Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 992 posts

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

#411

Post by tptacek »

mpalmer wrote: post #406
tptacek wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that comment is just saying you can understand the changes empathetically. It's not saying they're good.

I can't square that with their last sentence. Moreover, when I feel empathy with someone who feels different and unrecognized by society, something still keeps me from advocating for the censorship and misrepresentation of a writer's ideas and internal logic. I think what's stopping me is the knowledge that if I'm fortunate enough to write something that lasts beyond me, I sure as heck don't want anyone updating it f…

Again: there's no advocacy (at least nothing evident to me) in that comment. It's a descriptive comment, not a normative one.

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

#412

Post by mensetmanusman »

pyinstallwoes wrote: post #376
gotoeleven wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Well now that you've written it, it shall be hallucinated, at the very least.

This is true, now more than ever I wonder how humans will fight back against the ever watchful eye of AI. The mops are wet with moon drapes.

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

#413

Post by consumer451 »

pessimizer wrote: post #389
consumer451 wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, maybe I don't understand your reply. Did you read my comment as some sort of justification of either the Dahl estate's rewriting of Dahl's work or the state sponsored censorship in happening in Florida?

I read it as, "we're complaining about Democrats when we should really be complaining about Republicans." I apologize if that was unfair. edit: even though you've made a careful distinction between "rewriting" and censorship here that a lot of people who support censorship make. I'm probably projecting this upon you, but it goes along with the diabolical "It's not censorship unless the government does it, and when th…

The burning of books is referenced in my username.

I think both things are bad.

One of the joys of being politically indie is that I can feel disgust at actions originating from across the political spectrum.

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

#414

Post by MichaelZuo »

gameman144 wrote: post #361

As a genuine question, what is the best way to combat things like this as an individual? I will obviously choose not to buy egregious rewrites like this, but Penguin is out maybe ten bucks from my decision on that front. I've got neither the skillset nor the bandwidth to attempt to organize boycotts or anything, and don't have the pubic clout to call public retribution down on the publisher. I'm asking because I stro…

You could stake your reputation on publicly denouncing the change. It may not do much but at least it would have a minute effect.

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

#415

Post by hackinthebochs »

consumer451 wrote: post #283
krona wrote: 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

This Dahl situation seems ridiculous and deserving of derision. I would also like to bring your attention to the Florida school book ban which applies not just to new editions of one author, but to an entire state's education system. > Among the titles that have been removed and banned in the course of the vetting in her school district are Toni Morrison’s ‘The Bluest Eye,’ ‘The Kite Runner’ by Khaled Hosseini, ‘The…

>the Florida school book ban which applies not just to new editions of one author, but to an entire state's education system.

I see no problem with the government determining what information can and can't be made available to children at public school. This isn't the government making certain information verboten universally, it's ensuring that other people cannot indoctrinate your children with information you find objectionable. Children's minds have become the new front-line of the culture war, and this is an entirely reasonable reaction.

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

#416

Post by dragonwriter »

saalweachter wrote: post #408
dragonwriter wrote: post #395

Authors make these kind of changes all the time during their lives to. As long as we have works with rights that outlive authors, the people that exercise those rights will do this just as authors do. We might think that those heirs have less of the “good artistic sense” we see the authors themselves as endowed with, but, it is generally the author’s choice who will inherit the rights, and from there it is those heir…

> nothing is lost in the changes This; the old books still exist. No one is coming for them. The copyright-owners have simply decided that the new editions of the books will be different. Hell, this might even be a simple cash-grab: if the books aren't selling as well now, and their royalty checks are shrinking, they may have done some basic market research and determined that the perceived crassness of the works was…

> This; the old books still exist. No one is coming for them.

Sure, and beyond that, my point was, if copyright deposit is working, there are copies in public hands, specifically for the purpose of preservation and availability beyond the expiration of exclusive rights, not just old books in private collectors hands.

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

#417

Post by monkpit »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #324
Sporktacular wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really what you think the wokeness warriors want - historical revisionism?

Well yeah. It already is taken as fact in many circles that the primary purpose and intent of the American legal system and government was the subjugation of minorities. While I think there is some value and truth in critical analysis of race, gender, or governance that challenge prevailing assumptions, many people have lost the plot and positive context entirely. They mistake the exceptions for the rule and the flaw…

> It already is taken as fact in many circles

You can really say this about anything. Not that I am disagreeing with you, but it’s a dubious way to frame anything you wish to state.

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

#418

Post by dragonwriter »

pessimizer wrote: post #403
dragonwriter wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Revisions by the rights-owner are “censorship”, now?

Yes, they are censorship by the rights owner of the author's work. Clearly and uncontroversially. edit: also, a "rights owner" is what we call someone who has a government-granted monopoly on the right to publish a work. Granting or transferring exclusive publishing rights to entities that would be willing to censor a work would be a government end-run around prior restraint.

> Yes, they are censorship by the rights owner of the author's work.

Is that true when the rights owner (as is often the case) is the author? If it is not (or if it is but it is not problematic) in that case, why would it be if the rights owner is the author's heir, or an entity to whom the author or their heir has voluntarily, whether for value or other reasons, transferred the rights?

> also, a “rights owner” is what we call someone who has a government-granted monopoly on the right to publish a work.

Yes, under our copyright system that is, with very rare exceptions, the author, their heirs, or people to who such rights have been transferred by one or the other (and, in the case of transfers by authors, there is even a one-time take-back privilege with a specific time window.)

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

#419

Post by throw_m239339 »

oska wrote: post #267
swatcoder wrote: post #181

Those of us who grew up near various religious communities in the second half of the twentieth century are familiar with the edited and abridged versions of media made to be more palatable to the morals of whichever community, as well as the scandals over media which were an affront to them for whatever reason. Obviously, a publisher committed to those communities and who can get the rights to do so will make a “clea…

> and forgot that secular morals can run just as puritanical I'd suggest that it is a new religion being satisfied here, that of 'wokeism'.

> I'd suggest that it is a new religion being satisfied here, that of 'wokeism'.

It certainly is a cult since it works exactly like one, it has rules, a unquestionable creed ("diversity and inclusion"), struggle sessions where members have to admit their "crimes" in public like "their privileges", a hierarchy between its members (the pyramid of oppression), a caste that is above any criticism whatsoever, blasphemy, lists of forbidden words, and shunning of its members when they do something deemed "insensitive".

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

#420

Post by bee_rider »

Gigachad wrote: post #399
bee_rider wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In current American English, “female” has shifted to usually being an adjective, woman is a noun. Referring to people by noun-ing one of the adjectives that describes them is something considered reductive by a chunk of the population. If someone is a fan of “female” as a noun: I’m not going to change your mind. I get that changing language is annoying sometimes. I’m pointing out that “female” as a noun does bother s…

As a native English speaker, I find it hard to keep up and understand everything that’s now been deemed inappropriate. I can’t imagine how a non native would understand. Seems like there is an effort to intentionally keep making it more complex to show who really keeps up with twitter the most.

I don’t have a twitter account to get updates on this, so I just try to avoid nouning adjectives related to any hot button issues. I dunno, I’m not the Word Police, just interested in avoiding unnecessary conflict.

I’d hope that most people would give the benefit of the doubt people who aren’t native English speakers, though.

Post reply on HN