Shambo
Striker
What would you do with contentious works that cannot be edited?
Gone With Wind, for example?
cannot be edited?
I am happy for books to be edited to fit in with modern standards
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What would you do with contentious works that cannot be edited?
Gone With Wind, for example?
I'd argue, we can handle them by understanding the context it was written in. Books become very useful to help us understand what the general views of the world were like at that time. If someone doesn't like the way a book has been written then they can write another one and have that published. World views are changing and evolving constantly.Its an interesting question though, how to handle historic texts in general
Do you update the language so that it has the same impact as it did at the time it was written - so that the intention is kept the same
Or do you leave it exactly as it is, and then have people experiencing the story in a very different way to how the author intended
It could mean that classics end up "going out of fashion". And then you have to wonder if that's actually a bad thing. Are there countless great stories out there that never get discovered because of the huge pool of classic stories that fill the public conciousness?
cannot be edited?
I am happy for books to be edited to fit in with modern standards
Its an interesting question though, how to handle historic texts in general
Do you update the language so that it has the same impact as it did at the time it was written - so that the intention is kept the same
Or do you leave it exactly as it is, and then have people experiencing the story in a very different way to how the author intended
It could mean that classics end up "going out of fashion". And then you have to wonder if that's actually a bad thing. Are there countless great stories out there that never get discovered because of the huge pool of classic stories that fill the public conciousness?
Yeah, its a very good point that it becomes a artifact of its time.I'd argue, we can handle them by understanding the context it was written in. Books become very useful to help us understand what the general views of the world were like at that time. If someone doesn't like the way a book has been written then they can write another one and have that published. World views are changing and evolving constantly.
What does fit in with modern standards mean? Where would you draw the line? What is the purpose of fitting in?
I do understand that concern and it is a fair one. That said, these kids don't have to read the book if it becomes too "problematic" though. That debate should be had as and when required.Yeah, its a very good point that it becomes a artifact of its time.
But kids can't grasp those contexts, so it would end up having an impact.
That is the purpose of literature in your eyes? Fair enough but I disagree on a fundamental level.to fit in more with modern life. I struggle to explain it any more than that. its not a hard concept to grasp
wherever the publisher wants to draw the line to appeal to as many people as possible. this is capitalism.
to appeal to more people (a new audience maybe)
God forbid the kids have to put some effort in. Just let them back on their Xbox.I do understand that concern and it is a fair one. That said, these kids don't have to read the book if it becomes too "problematic" though. That debate should be had as and when required.
There is a difference between editing books to meet a certain "standard" (and who exactly defines those standards?) and say, burning them. It is a step towards that though.
Of course. I'm quite neutral on the Dahl books changea. I think foot notes or end notes might have been better. Though I'm saying that as an adult who as a child would have read them.I don't know how many children would.Surely that is more of a translation than sanitising the prose?
I wish they had when I did Chaucer at school.
I'm just being argumentative to try to flush out the debate here tbh, I'm not even sure which side I agree with. Its possibly an impossible question.I do understand that concern and it is a fair one. That said, these kids don't have to read the book if it becomes too "problematic" though. That debate should be had as and when required.
There is a difference between editing books to meet a certain "standard" (and who exactly defines those standards?) and say, burning them. It is a step towards that though.
Of course. I'm quite neutral on the Dahl books changea. I think foot notes or end notes might have been better. Though I'm saying that as an adult who as a child would have read them.I don't know how many children would.
every generation of english lit students would appreciate someone making Shakespeare a bit more accessible.I assume you would leave Shakespeare and the Poets alone.
It's a reasonable to question to ask.I'm just being argumentative to try to flush out the debate here tbh, I'm not even sure which side I agree with. Its possibly an impossible question.
I don't think the text in Dahl's books is problematic personally. Calling someone fat or ugly isn't a big issue to me. But I'm Gen X / Millenial. I can just about see that Gen Z might have a problem with it, and that's their perogative - we all have to remember that our generation changed things, just as the ones that come after us will do too. Its the natural order of things.
But if we don't update books, using these Dahl ones as an example, at what point in time do they become too out of touch for kids to read - because that's when they basically die and get written off to time.
Someone has to make that choice - do we resign them to the status that say, Shakespeare's writing has, where its only really read as a study. Or do they get updated to keep the basic story in tact for a much longer period.
I'm possibly repeating myself now, and even so I don't have an answer![]()
There’s nothing wrong with being argumentative. Personally I think that historic text should be left alone as an artefact.I'm just being argumentative to try to flush out the debate here tbh, I'm not even sure which side I agree with. Its possibly an impossible question.
I don't think the text in Dahl's books is problematic personally. Calling someone fat or ugly isn't a big issue to me. But I'm Gen X / Millenial. I can just about see that Gen Z might have a problem with it, and that's their perogative - we all have to remember that our generation changed things, just as the ones that come after us will do too. Its the natural order of things.
But if we don't update books, using these Dahl ones as an example, at what point in time do they become too out of touch for kids to read - because that's when they basically die and get written off to time.
Someone has to make that choice - do we resign them to the status that say, Shakespeare's writing has, where its only really read as a study. Or do they get updated to keep the basic story in tact for a much longer period.
I'm possibly repeating myself now, and even so I don't have an answer![]()
That is the purpose of literature in your eyes?
I assume you would leave Shakespeare and the Poets alone.
it's a slippery slope for me. However, it is for the owner's of the work and the publishers to decide. Once they are in public domain then originals can be printed by anyone.
I hope someone does. The best items are the ones where someone finds something and thinks they are on a nice earner, then stand trying to feign being pleasantly surprised when the valuation is only a couple of hundred quid.
Someone should definitely mention this to everyone who thinks the bible was written by god, mindI think it should be left alone and if the copyright owners want to change it they shouldn't say it's written solely and wholly by Roald Dahl and certainly not on the date it was originally published.
If penguin and the estate wish to sanitise the work it is their product to do whatever they wish.the purpose? no. the purpose is to be enjoyed. If a publisher decides that more people/a wider audience/a new younger audience will get enjoyment out of it by modernising it then so be it. Happens all the time. I have no issue with it
have no issue either way. if a publisher decided to edit it then I wouldn't be bothered
I agree that the works are the property of the estate and they can do what they wish.I would prefer the books to stay the way they were. The consequence of that would be that his books would gradually stop being bought, and all you'd see would be small/big screen adaptations that repackage some characters for a modern audience. Like Noddy which still gets used in kids cartoons but nothing like the originals (no evil brutish gollywogs portrayed as the villains etc). None of which bothers me either but the publishers of the books will get less money when that happens. This is their choice.