Live data from Hacker News

Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

telegraph.co.uk

241–250 of 992 posts

Re: Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Screeching" in english (at least North American english) is typically a gendered derogative. You generally wouldn't say a man was "screeching", not unless you also wanted to imply he was effeminate. By avoiding the word, you avoid insinuating the target's gender is part of the issue, and/or avoid insinuating that the target is effeminate when they "should not" be, i.e. you avoid homophobia.

Either I am completely out of touch, or this comment is nonsense. A screech is a high pitched sound, nothing more unless otherwise indicated.

Screeching (loud piercing sounds) is what eagles some other large birds do. It's also applied to tires which lose their grip on the road during a burnout or the like.

Looks like the character “Screech” will have to adopt a new (nick)-name.

Re: Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's The Transgender-Industrial Complex by Scott Howard, published by Antelope Hill Publishing.

And available at Barnes and Noble. https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-transgender-industrial-...

"Probably the most censored book of the last 30 years."

Re: Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

#243

I'd be interested in hearing the most credible/reputable sources speaking out in favor of these changes. I've exclusively seen commentators dunking on this (rightfully so), across the political spectrum. To be clear: I'm wondering if we can find specific people speaking up for this, not an analysis of whose side of the culture war is most culpable for it.

[dead]

Re: Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

#244
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Use of gendered language is marginalizing to nonbinary people. References to brothers or sisters, or mothers or fathers, is offensive to nonbinary people? In all seriousness, not trying to start a flame war, why is that? Is a reference to hair offensive to a bald person?

Offensive is probably too strong a word. The reason to replace an aggregate ‘brothers and sisters’ with ‘siblings’, ‘mothers and fathers’ with ‘parents’, or ‘boys and girls’ with ‘children’ is because for all of these the replacement suffices without calling attention to gender when it’s not necessary to do so. There’s also an argument that the ‘X and Y’ phrasing makes the ‘X’ seem more important than the ‘Y’, or mak…

The words siblings, parents and children all existed when Dahl wrote these books, yet he chose to use brothers and sisters, mom and dad, and boys and girls. He specifically used these words, because he's the author and wanted to convey a specific meaning.

Re: Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Yelling doesn't make the argument more persuasive. Not only is the word "shrill" gendered, it's famously gendered. If you were writing an article about the concept of gendered words, you could do worse than opening with the word "shrill". You could just Google this. Again: none of this --- nothing I've said, and nothing about the comment you've chosen to angrily respond to --- implies that these changes are good. May…

Kindly take your gaslighting and passive aggression somewhere else. I'm allowed to "yell" and write how I like. I haven't taken any personal shots at anyone - unlike yourself.

Even if shrill is "gendered" (The Google says it "hints" at gendered language, btw), so fucking what. The implication in GPs comment is that this justifies Newspeak-ification... It doesn't. And neither does referencing less "agreeable" authors, such as Joseph Conrad. I mean, wow dude. Talk about the worst possible takes.

Re: Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

#247
post #231

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

[flagged]

Re: Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

#248
post #77

While some of this is questionable the removal of the word 'fat' is an important one. 'Fat' should not be used in kids books as a derogatory, or at all frankly. Fat is an incredibly important and necessary part of a healthy diet and should be treared accordingly. Training people to think of fat in the antiquated notions of bad cardiogy isnt useful. So while this may have been a move centered around "body positivity",…

Why shouldn't fat be normal descriptor of well fat people. Should we next ban thin? Or short and tall? Those also can also be derogatory.

You seem to have missed the point. So allow me to reiterate: fat is a derogatory term which lends itself to the idea that food fats are bad.

Food fats aren't bad. So call them chubby or overweight or whatever you want. Using the word fat, when fat refers to a food product, gives dumb people the impression that fat is a bad thing.

Do you get this concept?

"Thin" isnt a food group. Short and tall, also not food groups.

Re: Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

#249

It turns out that Dahl was a real antisemite, to me that is more of an issue: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/dec/06/roald-dahl-fam...

I don't want to downplay antisemitism - its a real problem. But why does that bother you, given he's dead? Matilda was one of my favorite books when I was a kid. There's something in it that hits me right in the soul, even as an adult. I hear you when you say his antisemitism is an issue for you - but - I just can't see how that has any bearing on my relationship with his books. As a child I didn't understand, and no…

>But why does that bother you, given he's dead

For example it can be taken it as a call to others to hate your guts too, and it can play out pretty nasty, if the economy turns bad and if people will start to look out for scapegoats.

This is not something entirely abstract, it happened before.

Re: Hundreds of changes made to latest editions of Roald Dahl's books

#250
post #15

Here's a good list of changes. Most are about removing any references to ugly or fat. But also other strange things like changing the author's Matilda likes to read to include Jane Austin and John Steinbeck, not calling people crazy, swapping screeching to annoying, removing brothers and sisters to favor "siblings" and using "folks" instead of "ladies and gentlemen" https://twitter.com/incunabula/status/1626860237104…

> In Fantastic Mr Fox a description of tractors, saying that “the machines were both black”, has been cut. In the new Dahl world, it seems, neither machines nor animals can be described with a colour.

And removing any reference to color … for tractors.

Post reply on HN