hate speech and they claim that it's not censorship unless the state explicitly bans it

[Trollheart]

Does anyone doubt Fat Albert will be next? Or Ugly Betty? I mean, once this starts where the hell does it stop? I do worry about this; it's not a case of who's doing it but why it has to be done. Why can't things just be left as they are? It's like a whitewashing/revising of history and/or fiction. Are we trying to pretend the attitudes (as such) espoused in harmless children's books never existed? Did one kid never call another fat, or skinny, or specky? All our kids are perfect paragons of nature, are they?

[Janszoon]

Does anyone doubt Fat Albert will be next? Or Ugly Betty? I mean, once this starts where the hell does it stop? I do worry about this; it's not a case of who's doing it but why it has to be done. Why can't things just be left as they are? It's like a whitewashing/revising of history and/or fiction. Are we trying to pretend the attitudes (as such) espoused in harmless children's books never existed? Did one kid never call another fat, or skinny, or specky? All our kids are perfect paragons of nature, are they?

You realize the story you posted is about a publisher trying to sell more books, right?