You Couldn’t Make It Up

By age 7- 8 or so I’d read Heidi and weep. Black Beauty sob sob.
Oh yes, reading through the tears.
And DD (aged 4) watched Lassie with tears pouring down her face: "oh, oh, that poor doggie". Her dogs are mainly rescues now.

We are discussing classic novels, not the showing of graphic pictures of foetuses, murder victims, mutilated animals etc.

I agree these could be distressing, especially for those who have had experience of these events personally.
Don't do medicine, become a pathologist, forensic scientist, social worker, police officer - that would be sensible.

But if a student doesn't realise that some classic literature does contain descriptions deaths, exexcutions, politically incorrect (by today's standards) events such as young girls aspiring to meet the military - always an officer, never a private ?, then perhaps they are taking the wrong course.

I remember pleading with mummy to read me The Dancing Shoes, or the Little Matchstick Girl - promise, I won’t cry this time I’d say - then weep as she read.
By age 7- 8 or so I’d read Heidi and weep. Black Beauty sob sob.
I read The Wolves in the Walls to my 5 year old grandson- he was terrified and loved it.

Some people have suggested that they are called "content" rather than "trigger" warnings which I think is no bad thing.

Until this morning I had little sympathy but the subject was discussed on James O'Brien. One caller explained how a lecture she attended about abortion had photographs of foetuses. One young girl who became distraught because she'd had an abortion. Another woman explained how when she was a teenager her mother had committed suicide and a man explained how his pregnant partner had died of a brain tumour. For these three people seeing output about these subjects was very traumatic. Another person commented how someone that she knew always asked the teacher (junior school) if any of the content included sibling death so that she could prepare her son.

I understand that the subjects mentioned could cause PTSD in some people but surely, when you read a book you can tell when something horrible is about to happen and you can skip a page or two.

Twentieth century novels contain much more graphic stuff than those of the nineteenth. I've just read "The Black Dahlia" by James Ellroy which has extremely graphic details of murders of young women. (I didn't know this when I downloaded it). I've forgotten the details.

I'm someone who cries at Lassie and once was stuck on the tube opposite a blind person with a guide dog. The dog was looking at its owner with such love and trust that my eyes started to water (teared up as it's now called) and I didn't have any tissues so every now and then I dabbed my eyes with my sleeve. Should I be protected from this?

I noticed today that Jane Austin is also under attack because of the way in which the young girls in some of the novels are always trying to meet the military.

If you don’t care about warnings ignore them - let your kids read anything they like. If you have never had a traumatic experience in your life, lucky you , if you don’t mind horrific images popping up unexpectedly in films , again lucky you, not everyone is so lucky, many have experienced trauma and have no wish to relive them.

A Tale of Two Cities was our book for O level. I enjoyed it and was very moved at the ending.
Many of Dickens' books have upsetting parts in them and I have read quite a few.
Should they all come with a warning?

Blossoming

I cried buckets over the death of Sydney Carton when I read Tale of Two Cities. I was 7 years old and I still think they executed the wrong man.

I think you have a point there Blossoming about Sydney Carton, but if you had never read it, would you have the foggiest what anybody was talking about if they said “Tis a far, far better thing etc etc etc”

I cried buckets over “Charlotte’s Web” and my daughter sobbed her little heart out at “Ginger’s Adventures” - didn’t traumatise us - I still sob my eyes out at sad stories or films, but I’m not blaming my childhood!

One of mine is at university, though he is in his 20s and he is more fragile than I was at his age and does tend to be affected more by things. I'm not sure why that is a bad thing. I was exposed to things I really shouldn't have been as a child and even as a young adult. Times have changed. He is by no means the most fragile amongst his friends, in fact he is pretty robust being the sibling of someone with a severe disability.

I have a temperature though and he isn't studying English but I think my parents expected me to grow up too quickly and take on too much responsibility, a lot of which I wasn't ready for and couldn't cope with but would never have mentioned it.

I don't think trigger warnings are a big deal.

I cried buckets over the death of Sydney Carton when I read Tale of Two Cities. I was 7 years old and I still think they executed the wrong man.

With everyone hear mocking "trigger warnings" which sometimes comes before films etc might like to consider the case where someone who has experienced the suicide of a close loved one might be very upset to watch a film/ play which included a suicide scene - at least with the warning they can be prepared or decide not to watch. This can be extended to other traumatic events - child abuse for example - someone who has personal experience may want to avoid watching or reading about it. I would not want to watch graphic animal cruelty for example. I fully expect to be called a snowflake for defending such warnings.

Elegran Mon 29-Nov-21 15:26:44
Very well put.
???

I’ve made a note Elegran.
Thanks again!

Mock people doesn't change their opinions or give them less daft things to say, only makes them resentful of those who believe themselves so superior that they have a right to mock. Resentment them sends them into even deeper entrenchment in their daftness.

It wasn't me who brought in xenophobia.

Sorry, Alegrias, it was me. A reaction to one post that I thought was completely uncalled for.

I basically try not to mock people for what they believe in

I’ve not noticed such kindness from you on the political threads towards me Alegrias but maybe I’m the exception that proves the rule.
?

Of course, 'bowdlerism' and 'to bowdlerise' Elegran!

I won't waste my time attempting the same.

I think you'll enjoy it, Urmstongran. After you finish it, try "Thornfield Hall: A novel of Jane Eyre below stairs" by Jane Stubbs

There was a wave of this beginning about the start of the 19th Century, with Thomas Bowdler.

Thomas Bowdler's main claim to fame – or, often, mockery – was the editing of various famous literary works to be more “appropriate” for what he thought genteel 19th-century women and children should read. Hence the word “bowdlerised” for a text with anything racy or gritty taken out.

The most (in)famous of Bowdler’s efforts was The Family Shakspeare, which removed unpleasant deaths, swearing and anything sexual from Shakespeare’s plays. (in 1818, nineteen years before Victoria became queen in 1837 - I wonder are we in for another age of Victorian tightarsedness rectitude nearly two centuries later?)

Apparently, the book was actually largely edited by Bowdler’s sister Harriet but appeared under his name on the grounds that no respectable woman could publicly admit even understanding the Bard’s more racy passages.

Some of the changes made by Bowdler included making Ophelia’s death seem an accidental drowning not suicide, and removing the prostitute character Doll Tearsheet entirely from Henry IV, Part 2.

Bowdler also prepared an expurgated edition, published in 1826, of Edward Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. It must have been considerably shorter .

www.telegraph.co.uk/only-in-britain/thomas-bowdler-was-born/

www.britannica.com/biography/Thomas-Bowdler

I basically try not to mock people for what they believe in, only for the daft things they say.

But isn't what they say usually what they believe in anyway?

Calistemon

^You can all carry on with your judgement and taunting in peace.^
Oh, the irony.

Sorry, but it's true.

?????

Bingo!!

If you would like a different angle on the events in Pride and Prejudice, the handsome officers, and the Bennets at home, with the domestic staff as the central characters, read "Longbourne" by Jo Baker

Actually I would! Thank you Elegran I’m off to order it now.
?

I basically try not to mock people for what they believe in, only for the daft things they say.

I think this is where someone comes along to tell me that they thought I'd left?

You can all carry on with your judgement and taunting in peace.
Oh, the irony.

Sorry, but it's true.