[News] Roald Dahl being updated for modern times

[GT49er]

...as long as it does involve any sort of criticism of the government of course

.....and as long as it doesn't cause a certain very sensitive (and sadly on the rise) sector of society to faint and reach for their smelling salts.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

.....and as long as it doesn't cause a certain very sensitive (and sadly on the rise) sector of society to faint and reach for their smelling salts.

Is that the people who are sensitive about some words being changed in a book?

 

[giveusfalmerplease]

About time to be honest, rather than totally binning his works, a little tweak here and there, bob's ya uncle, everyone's happy.

Of course in today's mad PC world you can't even say Bob's your uncle, could just as easily be your Aunt, or gender neutral father's sibling

 

[GT49er]

Is that the people who are sensitive about some words being changed in a book?

No, it isn't.

 

[giveusfalmerplease]

Also, is it just me or does enormous seem worse than fat?. I'm fat, being two stone overweight but I certainly aren't enormous

 

[BN9 BHA]

Of course in today's mad PC world you can't even say Bob's your uncle, could just as easily be your Aunt, or gender neutral father's sibling

Thanks for putting that link up, I was looking for a new laptop

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Must admit I'm no fan of Dahl's books or views. But removing phrases and adjectives rather changes the children's books and makes them less likely to hold their attention. A fat mouse conjures a better picture than a mouse and a black tractor better than a tractor. Are we unable to acknowledge in a story that some mice are fat and some tractors are black in case it offends a BAME or fat reader? I suppose the point is to discourage children from identifying the fatness of anything or the blackness of anything and then they won't grow to be racist or fat shaming adults. I can't believe I'm typing this in the knowledge that it's probably true.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

All this nonsense is becoming tiresome…..

 

[schmunk]

Why does this country pander to the snowflakes and woke. Pathetic

Don't you think that getting frothy about some words being changed in some children's books is a bit... ...snowflake-y?

 

[Zeberdi]

I suppose the point is to discourage children from identifying the fatness of anything or the blackness of anything and then they won't grow to be racist or fat shaming adults. I can't believe I'm typing this in the knowledge that it's probably true.

It’s cancel culture.

The point should be not discouraging children from identifying the fatness of anything or the blackness of anything’ but encouraging them that ‘fatness’ and being ’black’ are equally valid characteristics as ‘slimness’ and ‘white’.

 

[cheshunt seagull]

These are classic children's books and I can't see any problem with a few changes in terminology to ensure that they can be enjoyed by all children and which don't normalise the use of words which are now viewed as negative.
My old employer, The British Library, has published a series of crime novels from the 30s. Some of these present language and views which wouldn't be acceptable now but the books are presented partially as artefacts reflecting society at the time so it is important to keep them as they were. They contain a note about this in the foreword and assume a level of intelligence and literacy from their adult audience.
The two things are completely different. Those who want to see the original Dahl books can find these in archives.

 

[GT49er]

I look forward to reading about how Henry the engine of colour is asked nicely to go on a signal awareness course by an enormous androgenous top-hat wearer who has been charged with sympathetically managing the railways of Sodor, with full consideration of equality and diversity.

 

[chickens]

I’d generally describe myself as fairly centrist in my politics, and this sits uncomfortably with me.

On the one hand, I accept that as our culture shifts and changes, scenes written decades or even hundreds of years ago, can seem increasingly problematic.

On the other hand, a book’s cultural setting is of its time, and if an author’s works becomes so out of step with the culture of the modern day, then surely the answer is two-fold.

1. Add a short disclaimer at the front of the book reminding the reader that the book is a product of its time, and detailing what’s problematic within.

2. Drop the book from the school syllabus and move on to other authors. Allow it to become a parental or individual choice as to whether somebody reads that book.

IMO we shouldn’t be sanitising author’s works, just making sure people know why some consider the work problematic.

 

[jcdenton08]

I’d generally describe myself as fairly centrist in my politics, and this sits uncomfortably with me.

On the one hand, I accept that as our culture shifts and changes, scenes written decades or even hundreds of years ago, can seem increasingly problematic.

On the other hand, a book’s cultural setting is of its time, and if an author’s works becomes so out of step with the culture of the modern day, then surely the answer is two-fold.

1. Add a short disclaimer at the front of the book reminding the reader that the book is a product of its time, and detailing what’s problematic within.

2. Drop the book from the school syllabus and move on to other authors. Allow it to become a parental or individual choice as to whether somebody reads that book.

IMO we shouldn’t be sanitising author’s works, just making sure people know why some consider the work problematic.

This is exactly my view. Beautifully put.

I am actually not convinced the changes being made in this particular, specific case are even necessary of a foreword or “trigger warning”. The edits being made seem entirely unnecessary.

 

[BadFish]

everyone's happy.

My guess is that a load of people who haven't read a Roald Dahl book for a couple of decades are going to be very far from happy.

'snowflakes' 'wokes' and 'pc brigades' being thrown around like nobody's business.

Still it keeps the culture wars firing and that is good for . . . ?

 

[GT49er]

Shirley it is time we stopped forcing our kids to read filfth like this to get an 'O' level GCSE?

The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the Ram his halfe cours yronne,
And smale foweles maken melodye.

High time this was updated and sanitised for the 21st. Century - perhaps in txt spk?






......well, it would be easier to understand!!

 

[Giraffe]

Goodness knows what Penguin/Puffin would make of this:

Now is the time for marching, Now let your hearts be gay,
Hark to the merry bugles Sounding along our way.
So let your voices ring, my boys, And take the time from me,
And I’ll sing you a song as we march along,
Of Sussex by the Sea!

Chorus
For We're the men from Sussex, Sussex by the Sea.
We plough and sow and reap and mow,
And useful men are we;
And when you go to Sussex, Whoever you may be,
You may tell them all that we stand or fall
For Sussex by the Sea!

Refrain
Oh Sussex, Sussex by the Sea!
Good old Sussex by the Sea!
You may tell them all we stand or fall,
For Sussex by the Sea.

2nd verse
Up in the morning early, Start at the break of day;
March till the evening shadows Tell us it's time to stay.
We're always moving on, my boys, So take the time from me,
And sing this song as we march along,
Of Sussex by the Sea.

3rd verse
Sometimes your feet are weary, Sometimes the way is long,
Sometimes the day is dreary, Sometimes the world goes wrong;
But if you let your voices ring, Your care will fly away,
So we'll sing a song as we march along,
Of Sussex by the Sea.

4th verse
Light is the love of a soldier, That's what the ladies say -
Lightly he goes a wooing, Lightly he rides away.
In love and war we always are As fair as fair can be,
And a soldier boy is the ladies’ joy
In Sussex by the Sea.

5th verse
Far o'er the seas we wander, Wide thro’ the world we roam;
Far from the kind hearts yonder, Far from our dear old home;
But ne'er shall we forget, my boys, And true we'll ever be
To the girls so kind that we left behind
In Sussex by the Sea.

 

[carlzeiss]

Wouldn't it better to just have a public burning of his books and set an example

 

[Berty23]

The things people get upset about are hilarious. I wonder how many people kicking off about the changes even read the books as kids. So many things in this world that are worth getting angry about but people focus on things that really don’t matter. It is very strange.

I loved some of the books as a kid but the bfg was crap. Fantastic mr fox, Danny the champion of the world and James and giant peach were my favourites. Matilda was very good too. Quite enjoyed Charlie and choc factory too. Lots of the others were junk.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I’d generally describe myself as fairly centrist in my politics, and this sits uncomfortably with me.

On the one hand, I accept that as our culture shifts and changes, scenes written decades or even hundreds of years ago, can seem increasingly problematic.

On the other hand, a book’s cultural setting is of its time, and if an author’s works becomes so out of step with the culture of the modern day, then surely the answer is two-fold.

1. Add a short disclaimer at the front of the book reminding the reader that the book is a product of its time, and detailing what’s problematic within.

2. Drop the book from the school syllabus and move on to other authors. Allow it to become a parental or individual choice as to whether somebody reads that book.

IMO we shouldn’t be sanitising author’s works, just making sure people know why some consider the work problematic.

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.