Author Topic: The Censorship Of Roald Dahl Shows The Left is Utterly Disingenuous  (Read 238 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57,904
The Censorship Of Roald Dahl Shows The Left’s ‘Book Banning’ Accusations Are Utterly Disingenuous

The same people who say it’s OK to expose young children to sexually explicit material also think kids’ books need to be censored to stop calling people ‘fat’?

BY: MARK HEMINGWAY
FEBRUARY 21, 2023

It was recently announced that Roald Dahl’s much-beloved children’s books — which include “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” “The Witches,” “Matilda,” and “James and the Giant Peach” — were all being posthumously edited to reflect woke sensibilities. The changes are, frankly, appalling. Descriptions of characters as “fat” or “ugly” have been eliminated, gender-neutral language has been introduced, and laughable injections of political correctness have been made.

In one notable instance in “The Witches,” the description of the witches as bald has been altered and an all-new sentence added to communicate something Dahl obviously did not intend. The original text — “You can’t go round pulling the hair of every lady you meet, even if she is wearing gloves. Just you try it and see what happens” — now reads, “Besides, there are plenty of other reasons why women might wear wigs and there is certainly nothing wrong with that.” Heaven forfend that long hair continue to be associated with femininity! (You can find a more thorough rundown of what the various changes to Dahl’s books are in this Twitter thread.)

There are so many things wrong with this, it’s hard to know where to begin. Joyce Carol Oates, a major figure in the world of literary fiction, makes a key point. “Prose so radically revised by ‘sensitivity readers’ should be noted as collaborations. it is unfair to readers to be deceived into thinking that they are reading the original work,” she tweeted. “If Dahl is so egregious as to require such wholesale whitewashing (sic) why republish him at all?”

However, another major author, Walter Kirn, takes Oates’ observation a step further. Maybe on a personal level, Dahl was something of a mean antisemite, but what’s happening isn’t some concession made for a singularly problematic writer. “Writers may wish to rethink their ambitions. If their work should prove lasting, it may end up being tortured for all eternity,” Kirn observed. “This is not mere ‘sensitivity’ editing, by the way. This is blunt, agenda-driven rewriting. It is idea injection. And it will be continual once it starts.” (Also worth mentioning is that Salman Rushdie — who had ample reason to personally dislike Dahl — is also decrying the decision.)

However, what’s most disheartening about the Dahl episode is that the amount of outrage has been pretty minimal. Notably, the rights to Dahl’s work are owned by Netflix, which purchased them for $500 million in 2021, giving these Orwellian rewrites the patina of a cold business decision. Nor is this unprecedented. In 2021, Dr. Seuss Enterprises surrendered to politically correct pressure and stopped publishing several of Seuss’s works altogether, which caused quite a lot of public debate.

*  *  *

But perhaps what’s most remarkable about the muted response to the Dahl censorship is that it pretty definitively shows the left really doesn’t care in the slightest about book bans, despite their posturing in the ongoing controversies over the last few years about politicized and inappropriate books finding their way into school libraries.

*  *  *

Source:  https://thefederalist.com/2023/02/21/the-censorship-of-roald-dahl-shows-the-lefts-book-banning-accusations-are-utterly-disingenuous/

Offline goatprairie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,952
Re: The Censorship Of Roald Dahl Shows The Left is Utterly Disingenuous
« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2023, 04:43:59 am »
So if the libs can change Dahl’s prose, what’s to stop them from changing everything. Shakespeare? Faulkner? Twain?
They’ve already rewritten Christmas songs “Baby It’s Cold Outside”.  Are these pinheads intent on changing everything to avoid hurting  the feelings of whomever? Apparently yes.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57,904
Re: The Censorship Of Roald Dahl Shows The Left is Utterly Disingenuous
« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2023, 01:50:46 pm »
So if the libs can change Dahl’s prose, what’s to stop them from changing everything. Shakespeare? Faulkner? Twain?
They’ve already rewritten Christmas songs “Baby It’s Cold Outside”.  Are these pinheads intent on changing everything to avoid hurting  the feelings of whomever? Apparently yes.

That's the risk.  If the holder of the copyright agrees to the changes, then the changes will be made. 

Offline mountaineer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78,769
Re: The Censorship Of Roald Dahl Shows The Left is Utterly Disingenuous
« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2023, 02:23:39 pm »
If Augustus Gloop Can’t Be ‘Fat,’ What’s The Point Of Roald Dahl’s Kids’ Books?
Evil springs from the human heart, not from Roald Dahl describing characters as fat or ugly.
By: Nathanael Blake
February 22, 2023
Quote
Of course Augustus Gloop is fat. That is the point of him. In “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” he embodies unrestrained appetite in the most literal sense. He is a foil and a lesson, all rolled into one massive blob of a boy.

But now a bunch of iconoclasts with mediocre minds and grubby souls are offended. Roald Dahl’s works are now owned by Netflix (yes, really), and the publisher, Puffin, has announced hundreds of changes. Augustus being described as fat is among the casualties, lest someone’s feelings be hurt. And so “sensitivity readers” have been deployed to ensure that Dahl’s books conform to the sensibilities of the whiniest of the woke.

It is tempting to compare this revisionism to Orwell’s classic dystopia “1984,” in which every book had been rewritten. But this is a softer (for now) form of thought control. Instead of a brutal government, it is corporations buying the rights to rewrite the past and its works. And those making these decisions are not motivated by profit, but by a small-souled censoriousness in service to a weird substitute religion.

This censorship is different from a cancellation. Dahl had personal sins that could easily get him canceled, such as his antisemitism (of course, he also fought bravely against Nazi Germany — history, like people, is complicated). But cancellation would be financially painful, and the corporations involved want to squeeze every dollar they can out of Dahl’s works. Thus, these new editions of his books are the woke version of strategically adding fig leaves to a dead artist’s nudes.  ...

In “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” Augustus Gloop’s problem is not that people call him fat, but that he is fat — hugely so. He and the other bad children in the story (along with their wretched parents) are entertaining and edifying because they show the truth of being enslaved to desire.

Dahl’s children’s stories are therefore far more morally realistic than the adults who are rewriting his works. ...
The Federalist
Support Israel's emergency medical service. afmda.org