Ronald Dahl Censored


Why can't we have 2 versions of historical texts?

One sanitised/watered down/editted "for modern audiences". Then one in original format with a disclaimer at the front that explains the age and circumstances around the original release. We do that with Tom and Jerry ffs.

Let people decide which version they wish to read and if they are outraged by the original then they can't say they weren't warned.

If a text can't be edited without fundamentally changing the context then release it with a disclaimer on the cover and let people make their own mind up.
 
we agree! 😊
You applaud it, I think it’s bloody awful but we agree it is their property to do with as they wish.
Why can't we have 2 versions of historical texts?

One sanitised/watered down/editted "for modern audiences". Then one in original format with a disclaimer at the front that explains the age and circumstances around the original release. We do that with Tom and Jerry ffs.

Let people decide which version they wish to read and if they are outraged by the original then they can't say they weren't warned.

If a text can't be edited without fundamentally changing the context then release it with a disclaimer on the cover and let people make their own mind up.
Maybe authors need to put something in their wills saying that wet wipes cannot sanitise their work once they are dead.
 
Last edited:
Why can't we have 2 versions of historical texts?

One sanitised/watered down/editted "for modern audiences". Then one in original format with a disclaimer at the front that explains the age and circumstances around the original release. We do that with Tom and Jerry ffs.

Let people decide which version they wish to read and if they are outraged by the original then they can't say they weren't warned.

If a text can't be edited without fundamentally changing the context then release it with a disclaimer on the cover and let people make their own mind up.
Mind, its not like the old books suddenlt vanish.
 
Sad to see a truly original author get the Fahrenheit 451 treatment

Meanwhile rip-offs written by suspected wrangun David Walliams are freely available
 
that isn't at all what I said

why do you persist on trying to put words in peoples mouths (for internet battle points?) rather than just take their words as they have written them?!
I have no idea what you think. That's why.

I will form an opinion and if I'm wrong it doesn't matter to either of us.
 
I doubt the changes will stop children insulting or bullying each other. I very much doubt most kids even thought about the language till now. These alterations are being made to make adults feel more comfortable and feel they’re doing something. If parents or teachers are worried about Roald Dahl’s books then don’t buy them. I wonder how many parents actually read the books they give their children or read anything at all?
I read a lot of old detective stories and there’s a lot of casual remarks in them (racism, misogyny etc,) that would not appear in a modern book. On the other hand there are fewer detailed descriptions of horrendous violence. Our ideas of what’s acceptable change but if we constantly update everything then we never get to compare then and now to see those changes. If you watch old films it’s really striking how much people smoked in them. Hardly see a cigarette in modern films. On the other hand there’s very little blood when people are shot in old films, much less dwelling on violence and very little swearing. We apparently find explicit violence and bad language more acceptable viewing these days or do we just want more realistic depictions?
Is it more acceptable to call someone a slag on Eastenders than to call someone fat in a book?
 
Philip Pullman made a good point.
Dahl's books "should be allowed to fade away" rather than be changed if they are deemed offensive.

Indeed. If you don't like it, you don't have to read it.
Christ alive. They'll have a shock when they come to read Lord of the Flies if they thought calling Augustus Gloop "fat" was bad.
 

Back
Top