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

711–720 of 992 posts

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

#711

Post by lozenge »

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…

OK, but how does an Indian child feel reading that, who has their name mispronounced every day (sometimes carelessly, sometimes with profuse apologies, sometimes deliberately), and knowing that Pondicherry could never be the name of an Indian prince?

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

#712

Post by llanowarelves »

nicbou wrote: post #656
double2helix wrote: post #606

I'm a gay man and I think we are going to far with this PC nonsense. I had a hard time growing up in the 90s knowing I was different and being tormented by my peers, so I'm happy to see gay "normalized" in current pop culture more because I think it teaches the younger generation to accept themselves and others. However I feel that it's going to far, for example I started reading a novel the other day but gave up a t…

I've been to a lot of art museums when travelling. If you judged the world by the thousands of paintings in those museums, you could assume that people of color simply didn't exist back then, and that poor people showed up at some point during the 17th century. I could understand why people might want art to portray a broader world that includes them in it, especially when introducing their children to that world. It…

Well art galleries, at least at first, never promised things like "representing the world" or even be for mass consumption. The average person could have easily lived and died never seeing the paintings or hearing chamber music or a symphony (depends on what era).

Paintings were a patron-based good that was producing family portraits and things for rich people that the excess of eventually got put into their country houses, that people could come see, forming the first "art galleries".

It is a modern and internationalist view projected backwards in time to have these expectations, and you will find even less worldly representation in the art of non-Europeans from that time, focusing on their own. (Nothing wrong with that).

Contrast what non-European art was doing with the wealthy European Baroque patron who was buying stuff from China and Africa, travelling around the world lot, admixture of various European cultures to produce baroque music (also didnt have copyright so "sharing" common between composers building on each other). This was very diverse and worldly for that time.

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

#713

Post by jemmyw »

Beldin wrote: post #691
jemmyw wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got all the Julia Donaldson books too. They're ok, aimed a little more at the pre reading level though. And the repetition: I get it helps kids learn but it's mind numbing. Also her books have terrible plot holes that kids see though, like if you're a princess captured by a wizard and you can change into anything turn yourself into a fucking dragon and spit roast the dude. Dahl just had a way with words and stor…

> And the stories...[...] but these aren't books that are going to delight. Dahl's best-known book is about a family of 7 that can barely afford to eat. One of his other famous books is about how giants stalk through the night to kidnap sleeping children and eat them. A third one is about a child prodigy who is treated to the point of mental abuse at home, finally gets to go to school, only to encounter physical abus…

I never said they'd scar children. Bore them.

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

#714

Post by gsinclair »

jemmyw wrote: post #191
40acres wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JK Rowling built a billion dollar children’s franchise shortly after Dahls death.

True. Although her audience is a little older than I was thinking. Also I didn't think of her because I don't like her writing, I find it boring. The stories are ok but the way she presents it is dull, to me. Obviously that's a minority opinion given her broad appeal.

Loads and loads of very young readers have relished the HP books.

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

#715

Post by lozenge »

agentwiggles wrote: post #47

Wow. This is so gross. I was a bit put out by the Dr. Seuss controversy a few years back, but at least in those cases, they just stopped printing the books (and, to be fair, the caricatures of various ethnic groups in If I Ran The Zoo are pretty bad). It feels much more disturbing, though, to just silently update the language in the books to be more in line with modern sensibilities. Dahl was a man of his time, and a…

It's not silent, they added a note in the copyright section. Which as a child, was oddly interesting to me.

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

#716

Post by Aeolun »

double2helix wrote: post #606

I'm a gay man and I think we are going to far with this PC nonsense. I had a hard time growing up in the 90s knowing I was different and being tormented by my peers, so I'm happy to see gay "normalized" in current pop culture more because I think it teaches the younger generation to accept themselves and others. However I feel that it's going to far, for example I started reading a novel the other day but gave up a t…

I recently read a story, and one of the couples in the otherwise bog standard hero fantasy is just casually gay (like, there is no specific mention of it, written like a standard couple, they just happen to both be men). That was great, and I think how it should be normalized.

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

#717

Post by bsaul »

defrost wrote: post #694
bsaul wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i can't understand how the educated left don't see the atrocity of what they're initiating with this trend of rewriting classic literature. We've had so many examples of ideology rewriting the past...

I'm educated. I'm well to the left of the centre right and extreme right that is the bulk of US politics. ( ie. I'm Australian, support national health services, minimum living wages, welfare safety nets, etc. ) I'm not rewriting classic UK literature .. and I doubt many of the political left in the UK care much about ths either. Maybe the idealogical brush you're wielding here is a tad broad?

Didn't say you were rewriting it yourself. Only you didn't seem offended at all by that rewrite (which judging by your tone seems just about right).

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

#718

Post by salawat »

tohnjitor wrote: post #496
Quarrelsome wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

does that matter when there don't appear to be any non-binary people in any of Roald Dahls works?

Oh my goodness how dare he!

Did you just assume their gender?

(I'll see myself out.)

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

#719

Post by k__ »

double2helix wrote: post #606

I'm a gay man and I think we are going to far with this PC nonsense. I had a hard time growing up in the 90s knowing I was different and being tormented by my peers, so I'm happy to see gay "normalized" in current pop culture more because I think it teaches the younger generation to accept themselves and others. However I feel that it's going to far, for example I started reading a novel the other day but gave up a t…

I'm living surrounded with different LGBT people, so it doesn't feel strange to me.

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

#720

Post by lozenge »

Dig1t wrote: post #79
webjunkie wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using the term "female" to describe a woman can be perceived as reductive and dehumanizing because it reduces her to a biological category. By using the term "woman," the focus is shifted from her biological characteristics to her identity as a person, which is a more respectful and accurate way of addressing her. Worth noting is that there is no equivalent term to "female" when referring to men, who are almost alway…

>Worth noting is that there is no equivalent term to "female" “Male” is the word, and it is used in lots of books in exactly the same way as it’s being used here. I have read tons of books that said something along the lines of “he was an excellent male specimen” or “a member of the male species” Using the word female/male has a specific effect on the way the sentence reads, it gives it a clinical feel and is very us…

Both examples use the word male as an adjective.

The right example would be "He was a boisterous male."

Post reply on HN