Censorship or rewriting ?

Gloriana and galaxy another here who really dislikes David Walliams language and his whole image but that’s a personal thing and I totally disagree with censorship

The Witches was definitely anti- Semitic. They were hook nosed; bald under their wigs; printed money; and kidnapped children (a reference to blood libel conspiracies).
Dahl was notoriously anti Jew.
He said, ‘even a stinker like Hitler didn’t pick them for no reason’.

FannyCornforth

The Witches was definitely anti- Semitic. They were hook nosed; bald under their wigs; printed money; and kidnapped children (a reference to blood libel conspiracies).
Dahl was notoriously anti Jew.
He said, ‘even a stinker like Hitler didn’t pick them for no reason’.

That may or may not be true, FannyCornforth

The Witches is one of our GCs favourites along with Matilda, I think it’s because they show grownups as not perfect and well behaved.

What next Beatrix Potter?

Every so often, Puritanical movements emasculate any literature that doesn't fit their ideas of perfection. In 1807 Thomas Bowdler and his sister Henrietta published their first version of "The Family shakespeare" “in which nothing is added to the original Text: but those words and expressions are omitted which cannot with propriety be read aloud in a Family.” About 10% of the text was removed, mostly references to sex or violence. Among other bowdlerising, the prostitute character in Henry IV, Part 2 is omitted, and Ophelias suicide was replaced by accidental drowning, .

If this new wave of censorship takes off, it will progress to rewriting history to remove the disturbing bits, so that we no longer read that Anne Boleyn was beheaded - perhaps her sentence will be changed to 100 hours of community service. The hundred years war was will be shortened to a fortnight of verbal threats on Facebook, and Julius Caesar will be confronted by a deputation bearing a document of abdication to sign and a promise to devote himself to good works in the future, instead of being stabbed by most of the Senate.

Then there is the Bible, of course. That will be rewritten so that Christ doesn't get nailed to a cross, but instead is sent home to his mother's house and has to report to a probation officer once a week to learn how to conform to societal norms.

It is true!

FannyCornforth

It is true!

I have just found an article in a Jewish newspaper (2020) which confirms your post FannyCornforth

I doubt the age bracket reading Roald Dahl will be aware of his antisemitism in The Witches.

I am totally for any book/author that gets young children reading particularly boys.

FannyCornforth

The Witches was definitely anti- Semitic. They were hook nosed; bald under their wigs; printed money; and kidnapped children (a reference to blood libel conspiracies).
Dahl was notoriously anti Jew.
He said, ‘even a stinker like Hitler didn’t pick them for no reason’.

I've always regarded The Witches as a slur on older women, whose noses look longer and who lose their hair and steal children because they don't have any. They were balanced by Luke's grandmother who cared for him.
Dahl was unpleasant in a lot of ways.

Rather than culture wash literature, statues and history isn’t it better to use them as a conversation starter to learn from the past and move towards a better understanding of humanity and the surrounding world?

Same here GrannyGravy
I was a specialist Reading Teacher in working a mainstream Secondary School.
Most of my clientele were reluctant boys.

FannyCornforth

Same here GrannyGravy
I was a specialist Reading Teacher in working a mainstream Secondary School.
Most of my clientele were reluctant boys.

Four sons and a daughter here, DH and I were/are voracious readers all children were reluctant.

If it wasn’t for Roald Dahl, Tolkien and for the youngest JK Rowling I would have been pulling my hair out.

Ridiculous!

My DDs are either side of 40 and can still be reduced to hysterical laughter by the late, wonderful Rick Mayal reading George’s Marvelous Medicine.
Why mess with things?

Rather than have the books pulled from publication, I'd say changing the wording to fit modern belief systems is probably sensible. Dahl was a known anti semitic and probably a racist too. However, I use his work in my teaching and agree it would be a shame to lose some of his writings due to unacceptable language.

'Despite Dahl publicly admitting he was anti-Semitic in an interview shortly before his death at age 74, in addition to a number of reports of his alleged misogyny and racism'

time.com/5937507/roald-dahl-anti-semitism/

I don’t think the words should be changed If thats what you believe then everything from the Bible upwards needs changing GagaJo

My 6yo DGD knows she's been taught in school not to refer to people as fat. And if I say 'fat', she will tell me that it is hurtful to say that.
Surely it's either use 2023 language, or lose the books.

I have no problem with the word fat. No idea why calling someone enormous is preferable to being called fat.

I wonder what Miriam’s Big Fat Adventure should be called?

As a fat person, I also don't mind the word 'fat'. To me, it's just an adjective. BUT the trouble is, that children use it as an insult, as does much of society. My grandson has been in trouble for school for using it this way, which has been a bit confusing for him, because he knows Granny is fat. But we've told him that things can be different at home and at school and just to do as he's told.

If a book is instructional, Of Mice and Men, for example, deliberately exploring discrimination and bigotry, then it can be used as a teaching aid. Unlike the Dahl books where the characters are made into villainous racial stereotypes, implying that people with these characteristics are evil.

I think the Dahl Foundation are being pragmatic.

Elegran

Every so often, Puritanical movements emasculate any literature that doesn't fit their ideas of perfection. In 1807 Thomas Bowdler and his sister Henrietta published their first version of "The Family shakespeare" “in which nothing is added to the original Text: but those words and expressions are omitted which cannot with propriety be read aloud in a Family.” About 10% of the text was removed, mostly references to sex or violence. Among other bowdlerising, the prostitute character in Henry IV, Part 2 is omitted, and Ophelias suicide was replaced by accidental drowning, .

If this new wave of censorship takes off, it will progress to rewriting history to remove the disturbing bits, so that we no longer read that Anne Boleyn was beheaded - perhaps her sentence will be changed to 100 hours of community service. The hundred years war was will be shortened to a fortnight of verbal threats on Facebook, and Julius Caesar will be confronted by a deputation bearing a document of abdication to sign and a promise to devote himself to good works in the future, instead of being stabbed by most of the Senate.

Then there is the Bible, of course. That will be rewritten so that Christ doesn't get nailed to a cross, but instead is sent home to his mother's house and has to report to a probation officer once a week to learn how to conform to societal norms.

Ha! Good post

Ronald Dahl's original unsanitised books will rocket in value! Ridiculous censorship. What has come over us?!

Pragmatic is definitely the word GagaJo
This won’t have been done on a whim

Idiotic idea.

Nannyish ideas. Let people make up their own minds if they find something offensive.

Good post Elegran

In the new edition of Witches, a supernatural female posing as an ordinary woman may be working as a “top scientist or running a business” instead of as a “cashier in a supermarket or typing letters for a businessman”. Do we assume from this that the publishers think being cashiers or secretaries is insulting ordinary women? What on earth is offensive about either occupation? I have a friend who worked as a cashier to fit in around her children, she has a first class degree.

I must admit that I didn’t get the cashier/ scientist thing.
Going under cover as a cashier in a supermarket is intrinsically funny.