There’s a proxy war in Ukraine, food stocks are being compromised, etc

[64]

what gets right wingers and Tories most riled this last week,if my social media friends are anything to go by?
Roald Dahl being slightly rewritten for modern tastes

[Deereyme66]

Agree with that. What’s the problem with a few bits being edited to be more inclusive and stop certain children feeling bad about themselves?

What’s the subject title including the lamentable ‘proxy war’ trope got to do with it though?

[Siderite]

Some of the edits to Dahl make no sense and we should be wary of works being edited for personal taste.

[Siderite]

Deereyme66 wrote:

Agree with that. What’s the problem with a few bits being edited to be more inclusive and stop certain children feeling bad about themselves?

What’s the subject title including the lamentable ‘proxy war’ trope got to do with it though?

It’s part of the lefty conspiracy theorising about how the west are actively trying to distract from its evil interfering, which in this case is apparently helping Ukraine from being invaded (sorry, attacking the poor, provoked state of Russia), with meaningless culture war fluff. Except it’s hardly ahead of Ukraine in the news.

[Deereyme66]

Oh, I see. Too convoluted IMO then. Unsupported, unsubstantiated inferences and conspiracy. Just comes across as ‘here’s what’s really going on!’ nonsense a teenager might come out with.

[Siderite]

From a more gracious interpretation it could be because the Russian military are heavily reliant on Iranian and potentially Chinese support for supplies. In which case I would make a pre-emptive apology to some degree; I’d quibble about the definition, but I’d respect the heart being in the right place more. However, I am suspicious about those like 64 who seem more bothered about the west and many on that part of the left do see Ukraine as being like a puppet state of the USA, while disregarding that the armies on the ground are Ukrainians fighting on their own means and not as agents of NATO.

[64]

Siderite wrote:

Some of the edits to Dahl make no sense and we should be wary of works being edited for personal taste.

It’s a private company thinking it can sell it better this way,not a Government edict though

[Siderite]

I couldn’t care less whether it’s public or private. I’m not making a rant against the public sector or government. I am not some right wing libertarian attacking big state interference, not by a long shot. I am against anyone altering the work of someone else like this.

[Deereyme66]

Siderite wrote:

Some of the edits to Dahl make no sense and we should be wary of works being edited for personal taste.

Which edited bits make no sense to you Siderite? The ones I’ve seen, I don’t see a problem with them being changed. Some pretty nasty words and phrasing that I wouldn’t welcome young impressionable children picking up and repeating, particularly to other children. Bullying starts early at school, so do mental health issues associated with physical appearance in younger people. Also, it’s Roald Dahl’s books for children, not War and Peace. I don’t have an issue with it within reason. Also, I’m not aware the editing reason is ‘personal taste’.

[Siderite]

The bits where they’re making mother, father, brother and sister gender neutral. Needless; there is nothing offensive about biological sexes. Making it so we can’t use specific language to be ‘inclusive’ just makes language clunkier, as it is in this case. I am not convinced by the idea that Dahl books could make kids bully. It’s too reminiscent of conservative scaremongering about video games and violence.

It shouldn’t matter about the quality of the work. Some faceless bureau editing works without the author’s consent is concerning.

[Deereyme66]

‘The bits where they’re making mother, father, brother and sister gender neutral.’

Wasn’t aware of those. I’d agree, that’s needless. I’m not saying I think Dahl books could make kids bully per se. Not sure any one factor could. But I can see how some of the words and phrasing could be repeated. Tbh, it’s not a huge issue to me that they’ve been edited. Is all the hoo har from The Telegraph and prolific figures really justified?

[Northumbiron]

Can’t fully agree with you Deerey.

As a teacher and parent (hopefully not too long a grandparent!) it’s the grossness of the language in Dahl’s books that makes them so attractive to kids. It’s the hero/heroine versus the hideous monster.

You can date it back to Perseus and the Gorgon, Beowulf and Grendel, George and the Dragon. Children are nasty little so and sos at the best of times. In my experience Dahl’s books got kids reading and that has to be a good thing.

You wouldn’t edit Shakespeare to make Bottom less ass-like, would you?

The language is just fine as it is.

6 users thanked author for this post.

Lord Kitchener, Just Iron, Iron-awe, Heath, Siderite, Deereyme66

[Deereyme66]

Yes, I’d agree with that, on the whole. Still think it’s being blown out of proportion. I can understand if that might seem contradictory

[Siderite]

I agree with you, NI, and well put. It might not be the biggest issue in the world right now, but it’s worthy of some note. I mostly don’t read the rags, but on BBC the food shortages and Ukraine have eclipsed it by some way, so I don’t see the argument by 64 that it’s distraction. If it is, it’s failing.

I like living in a liberal society, with freedoms. That includes the freedom to enjoy what books we like, within reason. I understand there needs to be limits for explicit racism, misogyny and hate speech, but I don’t think Dahl’s books cross the line. Sanitising his work just seems wrong and against what he’d want, which seems important given he’s the author of already published books. I imagine these newly sanitised edited books wouldn’t sell as well if released in place of the originals.

None of this means I am blind to the faults of Dahl or his views. I think he held some horrible views; he was undoubtedly a racist, sexist and anti-Semite. I disagree with some aspects of his books, but I am uncomfortable with sitting as the almighty judge on what children should consume. There’s another aspect in that if we sanitise all the uncomfortable aspects of the past, we lose focus on why it’s so wrong. If Dahl’s work loses that it is hard to argue that there are problematic aspects, because people will look at it and think there’s nothing bad there, making the past seem rosier than it was.

[Siderite]

I have just seen that Puffin will still sell the classic prints alongside the new. I accept that. Though, part of me wonders if this was all some marketing scheme to generate attention and drive up sales. No evidence, so I am categorically not saying this conspiracy has any validity, but it’s maybe more likely than some of the wacky conspiracies out there.

[Deereyme66]

Having a change of heart on this reading your points on this NI and Siderite, plus the view of the better half and the youngest.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Siderite

[Northumbiron]

As a footnote I’d say that kids become bullies by watching other bullies rather than by reading books.

Usually in the books the bullies get their come-uppance. And that’s particularly true of the Dahl stories.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Heath, Deereyme66, Iron-awe, Siderite

[Deereyme66]

True

[Author]

Posts