Does Literature need “decolonisation”?

I'm not sure I agree that it's a shame. It's just reality. We can't always judge a situation while it's happening because we don't know all the ins and outs. There's something to be said for letting things simmer down before making judgments. I've seen that argument applied to what's going on at Westminster right now with regard to sexual harassment. Certainly, due process for the accused should not be abandoned in the heat of the moment.

I've also seen arguments being made now that colonialism wasn't all bad.

When books are chosen purely because of the race of the author or the 'message' then it is wrong to progress this train of thought in universities or schools. This seems to be increasingly the case though. Most universities and schools (certainly at A level) used to encourage 'reading around the subject' or reading other texts on a theme so any 'restrictions' put in place by a syllabus were surmountable.

The whole use of the word 'decolonisation' is bad English and only used to because it is a red rag to the media bill.

What these protesters want to do is study literature written in English rather than just English literature. That seems a perfectly reasonable ask. But what the heck has that got to do withe decolonisation. On the contrary what they actually want is colonisation, in other words draw into the empire of English literature all literature written in English.

Not very well educated are they?

Most university faculties of English have long since started talking of "post-colonial English" of "African" or "Indian" authors etc. Some go the whole hog and talk of "Scottish" authors, by which they mean anyone who regarded his or herself as Scottish and not only poets like Rabbie Burns who wrote in a Scots form of the language that most Englishmen and women do not fathom a word of! All talk of women authors, some of feminist authors.

I have read English myself and am not certain that even at university level these distinctions are necessary, wise or helpful. All can be seen as patronising or rude, if we are that way inclined.

I agree that books should be read for enjoyment, but it is sometimes necessary to know a little of the context the author lived in. Today some people find Kipling unbearably racist or imperialist, where I personally still read him for pleasure, although both Kipling, Saki, and Dornford Yates do use expressions, as did Agatha Christie, which we find offensive today.