Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pollyfossil t1_j973z3d wrote

I teach literature to college students that was published 100s of years ago, so I'm very familiar with the fact that norms constantly change and that reading literature that reflects different worldviews and different mentalities is enriching and intellectually challenging. I'm also aware of the fact that texts go through multiple editions for different reasons and we need access to all of those editions in order to understand them fully from a scholarly perspective. The changes that are being made to these Dahl editions are being made with the permission of the copyright holder, so that's their decision - it's not been made by a committee of the politically correct. It's therefore more accurately described as revision, rather than censorship. It may well be of interest to future researchers on children's literature, but I don't understand why it's been seen as indicative of the downfall of civilization.

2

noctisfromtheabyss t1_j974r42 wrote

Did the author approve of these changes? Was this revision made to better reflect the authors intentions or was it made to censor words and phrases that the publisher things will make people on twitter angry and thus reduce sales?

Its actually frightening that you teach literature and youre ok with an artist work being changed without their permission/consent and that your justifying altering said work for profit motive.

1

pollyfossil t1_j97bu83 wrote

He's been dead since 1990. If you're so exercised about his work being changed, you'd want to take that up with his literary estate, which has approved these changes (quite possibly in the interests of profit).

1

noctisfromtheabyss t1_j97dgeu wrote

I've always wondered, do you spice up the boots with like a dry rub or sauce or do you just raw dog it when licking?

1

pollyfossil t1_j97mtpd wrote

Ooh, what a stinging put down! I'm not sure I'll ever get over it.

1