Rewriting history

[Blue Maverick]

Dahl was a weird one, changing fat to enormous. As if no one will be offended by that.

"That dress makes you look enormous."
"Thanks love, especially for not calling me fat."

Mind you, one of my mates has a rule for his kids in his house, the word fat is banned as its derogatory. Next party..."hey Jay, is this full FAT coke?"

Shakespeare won't get touched. He invented hundreds of words.

As a previous poster said...who is asking for these changes?

Who do you think!

 

[City Hobgoblin]

Is there a demand for this sort of thing? I've never heard anyone in the pub demanding books are rewritten

No there isn't. See the backlash over the Dahl interference.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Are these non-fiction books?

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Who do you think!

The gays?

 

[BimboBob]

The gays?

More like wobble bottoms.

 

[Blue and true]

In the early-mid 20th century a group of people tried rewriting history with coordinated book bonfires. The group? Nazis.

Rewriting books from our past because they don't conform to modern ideals is tantamount to soft fascism. They should be left alone.

 

[City Hobgoblin]

Re-writing, although not great, isn’t the same degree of censorship as carried out with book banning (or even burnings).
As ever it’s the RWNJ of the US who lead on book banings in the western world.
Classics of modern US and western literature like - to kill a mockingbird, animal farm, 1984, the handmaidens tale are regularly banned by school boards run by RW ‘Christian’ religious nuts.

The historical offensive use of characters/caricatures in literature and their removal/alteration, has been happening for years.
Just from my youth, Tintin in the Congo, is pretty offensive with its caricatures, other Tintin books have similar albeit generally lesser caricatures of other non western cultures.
Another comic book from my youth ‘lucky Luke’ - a cowboy - has had another subtle re-adjustment with his previous ubiquitous cigarette hanging from his lip replaced with a hay straw in reprints.

So, small re-writing is.. a reflection of adjustment of attitudes and progression. As long as the reason for it isn’t lost to history, eg whitewashing the past of its badness, then I see no issue.

In the case of Tintin / Herge the books reflect the author's / European attitudes maturing across the 20th century. By the mid-Century the stories included anti-slavery, anti-colonialism and anti-fascist themes.

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

In the early-mid 20th century a group of people tried rewriting history with coordinated book bonfires. The group? Nazis.

Rewriting books from our past because they don't conform to modern ideals is tantamount to soft fascism. They should be left alone.

16. That has to be the shortest example of Godwin's Law I have ever seen.

 

[KS55]

Just watching this & chatting to Mrs Moon, it's bollocks...roll on the re-writing of Shakespeare, Dickins, Bronte sisters etc.

Only then will all be right with the world.

Most of the classics mentioned on this thread have been rewritten several times. Bowdlerisation, children’s editions, modern English etc. I dont see any harm except when, as in Dahl case , it is about expunging history which is a pretence.
Equally bad is trigger warnings. CAUTION: SEX is mentioned; In this thriller someone gets shot; A slave owner calls his chattels niggxxxs. Oh dearie me.

 

[dronefromsector7G]

Woke, snowflake, gammon, offended.

Just getting them in there