Roald Dahl books have been edited to remove the word "female" along with other edits.

[GoChasingWaterfalls]

www.theguardian.com/books/2023/feb/18/roald-dahl-books-rewritten-to-remove-language-deemed-offensive?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

It's literary terrorism.

It’s not what he wrote! That’s what’s wrong.

Publishers are not censors. Editing a book before publication is not the same as bowdlerising a published book.

This doesn't suit the 'regime in power' as the Conservative government presumably has no involvement with this commercial decision.

That discussion was about sensitivity readers who are pre-publication I understood.

If you think the tories are in charge of our cultural life then you are very out of touch.

The woke authoritarians run the arts and culture in this country (and across most of the west, it seems.)

Ah yes. In that case, you're right. Some publishers do now employ censors.

This doesn't suit the 'regime in power' as the Conservative government presumably has no involvement with this commercial decision.

You're taking my post too literally. That was the plot of the book.

I'm talking about changing already published books. Although, this does seem to be being done to suit a small minority who shouts the loudest.

I read Of Mice and Men at school. It wasn't held up as a great literary work, it was read because of the controversy and historical context.

In my experience in a very racially diverse school, people weren't offended. We were told before reading it that that word would be in the book and to remember the context. People were more interested in who would have to read that part. Teacher did it and discussed it afterwards

Just to add:

Changing Miss Trunchbull's description from "a formidable female" misses the point - Dahl is using alliteration, which we teach children in KS2 to make their stories more readable/less boring to read. Children know what a female is. If we remove or bastardise literary devices such as this - the story becomes less readable.

Part of Dahl (and Walliam)'s appeal to children is to write about the revolting. Sanitise the writing by eg swapping gendered language, and many children just won't read them any more. These authors often use the revolting/unfair to prompt feelings of justice and fairness in the reader.

If we are to remove all 'problematic' elements in a story, where will it stop? In 30/40/50 years time will we see thrillers remove all descriptive language? Will Malorie Blackman's excellent, thought-provoking descriptions be altered and watered-down?

If an author has a character express views we vehemently disagree with, should they be replaced?

Again, where does it stop? We already see a move from policing fiction, to challenging factual writing. Scientific writing is already changing, to the detriment of clarity.

The substitution of a few dated words shouldn't change the enjoyment of new readers.

How is ‘female’ dated?!!!
This is really insidious and dangerous, and has to stop. Talk about a slippery slope…

beastlyslumber
Sorry if my point was unclear. Yes, these examples are very different from the point being discussed.
I was just musing on the fact that it is quite different to an author choosing to edit their work, but also that alternative versions (like abridged versions) are nothing new. Plus using someone else's work and words to generate content and make money off it.

The idea the customers of art can't get what they want due to the 'woke authoritarian' arts-controlling blob is basically a conspiracy theory.

The substitution of a few dated words shouldn't change the enjoyment of new readers.

Why is female dated?

And yes reading that excerpt below it is removing enjoyment because it is so poorly done.

@ReedRite I didn’t say it was my point of view. I said that these are the issues students will be raising and it’s not so simple to dismiss them with ‘Well, it was a long time ago’. These issues feel fresh to them.

Apparently so. I think it’s the Church of England (but I could be wrong) wants to take he, father, him etc out of the god references. I’d imagine they’ll be all sorts of problems with that - The Lord’s Prayer, The Father, Son and Holy Ghost trilogy etc. I’m athiest so have no personal connection but I really can’t see how well that’s going to go down with their followers who are mostly older and non woke. If they’re trying to encourage younger people to join their religion they’ll be wasting their efforts judging by how little they seem to be interested in god generally.

Is it? Good job that's not what I said then, isn't it?

However, it's quite clear that in the arts generally, many of the people who gatekeep and hold positions of power and influence are authoritarians in thrall to woke ideology. We have discussed several examples just on these boards - from Rosie Kay's dance company sacking her, to Kate Clanchy's book being censored, and countless instances of authors like Gillian Phillips or artists like Jess de Wahl being cancelled. Not to mention the full on monstering of JK Rowling.

Well, quite.

It’s fucking ridiculous, outrageous and, frankly, dangerous. It HAS to stop.

Yes. Where will it stop. If the next edition is changed again, and then again, what will be left? Will what is left have any of the richness (even the negative emotions) of the original.

Fuck! What if they change Jane Austen next?

When my dc were in junior school, (before the introduction of curriculum-driven compulsory elements in writing, which to my mind are stifling), there was huge emphasis on encouraging alternative phrases, words, conjunctions to avoid repetitiveness. At this rate we’re going to end up with an approved (God knows by whom, I dread to think) list of words which publishers will allow, no deviation permitted, with truly creative writing dumped in the shit.

Then it’s a fantastic opportunity to use this as a jumping off point, to engage them and get them thinking critically, not just parroting the current fashionable ideology.

The passion the young feel to be fair to all people and be empathetic and mindful of others’ feelings is wonderful. Previously society was too uncaring and focused on the needs of the elite, mental health issues were stigmatised, etc. But the pendulum has swung far too far the other way and needs to be brought back into balance. Younger people don’t always have the life experience or wisdom to recognise this, or the nuanced thinking to pick up on the unforeseen consequences of their noble aims.

Let’s credit them with some intelligence and provide them with some truly ‘safe spaces’ in which they can debate and hear opposing points of view without being monstered and cast out from the tribe.

So is the word Male still considered ok or is that offensive as well? (Probably not🙄). Since when did the word Femal become offensive ffs and who deigned it so (and who the hell okayed it!)

this reminds me of the book Ella Minnow Pea. A book all about totalitarianism and compelled speech.

Growing up I hated stories that laboured the point and the politics. I hated Blue Peter and it’s ‘niceness’. My life wasn’t like that. I loved Ronald Dahl’s books as they showed children, who like me, didn’t have the best adults around. Children making their own way in the world - children who were often portrayed as more adult than the adults. From my point of view, these fictional children don’t need their fictional lives cleansed.

Some people do have too much time on their hands. It’s the ones sitting around in endless meetings discussing how to teach children not to be rude when trying to discover if someone is a witch in a fictional story.

Personally I do find female used as a noun offensive, although that might be because of the Ferengi in Start Trek TNG... As a verb fine.

I also don't have a problem with fat being taken out, I think many 80s/90s children were bullied or ostracised for being overweight and their depiction in children's literature could well have been a contributing factor.

I can't believe some people don't understand the significance of changing female to woman.

There are many people very invested in making sure they don’t.