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

Post by mikrotikker » Sun, Feb 19, 2023, 7:14 AM UTC

bitcurious wrote: post #549

culi wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right I really don't get why people are so offended by these changes If a work of fiction is changed to not imply women are meant to stay at home and men are meant to go to work, doesn't that show that, to those offended, on some level those implications are core to what makes that work that work? None of these changes drastically affect the storylines, character arcs, unique characteristics, etc of the stories. If t…

> If a work of fiction is changed to not imply women are meant to stay at home and men are meant to go to work, doesn't that show that, to those offended, on some level those implications are core to what makes that work that work? The problem is that Dahl’s work isn’t an essay, or a treatise. It’s whimsical. It’s art! The words chosen, were chosen because they were the words that worked. Say these two extracts out l…

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Feb 19, 2023, 7:17 AM UTC

biztos wrote: post #498

bla3 wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm neither credible nor reputable, but I'm in favor of a weak version of this. When reading older books to my young child, I replace language that suggests that women are supposed to stay at home and men are supposed to go to work. One day soon he'll be able to read, and at that point I'll wish that books that were a product of their time would have been updated for the current time, so that he could just read the b…

There are tons of books that actually are a product of the current time. Why not read those, and support living writers, instead of changing the meaning of older works? Seems like your problem here is easier to solve without messing with the other writers and potentially confusing your child about what, say, a Ronald Dahl book is actually like.

Post by TedDoesntTalk » Sun, Feb 19, 2023, 7:23 AM UTC

exodust wrote: post #611

culi wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right I really don't get why people are so offended by these changes If a work of fiction is changed to not imply women are meant to stay at home and men are meant to go to work, doesn't that show that, to those offended, on some level those implications are core to what makes that work that work? None of these changes drastically affect the storylines, character arcs, unique characteristics, etc of the stories. If t…

> "I really don't get why people are so offended by these changes..." The problem is, changes are made simply because a fictional female character happens to stay at home. Which is fine if she wants that, or it happens in the story. I don't get why parents are so untrusting of their children's ability to think, that they censor and change language found in old books. Are they worried their kids will become monsters i…

Post by foreigner » Sun, Feb 19, 2023, 7:28 AM UTC

Post by oblio » Sun, Feb 19, 2023, 7:31 AM UTC

biztos wrote: post #498

bla3 wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm neither credible nor reputable, but I'm in favor of a weak version of this. When reading older books to my young child, I replace language that suggests that women are supposed to stay at home and men are supposed to go to work. One day soon he'll be able to read, and at that point I'll wish that books that were a product of their time would have been updated for the current time, so that he could just read the b…

There are tons of books that actually are a product of the current time. Why not read those, and support living writers, instead of changing the meaning of older works? Seems like your problem here is easier to solve without messing with the other writers and potentially confusing your child about what, say, a Ronald Dahl book is actually like.