[News] Roald Dahl being updated for modern times

[JetsetJimbo]

What seems to be missing from much of this debate is an acknowledgement that this is being done by the Dahl estate, not some shadowy Government Institute of PC Wokery or whatever, and it's being done to keep the books marketable to new audiences with views that differ from those that prevailed at the time the books were written. They're doing it because they want people to keep buying Roald Dahl books, it's that simple.

In other words, what the Telegraph, GBeebies, et. al. are complaining hysterically about is literally just capitalism and the free market at work.

 

[worthingseagull123]

About time to be honest, rather than totally binning his works, a little tweak here and there, bob's ya uncle, everyone's happy.
I must admit whilst reading my daughter some Beatrix Potter a few years ago, I felt somewhat uncomfortable with the amount of times violence that was unleashed on the poor bunnies by their mother, So much so I had too explain was common place when the story was written and sadly your grandfather also unleashed on us and thankfully we have moved on and this kind of behaviour is deemed unacceptable now.

I am so sorry that reading a childrens book was so traumatic.

You stay stong.

 

[chickens]

The only people making this decision are the publishers doing it for commercial reasons with permission of the owners of the intellectual rights.

Many books do have changes over time with various editions, often changes made by the author - it's their work, if it is going to another print run, then they can do what they like with it. Arthur C Clarke for example was often changing his science fiction novels decades after the original publication for new editions as the world of science changed around him.

Absolutely, and I’ve no objections to changes made by the author between editions because we can have confidence they are true to the author’s vision for the work.

I’m sure those making the edits are largely competent and well-meaning, but I do believe that we are at risk of whitewashing our past, and anyone who is then exposed to unedited material from past times will be potentially both unprepared and disbelieving of the manner in which people spoke/behaved.

The above could in itself be weaponised by conspiracy theorists as evidence that certain texts are not authentic.

To my mind, if I were to read from Chaucer forward to now, I should get the flavour of the times I was reading about from the texts, they shouldn’t all be homogenous. We shouldn’t lose sight of who we were, to appease who we are now. Let texts fade and be replaced in popular consciousness, and then they’re still there for those who wish to look back at them.

 

[Insel affe]

I am so sorry that reading a childrens book was so traumatic.

You stay stong.

Condescending prick

 

[The Clamp]

Seems like a fair solution...

Genuine LOL
That’s really tickled me.

 

[brightn'ove]

Hmm I wonder who is going to be upset about this

 

[Icy Gull]

Genuine LOL
That’s really tickled me.

Should I ask my granddaughter to read this preface out loud before she starts reading the book to me?

 

[TugWilson]

You cant sanitize everything to suit the easily offended and those who choose to be offended on someone else`s behalf , and when you do , very soon the new version becomes offensive to a different group of people so you`re back where you started .

As said above leave the original and offer an alternative , otherwise we end up with history being changed such as the Americans breaking the Enigma code .

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.
- George Orwell, 1984

Poignant.

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

Extract from Penguin mission statement:
"...we fiercely protect our authors’ intellectual property and champion freedom of expression, ensuring that their voices carry beyond the page and into the folds of communities and societies around the globe."

Until we don't...

Until it suits a very weird narrative in the modern era.

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

Condescending prick

He is right though. It is a children’s books ffs.

 

[The Clamp]

Will I still be able to buy snozcumbers?

 

[Bold Seagull]

What seems to be missing from much of this debate is an acknowledgement that this is being done by the Dahl estate, not some shadowy Government Institute of PC Wokery or whatever, and it's being done to keep the books marketable to new audiences with views that differ from those that prevailed at the time the books were written. They're doing it because they want people to keep buying Roald Dahl books, it's that simple.

In other words, what the Telegraph, GBeebies, et. al. are complaining hysterically about is literally just capitalism and the free market at work.

There's a hammer, there's the head of a nail.

 

[albion534]

I am so sorry that reading a childrens book was so traumatic.

You stay stong.

Never seen so many snowflakes crying over a few words being changed. If changing the language brings new readers. Fantastic

 

[Bold Seagull]

Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.
- George Orwell, 1984

Sadly George Orwell died quite young at 46 in 1950. As of 2020 his works were largely out of copyright. Some of the publishers still have copyright within time-frames from publication of certain editions, nevertheless there is a bit of a free for all around his work with 1984 and Animal Farm being able to be knocked out in any old version, and anyone being able to take creative liberties with adaptions for computer games, films, musicals or whatever else takes their fancy.

You know what they say, capitalism is always right.

 

[hart's shirt]

Far better Dahl books in their original or slightly amended forms than the deluge of poor quality children's books written by celebrities that 'feel that they have a book in them' which capture attention and deny marketing budgets to full-time authors dependent on them for income.

The bigger argument is not whether it's right to update books or not, but rather whether children are being encouraged to read a variety of texts and whether the closure of libraries due to funding cuts can ever be justified.

There's little point in complaining about the content of books if kids can't access them in the first place.

 

[beorhthelm]

...
To my mind, if I were to read from Chaucer forward to now, I should get the flavour of the times I was reading about from the texts, they shouldn’t all be homogenous. We shouldn’t lose sight of who we were, to appease who we are now. Let texts fade and be replaced in popular consciousness, and then they’re still there for those who wish to look back at them.

exactly. removing "fat" might not be that important, might have some context lost. the changes to eradicate Kipling is more concerning, as the replacement, Austen, is not the same type of author or writing similar stories. this changes something about the character.

 

[Curious Orange]

This pretty much nails it.

Imagine there being nuance in the culture wars.

There are only labels in the culture war.

 

[worthingseagull123]

Condescending prick

I wasn’t wrong though.

Stay strong. The nasty Bunny mother can’t harm you.

 

[Insel affe]

I wasn’t wrong though.

Stay strong. The nasty Bunny mother can’t harm you.

You did not get it did you, my daughter asked why the mother was beating the children, I explained that is what happened back in the day when the book was written, it was acceptable to beat your children, and I was beaten and abused as a child in a foster home in Worthing and at home.

That is why I felt uncomfortable, not because I am woke, I think you would find I am one of the least woke people you could meet.

have a good one.