To me, editing books for PC reasons is comparable to book burning.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
James Bond Novels Edited to Remove Racist Content
- Thread starter Stevicus
- Start date
Yes I stated that the brand known as coon has since changed their name and brand in my reply
Perhaps you missed that part?
Btw is it Unaustralian of me to say that I prefer Bega?
No.
But I’m inspired.
I’m proffering expanding the concept of making literature PC to sanitizing history. It wouldn’t be all positive…I’d give Hitler and Stalin hunchbacks.
Better to add trigger warnings, then such literature can also be a window into the author’s mind and era.
**** the Taliban mentality.
I can't answer for @Revoltingest, but such things could have the effect of whitewashing history. By rewriting authentic texts and literature from different eras (in order to make them more sensitive and politically correct for today's readers), it could have the effect of changing perceptions of those eras. If someone wanted to do research on racist literature in the early 20th century, they may not be able to find any if it all gets revised.
I already answered.
I’m sure that researchers would rely upon original uncensored works. But the general public would never see them, perhaps believing that Huck Finn called ****** Jim “Person Of Color Jim”.
Yes I stated that the brand known as coon has since changed their name and brand in my reply
Perhaps you missed that part?
Btw is it Unaustralian of me to say that I prefer Bega?
Sorry, it was your use of 'is a brand' early in the post. It got stuck in my head and I managed to somehow not even notice the sentence later talking about the rebranding.
And no. I'm a Bega boy too. Vintage.
That would seem a little larger in scope and consideration than the James Bond touch-ups specifically referred to in the OP, though. These are minor wording changes, done based on rewording done by the author himself before his death. There are still plenty of non-pc references in there...and this isn't a history book at all.
For me, removing the n word as a way of describing a black man isn't problematic. Removing it from your character's voices is. I'd need to see a list of the changes to really judge (for example, it's reported a striptease scene is removed, to which I'd wonder why?)
It's different (to me) than the more extensive and clumsy work being done of Dahl's novels, without any input or direction from Dahl himself that such a thing was within his intent.
Oh, and in terms of changing perceptions of eras...there are LOTS of things I think are more problematic in that sense than tweaking a few words in a Bond novel.
I'm against changing the wording of Huck Finn, although I'm fine with some sort of generic trigger warning at the front of the book, much like we have at the front of tv shows. 'Dear reader, this novel is a classic and we have left it untouched. It contains language generally seen as unsuitable for modern audiences. We have included a highly sophisticated way you can avoid these confronting words if you need to. It's called 'don't turn the page'.'
Not, I would suggest, if it was done with the author's blessing.
I would agree but its difficult for Ian Fleming to give his blessing
Yup, and I wouldn't be arguing too hard with those that see this as unwarranted and harmful.
More just in general, I think it's fine if an author decides to revise their own work for basically any reason.
Fleming allowed editors to adjust his books for different markets whilst he was alive. You could see this as simply more of the same, given that the majority of the edits are to remove derogatory references to African Americans which occur in the narrator's voice, rather than a characters voice.
I'm not a fan of it, but I don't see it as being 'as bad' as the recent Dahl edits, and I don't see it as being 'as bad' as burning all Bond books.
I think any edits without the author's permission are unacceptable. In essence it's rewriting history. Something i could not agree with even for the sake of political correctness