Ian Fleming's estate issues statement supporting controversial edits: 'It is something he would have wanted' | The Independent
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/ian-fleming-james-bond-rewriting-statement-b2290950.html
James Bond fans rage at Ian Fleming book 'censorship' - 'Give me a break!' | Books | Entertainment | Express.co.uk https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/books/1739975/james-bond-books-censored-edits-ian-fleming-daniel-craig
It's the new age of bowdlerization. Penguin Random House issued a
sanitized edition of Roald Dahl, then backed down halfway and said
they'd keep the original versions in print alongside them.
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> writes:
It's the new age of bowdlerization. Penguin Random House issued a
sanitized edition of Roald Dahl, then backed down halfway and said
they'd keep the original versions in print alongside them.
As I heard it, the sanitized version is a Puffin edition. Puffin is
Random House's line of kids' books. The Penguin line is adult fiction
and the backdown was to publish the unsanitized Dahl books under the
Penguin imprint, so you get to choose which one you want.
I figure that kids' books are only partly works of literature. They are
also instructional, since part of their purpose is to help kids learn to read. So in that sense they are like textbooks. Textbooks get updated
all the time, so updating kids' books to deal with changing environments seems legit to me.
"Danny Dunn and the Homework Machine" was in the news recently. It was written in the 1950s and was about kids programming a vacuum tube
computer. An updated edition with modern computers would arguably be a
good thing. Cleaning up any outdated jargon and needless offenses seems
fine to do at the same time. A lot of 1920s-era blatant racism was
revised out of the original Hardy Boys mysteries starting in the 1950s,
and I don't think anyone made a fuss.
The main thing is to not try to suppress the original editions for those
who do want them for whatever reason. The big offender in that
department is George Lucas, who went to great lengths to stop anyone
from ever re-watching the original Star Wars movie where Han shot first.
A lot of 1920s-era blatant racism was
revised out of the original Hardy Boys mysteries starting in the 1950s,
and I don't think anyone made a fuss.
The Hardy Boys, and Nancy Drew, books were, and are, being constantly revised, anyway. For one thing they've been c~18 years old for around
100 years.
Tim Merrigan <tppm@ca.rr.com> writes:
The Hardy Boys, and Nancy Drew, books were, and are, being constantly
revised, anyway. For one thing they've been c~18 years old for around
100 years.
Dunno about Nancy Drew but the Hardy Boys have aged a little. According
to the Wikipedia article about those books, they were 14 or 15 in the
early editions and were aged up to 17 or 18 in the revisions.
I didn't realize the books were being constantly revised in the sense of
the individual titles being revised repeatedly. I had thought there was
a huge revision project that took place from the 1950s to the 1970s or >whatever, where the books (100's of them) were revised one at a time.
I similarly would be surprised if the original Batman comics could be >published today, where Robin was a minor and Batman constantly let him
get into danger.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 54 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 18:06:45 |
| Calls: | 742 |
| Files: | 1,218 |
| D/L today: |
4 files (8,203K bytes) |
| Messages: | 184,416 |
| Posted today: | 1 |