Roald Dahl books rewritten to remove language deemed offensive

Absolutely horrible and should be criminal. Writing has a rhythm. It is wrong to do that when the author created those words and the way they go together.

I'm fine putting a note at the beginning of the books explaining the time they were written and adding context. But altering the words is just horrible.

 

Dahl himself rewrote passages from the book in a 1973 release to change what was considered a racist depiction of the Oompa Loompas as enslaved African pygmies:

https://theconversation.com/amp/fro...ed-oompa-loompas-in-modern-adaptations-166967

Before the film’s release, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in the US threatened to boycott cinemas, while the producers worried if they represented black characters in a derogatory way, they would lose revenue.

Dahl eventually buckled to public criticism. In a revised 1973 edition of the book, he reimagined the Oompa-Loompas as “little fantasy creatures”.

In this new edition, the Oompa-Loompas are hippies. Their skin is rosy white; their unkempt hair is golden brown; they frolick in the factory gardens, picking wildflowers, playing hand drums, and chasing butterflies. They symbolise 1970s counterculture and its rejection of materialism, conservative values, and social and political conflict
​

The rewritten book should included disclaimers about the rewritten parts. Having a “sanitized” version of the book available for children is nothing new. My worry is that the original work will be lost. That would be a shame, whatever we may think of how some of the content has aged. Literature, including children’s literature, should be preserved and available.

 

this is what happens when a marketing company takes over an ip.

what kids like about roald dahl's stories is also what teachers and parents hate.

this is why all the film adaptations have sucked. dahl's stories are meant to be cruel, nasty, and gross.

 

related

 

Sounds like they own the intellectual property and can do whatever the eff they want with it. I don't approve, but whatever.

 

You cant claim words are authored by dahl when they aren't. Intellectual property doesn't even come into play, thats just lying.

 

Good lord, are we ****ed.

 

Better to just ban all the books.

DeSantis 2028

 

Don't care. Doesn't change the context of the stories. It isn't like the original text is going to disappear.

 

Wow. Funny how censors haven't actually managed to read any history books, or they'd know how Nazi this **** is.

... But whatever?

 

Would you care if they drew a mustache on the Mona Lisa with sharpie? Doesn't change the context of the story.

 

They are going to tell people dahl wrote this awful ****.

 

Personally? No, but big difference between an orginal painting and new copies of books that there are already millions of.

 

Private ownership VS government control...

 

Shut up, bigot. It doesn't change the context of the story.

Un ****ing believable.

They can't appreciate art and refuse to learn history, so they take both away from everyone else.

Y'all should at least give thinking a try first before you go around telling the rest of us how to do it, perhaps?

 

So you find no value in art or poetry or history? Changing someone else's work and pretending it's still theirs is literally changing history.

You ok with changing Socrates to make him more inclusive?

 

There's value in it, but I don't see a change in value. Mona Lisa is basically the Kim Kardashian of paintings. Famous for being famous.

History will remain. Do I think they should note editing Dahl's original work? Yes. Do I have a problem with it being changed? No. Would I change it? No.

 

Hey @AroundTheWorld, if you ever get off those crossword puzzles and are out looking around for the actual good Nazi stuff, here ya go!