Books: Should the classics be edited for "political correctness"?

[Say Hey Kid]

Critics blast 'absurd' rewrites to Roald Dahl's children's books

Half-century-old characters are no longer "fat" or "idiots" after a slew of changes by the publisher to make Dahl's works more in tune with modern times.

www.nbcnews.com

Some of the greatest novels ever written are being edited because they use the adjective fat. It's okay for musicians to use the N word though.

Click to read more...

 

[ItsFineImFine]

The f***.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

WTF to your post and WTF to editing old works.

 

[Jussi]

Meh.

 

[Ceremony]

Of course not.

 

[Jussi]

 

[Teemu]

Roald Dahl has long been a member of the don't-meet-your-heroes club. Here are the Oompa Loompas as originally written. Dahl was defiant for a decade, calling the NAACP "Nazis" for suggesting there might be something wrong with whimsically utilizing African slave labor. I can't really blame his estate for cleaning up his works even if some of the changes are silly.

 

[PANARIN BREAD FAN]

hold up!!! so it's gotten to the point that the word idiot is now considered politically incorrect?

 

[Ouroboros]

 

[RandV]

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and the works of Roald Dahl is not "Some of the greatest novels ever written". I think it's mostly dumb, but see it as a relatively harmless soccer mom thing than a precursor to a dystopian 1982 or something.

Classic literature gives us thoughts and perspective from the people of the past, in which I think there is immense value. This isn't under any sort of threat though, and this is more something you should start understanding as teens. For children's literature though I don't think they're going to pick up on that subtle context. So while I called the example here 'dumb', I'd hardly have a problem if say they de-blackfaced African characters in a reprint of that one Tintin comic.

 

[Mrfenn92]

Just silliness

 

[glovesave_35]

Can someone explain the thought process behind removing references to color from the Roald Dahl stories?

 

[Osprey]

hold up!!! so it's gotten to the point that the word idiot is now considered politically incorrect?

I like how they replaced the word "idiot" with "boy." As a boy, I'm offended.

 

[Say Hey Kid]

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and the works of Roald Dahl is not "Some of the greatest novels ever written". ...

I could post dozens of awards, quotes, and links that would make you look silly. If you actually knew anything about literature you would know that Dahl is considered one of the goats of children's literature. You should have written "The works of Roald Dahl ARE not". Good luck in your classes.

 

[Ducks in a row]

Change words from books because someone finds something offensive is ridiculous.

 

[PANARIN BREAD FAN]

i'm not sure what the first words were considered as not pc.

this movement was given an inch when objections were lodged against the word Pejorative Slur. another inch was given for the word Homophobic Slur. i dunno - personally i like cigarettes myself, despite having to give them up as they were wrecking my health. i miss them.

many words and inches since Pejorative Slur has been considered unacceptable to say up to this point has now accumulated to at least a mile. to those who do not have a general understanding of how history works it's like this: keep giving inches away to movements like these eventually add to an insurmountable amount. and there's no compromise with these bastards - no inches will be given back.

 

[Seedtype]

I feel like the issue is copyrights go on for far too long. Of course any modern changes to a classic are going to come across as lame. But hey his family estate wants to continue to make money off his works. /Shrug

It's a marketing decision, just vote with your wallet.

Now, if they are going around and burning all the old version of the works in libraries or the internet or whatever, that is problematic.

Any classic work should fade away into history, but be preserved so we can look and learn from what came before.

 

[Garo]

I am sure the Bible has never ever been edited.

 

[Baby Punisher]

Censorship is censorship no matter how it's phrased

 

[Cas]

Nothing about this is new. Just look at the titles Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None were published under.

 

[Peasy]

Comparing the word fat to the N word lmao what an awful take.

Editing old content is dumb. Times change, and I think its important to remember that.

 

[BertCorbeau]

This reminds me of the ending of Thank you for Smoking when the Senator moves to “modernize” old movies to edit out cigarettes from the actors/actresses hands

SMH

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Han shot first.

 

[kihei]

It's a trickier question than it looks at first glance, but 99% of the time the answer is no. But I can see why Agatha Christie's publisher wanted to change that title.

I disagree with changes to the Bible, though. By modernising it, it can make the Bible appear more relevant to people today. Leave it in its ridiculous ancient version (or as close as you can get as there is no "original version" left) so people can get a clear idea of what a load of bollocks it is that they are believing. Of course, they should have figured that out already, but maybe an additional nudge would help.

 

[Shareefruck]

I disagree with changes to the Bible, though. By modernising it, it can make the Bible appear more relevant to people today. Leave it in its ridiculous ancient version (or as close as you can get as there is no "original version" left) so people can get a clear idea of what a load of bollocks it is that they are believing. Of course, they should have figured that out already, but maybe an additional nudge would help.

Yep, bingo.