Censorship or rewriting ?

My GCs didn't like Revolting Rhymes. Not did I. I did read a few to them with explanations that some words were 'not nice' but I think they already knew that.
I don't believe in rewriting history as we need to learn from it.
As a child in the 40s/50s I heard a lot of sexist/racist/antisemitic comments over the years. I learned to dispute those comments as I got older but there were many people at that time with those views.
There are still people with those views and that is why we should let them stand and explain how wrong they are.

NotSpaghetti

Now I sound like I'm disagreeing with myself!

A top quality debate!

Now I sound like I'm disagreeing with myself!

I don't think changing things is really the answer.
Explaining is a better way to go.

Haven't we all changed something in some way? If only by commentary as we read - I have certainly said "well that wasn't very nice, was it?" when reading to children. Or, "that's what people used to think".

I’ve just remembered using ‘Revolting Rhymes’ with Y2 about 12 years ago.
I had to edit it myself in a few places.
I particularly remember changing the word ‘slut’.
Shame on me!
The world’s gone mad etc

If education is what we're worried about, perhaps we should start some anti-racism content in schools, if we expect children to carefully navigate around uncensored texts with racist tropes in them?

The World has gone mad in my opinion! If you don’t like it don’t read it. Children need to learn about rights and wrongs and if we start censoring everything they don’t get the opportunity of a well rounded education.

Another example of silly wokery. I have read these books many times to children and have never felt that the language needed sanitising or censoring. Freedom of expression is precious and should be left alone generally. Haven't these people anything more useful to do? Utter madness.

Totally, 💯 Wyllow

I think the discussion can easily get too "either/or".

Either we leave everything in or it means we are all due for censorship of most undesirable kinds.

There are middle ways, and it depends on whether books are contemporary (as in Dahl, still) or really historical where it's possible to explain context.

Some posts above are conflating the two, in order to say how gross it is we should "meddle" at all. But sensitive and imaginative adjustments to contemporary work especially for children do not need to ruin stories as suggested.

It can enhance.

Thanks fanny. It's a pattern I think with Walliams, particularly the 'evil' second wives.

However, Galaxy, Walliams himself features in drag as a dinner lady; so I appreciate that it’s not to all tastes.

But…period 6, Friday afternoon with 15 ‘spirited’ Y7 lads.
Come on, cut me some slack!

Galaxy

I cant remember which book it was but the page 3 stepmother sticks in my mind 🤦‍♀️

Billionaire Boy!
The TV adaptation is very funny!

Grandetante excellent post.
It’s very difficult to discuss context and historical perspectives when you are just trying to get a bunch of six year olds engaged and reading.
(I know someone will come along and say that they have had some marvellously enriching conversations with KS1 pupils; but my experiences have been chiefly with children with SEN or who are new to EAL, and my main objective has been to get the so and so’s reading and enjoying it!)

I cant remember which book it was but the page 3 stepmother sticks in my mind 🤦‍♀️

Leave them as they are! Total madness to change anything. My daughter loved his books as does the 6 year old grand daughter. The language is rich and humorous plus really aimed at adults. Crazy idea!

Galaxy

I find David Walliams books deeply sexist, I have read both him and Dahl extensively to children and with regard to treatment of women Walliams is worse.

This is an interesting point. The age group I teach is above that of Walliams readership. But I'll cast a speculative eye over one when I'm next in the library.

One of the GC has Mr.Stink by David Walliams as their free reading book it is sexist and in my opinion not an easy ready due to DW’s writing style.

(I had to explain what a waz was last night, GC looked puzzled and said why can’t he just say a wee )

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Amalegra

Censorship by another name. Some unnamed person dictating what words/expressions are/are not permissible. It’s just like Winston’s job at the ‘Ministry of Truth’ in ‘1984’ isn’t it? Frightening.

No one (‘unnamed’ or otherwise) is ‘dictating’ anything.
It was a decision between the publishers and The Dahl Foundation.
It is theirs to do with it what they wish.

It's absolutely ridiculous that Ronald Dahl's stories can be rewritten to appease those who are supposedly offended. I watched Crocodile Dundee on TV the other day and was horrified that two important scenes had been partially edited out. These were the ones where the taxi driver is warning Dundee that the "girl" he is flirting with is actually a man in drag which was confirmed when he grabbed the man's crotch. This was then continued into the scene where Dundee is introduced to the older, predatory woman who aged features make look a bit Manish and he grabs her crotch too in order to check and the old woman is delighted. It's a sight gag but edited out 40 years later as we turn more and more wokish

Or, MayBee70, maybe people will look at his work with new eyes... ?

Sorry, MayBee - who will make who more popular? Who is the more influential?

I find it hard to believe that DW doesn’t have a ghost writer tbh

Galaxy

I find David Walliams books deeply sexist, I have read both him and Dahl extensively to children and with regard to treatment of women Walliams is worse.

I find Walliams very creepy. Maybe having Dahl’s books censored will make his books more popular? He’s very influential.