Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Children's books

Join in for children's book recommendations.

Original poster

Roald Dahl

56 replies

Hijinks75 · 18/02/2023 19:15

I just read an article about Dahl's books being “rewritten “ to remove offensive language, e.g. fat in Charlie and the chocolate factory, making the oompa lump as gender neutral, changing fantastic mr foxes sons to daughters and numerous other things, am I alone in finding this more offensive than leaving the books as they are

OP posts:
RhubarbRocks · 18/02/2023 19:54

@PlaitBilledDuckyPuss ah sorry I didn’t ever read it in that way - I thought it meant that we all need to look beyond looks and see the person within (and anyone calling someone ugly just because of what they look like is therefore stupid). Sorry if I’m the one who misunderstood that paragraph.

yellowsuncat · 18/02/2023 19:53

I have to agree the whole thing is ridiculous!

Frankldearest · 18/02/2023 19:53

As a fat, ugly female I don't find the originals offensive. Actually, I find it offensive that the terms fat, ugly and female are now considered so awful that they are cut out of books before children are allowed to read them. Will the illustrations be doctored too? Will no fat or ugly people be allowed to be shown?
The Roald Dahl Story Company claims that the "irreverence and sharp-edged spirit" has been maintained. Rubbish. It's not irreverent to criticise things that everybody in society is encouraged to criticise.

DysonBison · 18/02/2023 19:52

According to the Telegraph's article:

One of Dahl’s most popular lines from The Twits is: “You can have a wonky nose and a crooked mouth and a double chin and stick-out teeth, but if you have good thoughts they will shine out of your face like sunbeams.” It has been edited to take out the “double chin”.

So... what's the logic there?

MillicentTrilbyHiggins · 18/02/2023 19:52

While I don't agree with changing books (Most of the time anyway) I can see the logic behind some of the changes.

But what on earth is offensive about Mr Fox having 3 sons? Shall i tell my friend she's offensive for committing the sin of having 3 boys? Is my cousin more or less offensive for having 3 daughters?

PlaitBilledDuckyPuss · 18/02/2023 19:50

RhubarbRocks · 18/02/2023 19:47

Doesn’t it miss the point on Mrs Twit - she was ugly because she had ugly thoughts:

“A person who has good thoughts cannot ever be ugly. You can have a wonky nose and a crooked mouth and a double chin and stick-out teeth, but if you have good thoughts, they will shine out of your face like sunbeams and you will always look lovely.”

Which is not great to hear for those of us who, objectively, are not very good looking and sometimes get called 'ugly'. I wouldn't be sorry to see that paragraph go.

JammiDodgers · 18/02/2023 19:50

homebirthAMA · 18/02/2023 19:48

Like Enid Blyton characters being changed from Dick and Fanny to Rick and Franny...

😁

I never knew this . Crazy how everything offends everyone nowadays.

Cuppasoupmonster · 18/02/2023 19:49

PlaitBilledDuckyPuss · 18/02/2023 19:48

I'm not saying it would be, just that changing him from 'fat' to 'enormous' is completely pointless, and if they wanted to, they could remove any suggestion that he was larger than average.

Show quote history

It’s bizarre if there’s nothing wrong with being fat, body confidence etc then why not just say fat? Confused

RhubarbRocks · 18/02/2023 19:49

RhubarbRocks · 18/02/2023 19:47

Doesn’t it miss the point on Mrs Twit - she was ugly because she had ugly thoughts:

“A person who has good thoughts cannot ever be ugly. You can have a wonky nose and a crooked mouth and a double chin and stick-out teeth, but if you have good thoughts, they will shine out of your face like sunbeams and you will always look lovely.”

Sorry to clarify as it wasn’t mentioned above - Mrs Twit will no longer be called ugly in the new book

JammiDodgers · 18/02/2023 19:49

It wont stop here . It’s utterly insane .

We have all the old RD books thank goodness and bloody love them.

YANBU

Its fucking ridiculous.

PlaitBilledDuckyPuss · 18/02/2023 19:48

GoodChat · 18/02/2023 19:46

But if we're saying taller and thinner why would shorter and fatter be offensive?

I'm not saying it would be, just that changing him from 'fat' to 'enormous' is completely pointless, and if they wanted to, they could remove any suggestion that he was larger than average.

homebirthAMA · 18/02/2023 19:48

Like Enid Blyton characters being changed from Dick and Fanny to Rick and Franny...

RhubarbRocks · 18/02/2023 19:47

Doesn’t it miss the point on Mrs Twit - she was ugly because she had ugly thoughts:

“A person who has good thoughts cannot ever be ugly. You can have a wonky nose and a crooked mouth and a double chin and stick-out teeth, but if you have good thoughts, they will shine out of your face like sunbeams and you will always look lovely.”

GoodChat · 18/02/2023 19:46

But if we're saying taller and thinner why would shorter and fatter be offensive?

PlaitBilledDuckyPuss · 18/02/2023 19:43

Cuppasoupmonster · 18/02/2023 19:42

Depends on the size of the pipe doesn’t it?

Show quote history

Yes, exactly. And he could still have been left taller and thinner than he was at the end of the book.

GoodChat · 18/02/2023 19:42

Passmethecrisps · 18/02/2023 19:40

It’s a bit daft. I won’t fib - there are wee bits in the BFG that I leave out or change but that’s up to me. When a character is described as fat, both my children have responded saying it was unkind. Surely that discussion is healthier than erasure

Discussions better than erasure but it's up to you to leave bits out?

Cuppasoupmonster · 18/02/2023 19:42

PlaitBilledDuckyPuss · 18/02/2023 19:36

If they were seriously worried about fat-shaming, they could have removed any reference to Gloop's size and just had him as a greedy character, leaving it to the reader's imagination what he looked like. You don't need to be obese to get stuck in a glass pipe.

Depends on the size of the pipe doesn’t it?

Passmethecrisps · 18/02/2023 19:40

It’s a bit daft. I won’t fib - there are wee bits in the BFG that I leave out or change but that’s up to me. When a character is described as fat, both my children have responded saying it was unkind. Surely that discussion is healthier than erasure

Viviennemary · 18/02/2023 19:38

I heard this on TV the other day. It's definitely true. I thought how pathetic.

Original poster
Hijinks75 · 18/02/2023 19:37

Apologies for not including the link and yes they not removing the old versions, yet,

OP posts:
PlaitBilledDuckyPuss · 18/02/2023 19:36

If they were seriously worried about fat-shaming, they could have removed any reference to Gloop's size and just had him as a greedy character, leaving it to the reader's imagination what he looked like. You don't need to be obese to get stuck in a glass pipe.

TaRaDeBumDeAy · 18/02/2023 19:32

Ridiculous. Yanbu.

AlmostaMamma · 18/02/2023 19:31

mum2jakie · 18/02/2023 19:26

They have been doing the same to Enid Blyton books for years. Dame Slap being changed to Dame Scold, changing characters' names etc

Enid Blyton’s The Three Golliwogs featured three Black doll characters named “Golly,” “Wolly,” and “N***.”

I’m REALLY okay with that sort of thing being changed.

PlaitBilledDuckyPuss · 18/02/2023 19:27

"Augustus Gloop in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is now described as “enormous”.

Ah, that makes all the difference Hmm

"In The Witches, a paragraph explaining that witches are bald beneath their wigs ends with the new line: “There are plenty of other reasons why women might wear wigs and there is certainly nothing wrong with that.”

Confused That seems as if it's saying being bald is a 'witch like' characteristic.

Hawkins003 · 18/02/2023 19:27

Which begs the question, I'f society is doing this with books, then how much human history has been altered by the victors ?

Swipe left for the next trending thread