The latest victim of this lack of respect, albeit one posthumously affected, is Roald Dahl, whose books for children have drawn unwanted attention from a wretched consultancy in conjunction with veteran publisher Puffin Books. Evidently not feeling anyone capable within their ranks, Puffin Books decided to retain Inclusive Minds, which claims<\/a> to \u201coffer a range of services to help people engaged in all aspects of children\u2019s literature build a new, more inclusive world.\u201d<\/p>\n This all took place in step with the announcement in September last year that the streaming company Netflix had bought the Roald Dahl Story Company for the princely sum of \u00a3500 million. The contract is reportedly<\/a> the biggest content deal of its kind, a fact no doubt helped by the company\u2019s observation that Dahl\u2019s books have sold more than 300 million globally and been translated into 63 languages. \u201cNetflix and The Roald Dahl Story Company,\u201d the company announced<\/a>, \u201cshare a deep love of storytelling and a growing global fan base. Together, we have an extraordinary opportunity to write multiple new chapters of these beloved stories, delighting children and adults around the world for generations to come.\u2019<\/p>\n With the mantra of inclusivity heavy at Puffin Books, in addition to the \u201cgrowing global fan base\u201d, the publishing outfit faced a fundamental problem. Any position on being inclusive reaches a tipping point where it must exclude. And at Inclusive Minds, there are \u201cInclusion Ambassadors\u201d who constitute a network of advisors with a nose for sensitivity and a mind for removing the uncomfortable. \u201cThe network,\u201d Inclusive Minds goes on to say, \u201coffers book creators a chance to connect with \u2018experts by experiences\u2019 at the very earliest stage in the book creation process.\u201d<\/p>\n In \u201cWitches\u201d, an \u201cold hag\u201d became the less offensive \u201cold crow\u201d. Other patently silly changes included removing \u201cblack\u201d in \u201cFantastic Mr. Fox\u201d in favour of \u201cmurderous, brutal-looking\u201d tractors. The three sons, for some reason, become three daughters, while the Cloud-Men in \u201cJames and the Giant Peach\u201d become Cloud People.<\/p>\n Many of these changes are not cosmetic, constituting a direct alternation of the author\u2019s meanings and intentions. Matilda\u2019s reading of Rudyard Kipling, for instance, is considered inappropriate to the sensitivity police. Far better to make her read Jane Austen instead of that bard of British imperialism.<\/p>\n These changes prompted novelist Salman Rushdie, himself all too familiar with the mortal dangers of censorship, to suggest<\/a> that Puffin Books and the Dahl estate reel in shame. It was sporting of him to do so, given Dahl\u2019s own lack of sympathy for Rushdie\u2019s treatment at the hands of murderous Islamic fanatics for the publication of The Satanic Verses<\/i>. <\/p>\n Brendan O\u2019Neill, writing<\/a> in The Spectator<\/i>, was adamant that Dahl had been culturally vandalised, being \u201cwell and truly Ministry of Truthed.\u201d The fun in the texts had been redacted, confined to \u201cthe memory hole.\u201d <\/p>\n PEN America chief executive Suzanne Nossel was also<\/a> \u201calarmed at news of \u2018hundreds of changes\u2019 to venerated works by [Dahl] in a purported effort to scrub the books of that which might offend someone.\u201d Those wishing to \u201ccheer specific edits to Dahl\u2019s work should consider how the power to rewrite books might be used in the hands of those who do not share their values and sensibilities.\u201d<\/p>\n During his life, Dahl was also the subject of attention from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) for language used in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory<\/i>. The 1964 text originally described the Oompa-Loompas as African \u201cpygmies\u201d. In sympathy with the NAACP, Dahl rewrote the text for the second US edition, turning the Oompa-Loompas into white dwarves with origins in fictional Loompaland. <\/p>\n Ironically enough, Dahl\u2019s agent convinced<\/a> the author to change Charlie\u2019s identity, who was originally intended to be a black boy. The reason was crude but simple: making Charlie white would be more appealing to readers.<\/p>\n Amidst the protests against the latest rewrites and cuts, Penguin Random House, which owns Puffin Books, announced<\/a> that it would publish the \u201cclassic\u201d versions alongside the new editions, enabling readers \u201cto choose which version of Dahl\u2019s stories they prefer.\u201d That\u2019s just what the children need.<\/p>\n Puffin Books should have already heeded the lessons of previous failed efforts to run rewritten texts for contemporary audiences. Efforts in 2010 to subject the Famous Five series of Enid Blyton to \u201csensitive text revisions\u201d failed. These included alterations of \u201cawful swotter\u201d to \u201cbookworm\u201d, and \u201ctinker\u201d with \u201ctraveller\u201d. The publisher Hachette had to concede<\/a> in 2016 that the project had not worked.<\/p>\n This latest affair prompted a suggestion<\/a> from Philip Pullman on Radio 4 on February 20. Let the passage of time judge the works, rather than the officials of the age. Eventually, they may go out of print, leaving room for other authors and their stories to enchant a new readership. In Dahl\u2019s case, that time is a considerable way off. A salient lesson, then, to avoid overly paid and ill-informed consultancies and respect children\u2019s stories.<\/p>The post Sensitivity Rewrites: The Cultural Purging of Roald Dahl<\/a> first appeared on Dissident Voice<\/a>.\n This post was originally published on Dissident Voice<\/a>. <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Censorship is never innocent, made worse for its strained good intentions. For those responsible for setting and policing such policies, the inner judge comes out, stomping on assumed meanings, interpreting and removing things to ensure the masses are not corrupted. Children\u2019s stories and tales have not been exempted from this train of revision, expurgation and [\u2026]<\/p>\n The post Sensitivity Rewrites: The Cultural Purging of Roald Dahl<\/a> first appeared on Dissident Voice<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":30,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[92,437,9124],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1006352"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/30"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1006352"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1006352\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1006353,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1006352\/revisions\/1006353"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1006352"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1006352"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1006352"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/dissidentvoice.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/roald-dahl-196x300.jpg\")
<\/a>With the razors ready to modernise (read purge) any of Dahl\u2019s texts, a number of words came in for the chop. A focus was placed upon gender, race, mental health and weight. \u201cEnormously fat\u201d was adjusted to being merely \u201cenormous\u201d, in reference to the gluttonous character of Augustus Gloop in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory<\/i>. Oompa-Loompas were transformed into \u201csmall people\u201d, with words such as \u201ctitchy\u201d and \u201ctiny\u201d excised. <\/p>\n