Tiny quibble: "And it is a clever bit of marketing to get people to rush to bookstores to buy books before they’re censored"
IIRC, in this particular case, the changes actually happened last year and only recently started getting noticed more and having a light shone on them. (You're not at all wrong about the dynamic, though. I went out of my way to find some old secondhand copies of Dahl stuff before the prices went nuts.)
May 28, 2023·edited May 28, 2023Liked by radicaledward
When this first hit the news, my initial reaction was disbelief. Why would anyone want to do that? Are we going to rewrite 1984, too?
GROUPTHINK IS PROFIT
CONFORMITY IS SAFETY
CHANGE IS STABILITY.
Well, ok, that rewrite sucks. I understand why these changes were made, but for what reasons? Must we tick every box? Must we never eat omelettes again for fear of breaking eggs? And then there were none, no books, no paintings, no nothing for fear of the omelette.
Let's start repainting and resculpturing these offensive works of art, let's mould everything into a brave new world...
Hang on, there. Who cares? Overall? No one. I linked the article (from telegraph website) to a writer friend and she was indifferent to the changes and said "I don't think Dahl works well for this generation."
Therein lies the rub... sad. It's like a "Director's Cut" without the Director for all the wrong reasons. Who needs digital shots added to Star Wars? No one. Who needs Dahl updated to work well with this generation? Who? Well, you know who...
In the end, no one cares. Those who do will get the original, those who don't... Ignorance is strength! I mean, the other thing.
#istandwithwolf
Isn't there a boob at the end of Grapes of Wrath? We should probably get rid of that.
#BoobsOfWrath
I've been discussing this with my Year 12 students and they are all against the changes, which I tried to portray neutrally.
Nailed it.
Tiny quibble: "And it is a clever bit of marketing to get people to rush to bookstores to buy books before they’re censored"
IIRC, in this particular case, the changes actually happened last year and only recently started getting noticed more and having a light shone on them. (You're not at all wrong about the dynamic, though. I went out of my way to find some old secondhand copies of Dahl stuff before the prices went nuts.)
When this first hit the news, my initial reaction was disbelief. Why would anyone want to do that? Are we going to rewrite 1984, too?
GROUPTHINK IS PROFIT
CONFORMITY IS SAFETY
CHANGE IS STABILITY.
Well, ok, that rewrite sucks. I understand why these changes were made, but for what reasons? Must we tick every box? Must we never eat omelettes again for fear of breaking eggs? And then there were none, no books, no paintings, no nothing for fear of the omelette.
Let's start repainting and resculpturing these offensive works of art, let's mould everything into a brave new world...
Hang on, there. Who cares? Overall? No one. I linked the article (from telegraph website) to a writer friend and she was indifferent to the changes and said "I don't think Dahl works well for this generation."
Therein lies the rub... sad. It's like a "Director's Cut" without the Director for all the wrong reasons. Who needs digital shots added to Star Wars? No one. Who needs Dahl updated to work well with this generation? Who? Well, you know who...
In the end, no one cares. Those who do will get the original, those who don't... Ignorance is strength! I mean, the other thing.
Fantastic article, Ed! I am forwarding it to my kids, who loved OG Roald Dahl. Luckily, we still have the unexpurgated books.