When people talk about “woke”, this is exactly the kind of thing they are talking about.
People on the left are apoplectic about banning books for kids, yet here they are literally rewriting them. That is every bit as bad as what they claim is happening with banning books.
The worst edits IMO are the ones just marked removed
I would consider myself somewhere not too far from woke and I don't agree with this 1984 style rewriting of literature at all. This is neither left nor right, this is just wrong.
Most litterature doesn't last for many centuries until the language is so outdated that laypeople find it difficult to read without translation. It will then be translated, adding a layer of interpretation. All translations have that layer from the very start.
Yet the original versions are still around for those who prefer them.
Is it not okay to be able to pick a 2023 version, or a 1960s version depending on your own preferences?
How is that nearly as bad as banning a book?
The only problem I have with changes like this is if there's a lack of transparency, which I would to some degree agree is the case here.
>The only problem I have with changes like this is if there's a lack of transparency, which I would to some degree agree is the case here.
This reads like a side-note tacked onto the end of your thoughts.
To people that have a problem with it, it's the entire goddamn point. I'm fully aware when I'm picking up a greek tradegy I'm reading a translated interpretation. Now the reader is being denied the chance to see how the author wrote and talked straight from their writings. If the author's use of language isn't pleasant or moral by my standards today, I don't want to be misled to think that the new way is how they've always written.
It's immoral to sanitise the past for children and lead them to believe that we've always had today's moralities figured out, to children unaware of the edits, they're being deprived of the fact that society evolves and fights and works these things out.
If they're unaware that society can update it's morals (because some nitwit decided to slyly change language in a book in a way that's not transparent), maybe they'll think they don't have the power to change anything themselves.
> Now the reader is being denied the chance to see how the author wrote and talked straight from their writings
I don't agree. These version are obviously new and not the original. Changes are often made to books in newer versions. Most people who are used to reading books will know that.
> It's immoral to sanitise the past for children and lead them to believe that we've always had today's moralities figured out, to children unaware of the edits, they're being deprived of the fact that society evolves and fights and works these things out.
Or the children will like the new versions better because they are not being mocked by them. No one is taking from them the option to go back and read the original books if they, or their parents, are curious.
> If they're unaware that society can update it's morals (because some nitwit decided to slyly change language in a book in a way that's not transparent), maybe they'll think they don't have the power to change anything themselves.
This seems very contrived to me. You are expecting children to read these books, ask why the moral is different, then have their parents tell them that the world changes, or derive that themselves? I think there are so many other, and more obvious, ways that children will naturally learn that lesson.
> I don't agree. These version are obviously new and not the original. Changes are often made to books in never versions. Most people who are used to reading books will know that.
Sure, even Roald Dahl rewrote his stories to remove insensitive language. The key is he was the one that did it. It matters. Massively. And what makes these versions “obviously” new to a reader? How will they know it’s missing entire sentences?
> This seems very contrived to me. You are expecting children to read these books, ask why the moral is different, then have their parents tell them that the world changes, or derive that themselves?
Yes. Many books I read as a child in school had the language “of the day” in it and the teachers were clear to point out and discuss why we don’t see that language anymore. I came away more educated as to the injustices of the time the book was authored. If I had got an edited version without any indication that it was an edit, then I’m being deprived of that knowledge.
I think you're overestimating the extent to which anyone on the left or right approves of this kind of censorship. This is one bad decision by probably 2 or 3 people in a publishing company. The overwhelming consensus online seems to be that this is bad, and I can't seem to find anyone of any political persuasion who thinks otherwise.
People on the left are apoplectic about banning books for kids, yet here they are literally rewriting them. That is every bit as bad as what they claim is happening with banning books.
The worst edits IMO are the ones just marked removed