Culture Roald Dahl books given inclusive overhaul by 'sensitivity readers' - Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute.

Augustus Gloop is no longer fat, Mrs Twit is no longer fearfully ugly, and the Oompa-Loompas have gone gender-neutral in new editions of Roald Dahl’s beloved stories.

The publisher, Puffin, has made hundreds of changes to the original text, removing many of Dahl’s colourful descriptions and making his characters less grotesque.

The review of Dahl’s language was undertaken to ensure that the books “can continue to be enjoyed by all today”, Puffin said.

References to physical appearance have been heavily edited. The word “fat” has been removed from every book - Augustus Gloop in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory may still look like a ball of dough, but can now only be described as “enormous”.

In the same story, the Oompa-Loompas are no longer “tiny”, “titchy” or “no higher than my knee” but merely small. And where once they were “small men”, they are now “small people”.

Passages not written by Dahl have also been added. 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.”

In previous editions of James and the Giant Peach, the Centipede sings: “Aunt Sponge was terrifically fat/And tremendously flabby at that,” and, “Aunt Spiker was thin as a wire/And dry as a bone, only drier.”

Both verses have been removed, and in their place are the underwhelming rhymes: “Aunt Sponge was a nasty old brute/And deserved to be squashed by the fruit,” and, “Aunt Spiker was much of the same/And deserves half of the blame.”

References to “female” characters have disappeared - Miss Trunchbull in Matilda, once a “most formidable female”, is now a “most formidable woman”.

“Boys and girls” has been turned into “children”. The Cloud-Men in James and the Giant Peach have become Cloud-People and Fantastic Mr Fox’s three sons have become daughters.

Matilda reads Jane Austen rather than Rudyard Kipling, and a witch posing as “a cashier in a supermarket” now works as “a top scientist”.

Mrs Twit’s “fearful ugliness” is reduced to “ugliness”, while Mrs Hoppy in Esio Trot is not an “attractive middle-aged lady” but a “kind middle-aged lady”.

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”.

An emphasis on mental health has led to the removal of “crazy” and “mad”, which Dahl used frequently in comic fashion. A mention in Esio Trot of tortoises being “backward” - the joke behind the book’s title - has been excised.

The words “black” and “white” have been removed: characters no longer turn “white with fear” and the Big Friendly Giant in The BFG cannot wear a black cloak.

The changes were made by the publisher, Puffin, and the Roald Dahl Story Company, now owned by Netflix, with sensitivity readers hired to scrutinise the text.

The review began in 2020, when the company was still run by the Dahl family. Netflix acquired the literary estate in 2021 for a reported £500 million.

Sensitivities over Dahl’s stories were heightened when a 2020 Hollywood version of The Witches led to a backlash over its depiction of the Grand Witch, played by Anne Hathaway, with fingers missing from each hand.

Warner Bros was forced to make an apology after Paralympians and charities said it was offensive to the limb difference community.

That same year, the Dahl family and the company apologised for the author’s past anti-Semitic statements.

Matthew Dennison, Dahl’s biographer, said that the author - who died in 1990 - chose his vocabulary with care. “I’m almost certain that he would have recognised that alterations to his novels prompted by the political climate were driven by adults rather than children," he said.

 
Phillip Pullman wants you to know that he didn't like Roald Dahl anyway. This guy is so salty, didn't he write some young adult fantasy? I remember there being a very dumb movie. LOL. Seethe, bro. I'm not going to read your literally-who recommendations.

Pullman, however, simply encouraged children simply to read “better” authors.

“Let him go out of print,” the author of His Dark Materials said on Monday. He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that people should instead explore writers such as Malorie Blackman, Michael Morpurgo and Beverley Naidoo. “Read all of these wonderful authors who are writing today, who don’t get as much of a look-in because of the massive commercial gravity of people like Roald Dahl.”
Asked about the controversy over the rewrites, he said: “Dahl can look after himself. I hadn’t read his books for very many years and I don’t want to again.”
 
Not dissimilar to Prince Philip and a good number of the old school privately educated men of that generation.

It was a curious bridge between Victorian-Edwardian conservatives and coming to understand the democratization of modern western society. Especially in the UK.

That is another reason why Norway is a bit more magical in Dahls descriptions as to him it was both a place of happy childhood memories with grandparents and probably seemed more like “how things should be” to him.

The kind of complex man that Dahl was doesn’t exist in todays world. The pathetic attempts by millennials and Gen Z is just offensive in comparison.
You are not complex and deep if you grow a stupid beard, pretend to like mucked with beer and do a useless career or become an influencer.
Dahl is the kind of role model which sadly no longer exists.
The other part of it is that the publishers are shooting down future Rowling. Dahlia, etc., if they don’t 100% match their ideology. So what we get is always water downed with progressive ideology.
 
Isn't he the guy who tried to be the atheist C. S. Lewis? I remember they started adapting his trilogy after Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, but stopped after the first movie because no one watched it.
I think the movie suffered from the studio trying to repeat the success and tone of the Lewis movies when the vibe is fairly different.

They made it into a tv series in recent years that has done pretty well but paused thanks to Rona.
 
And now the prime minister Rishi Sunak added his pinch of salt in this case.
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-64702224 ( https://archive.is/7pYmu )
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has criticised changes to Roald Dahl books, after the removal of some references to things like characters' appearance and weight sparked a fierce debate.
Dahl's estate and publisher said works including The BFG and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory had been updated to be more suitable for modern audiences.
Some said they approved of the changes.
But Mr Sunak's spokesman said works of fiction should be "preserved and not airbrushed".
Borrowing a word Dahl invented for playing with language, the PM's spokesman said: "When it comes to our rich and varied literary heritage, the prime minister agrees with the BFG that we shouldn't gobblefunk around with words."
Others to speak out against the changes include author Sir Salman Rushdie.

"Roald Dahl was no angel but this is absurd censorship," the Midnight's Children and Satanic Verses writer posted on Twitter. "Puffin Books and the Dahl estate should be ashamed."
 
I've been wanting to go back into reading, so I started hanging around my local used bookstores. They might not be the most organized or even pretty sometimes, but you can always find some great stuff there.

My favorite thing about older books is the language used in them, even when it is translated to another one. Sometimes it sounds very flowery and archaic, but this works really well in illustrating just how differently people spoke or wrote back then. It feels genuine. One of my favorite and oldest books is from the 1920s and I remember finding a much newer edition of it at a library once. I tried reading it, but the language felt a bit too modern to me. I'm actually not too bothered by this, because languages do evolve over time and sometimes simplifying the prose can bring in younger readers who don't necessarily understand the long winded tones and ramblings of the past (I myself am guilty of this as well). As long as a book set in Victorian England doesn't sound like some millennial teenager's TikTok video, I'm okay with it. And neither do I condone sanitizing it for an audience of people who can't read nor understand anything longer than a Twitter post.

Anyway, what was I trying to say?

Updating the language to a modern form? Fair enough.

Updating the language to conform to "modern standards"? Kys, faggot.
 
I've been wanting to go back into reading, so I started hanging around my local used bookstores. They might not be the most organized or even pretty sometimes, but you can always find some great stuff there.

My favorite thing about older books is the language used in them, even when it is translated to another one. Sometimes it sounds very flowery and archaic, but this works really well in illustrating just how differently people spoke or wrote back then. It feels genuine. One of my favorite and oldest books is from the 1920s and I remember finding a much newer edition of it at a library once. I tried reading it, but the language felt a bit too modern to me. I'm actually not too bothered by this, because languages do evolve over time and sometimes simplifying the prose can bring in younger readers who don't necessarily understand the long winded tones and ramblings of the past (I myself am guilty of this as well). As long as a book set in Victorian England doesn't sound like some millennial teenager's TikTok video, I'm okay with it. And neither do I condone sanitizing it for an audience of people who can't read nor understand anything longer than a Twitter post.

Anyway, what was I trying to say?

Updating the language to a modern form? Fair enough.

Updating the language to conform to "modern standards"? Kys, faggot.
I noticed this with things like the Canterbury Tales and Shakespeare and other “old English” works - the modernized version was nice to get a handle on the story but the original work was worth the study necessary to appreciate.
 
Roald Dahl’s Books Are Rewritten to Cut Potentially Offensive Language
The New York Times (archive.ph)
By Derrick Bryson Taylor
2023-02-20 16:43:20GMT

LONDON — New editions of the works of Roald Dahl — the best-selling British novelist whose children’s classics include “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” “Matilda” and “James and the Giant Peach” — have been rewritten in an effort to make them less offensive and more inclusive, according to a representative from the author’s estate.

The changes have prompted widespread criticism from prominent literary figures and others, including Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of Britain. The books’ publisher, Puffin Books, and the author’s estate did not immediately respond to questions about the nature of the changes. However, The Telegraph, a British newspaper, earlier reported that hundreds of words, including descriptions of characters’ appearances, races and genders, had been changed or removed in at least 10 of the author’s 19 children’s books.

Dahl died in 1990. A review of the author’s works began in 2020, before Netflix acquired the Roald Dahl Story Company, which manages the author’s copyrights and trademarks, Rick Behari, a company spokesman, said in a statement on Monday.

“When publishing new print runs of books written years ago, it’s not unusual to review the language used alongside updating other details including a book’s cover and page layout,” Mr. Behari said, adding that the efforts were led together with Puffin. “Our guiding principle throughout has been to maintain the story lines, characters, and the irreverence and sharp-edged spirit of the original text.”

Changes reported by The Telegraph include characters who are no longer described as “fat” and references to “mothers” and “fathers” that have been updated to “parents” or “family.”

Mr. Behari said that the estate had partnered with Inclusive Minds, an organization that champions diversity and accessibility in children’s literature. In a statement on Monday, the group declined to discuss the Dahl project specifically. While noting that it did not “write, edit or rewrite texts,” the group said that it had helped “provide valuable input when it comes to reviewing language that can be damaging and perpetuate harmful stereotypes.”

Dahl, who was overtly anti-Semitic, was no stranger to criticism, as his works were called antisocial, brutish and anti-feminist. But they remain widely read and are regularly reimagined for the silver screen. “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” has twice been turned into films, in 1971 and 2005, and another adaptation, starring Timothée Chalamet, is set to be released this year.

Criticism of the changes was swift.

“There are millions, probably, of his books in secondhand editions in school libraries and classrooms,” Philip Pullman, author of the “His Dark Materials” trilogy, told the BBC on Monday. “What are you going to do about them? All those words are still there. You going to round up all the books and cross them out with a big black pen?”

A spokesman for Mr. Sunak, referencing a work by Dahl, told the BBC, “When it comes to our rich and varied literary heritage, the prime minister agrees with the BFG that we shouldn’t gobblefunk around with words.”

And Salman Rushdie, the prizewinning author of “Midnight’s Children” and “The Satanic Verses,” called the changes “absurd censorship.”

Suzanne Nossel, chief executive of Pen America, an organization that supports freedom of expression, said on Twitter that the organization was “alarmed” by the changes and that selective editing could “represent a dangerous new weapon.”

“Those who might cheer specific edits to Dahl’s 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,” she said.

Matthew Dennison, who wrote a biography of Dahl, said by email on Monday that the author was known to have fractious relationships with his editors and disliked anyone tampering with his work.

Dahl often focused on individual words or particular expressions when editing, Mr. Dennison said, and “continued to use elements of the interwar slang of his childhood, and aspects of his vocabulary up to his death.”

Dahl always resisted unnecessary sanitizing, Mr. Dennison said, noting that the author would recognize that alterations to his novels, brought on by the political climate, reflected adult sensibilities rather than children’s misgivings.

“I never get any protests from children,” Mr. Dahl once said. “All you get are giggles of mirth and squirms of delight. I know what children like.”

Derrick Bryson Taylor is a general assignment reporter. He previously worked at The New York Post’s PageSix.com and Essence magazine.
 
I haven't read this longass thread and I'm not going to so sorry if someone has already brought this up but this article is a huge improvement and a sign that the pendulum is swinging back.

The censoring and unacknowledged rewriting of children's literature has been completely normal since the late 70s at least.

I saw Enid Blyton mentioned - her stuff has been being fucked with for years already over race and smacking and just generally being too cool. Here's an article with a note from someone bitching about her in 1938


Here's an article about people getting the vapors over Noddy in the 90s


The internet makes it possible to invisibly rewrite texts, sure, but it also makes it super easy to collect and disseminate evidence of how long this stupid bullshit has been happening. Nobody got as mad about Blyton as fast as people are getting about Dahl right now. People were doing just as egregious things to literature but it was much harder to collate the evidence.

The Blyton stuff was a big enough deal that there is at least plenty of easily accessible evidence about it if you know to look. There's a huge amount of other reworking of children's lit that you have to do be knowledgeable on the subject to even be aware of.

This is a publishing house that was started partially to ensure that unfuckedwith texts of girls' school stories would remain available


Part of the issue when it's UK authors is that there are already multiple Americanized versions; I have multiple editions of some Noel Streatfield books that have huge variations. I expect there's some language in the American publishing contracts that allows for wokeifying as well as turning every jumper into a sweater and every lorry into a truck.

It's absolutely a good thing that this is getting publicity.
 
People are indeed pissed, but I am not sure Amazon is going to care, as a lot of these companies pushing woke shit have the attitude of "We know best, and we do not care what you have to say, so shut up, you ignorant peasants!" and are large enough to where any sort of backlash is probably not going to impact them all that much as they have captured so much of the market share.

Also, when stuff like this happens, scalpers are going to grab all of the unabridged versions of these books as well, and start charging hundreds or thousands of dollars on eBay or elsewhere on what used to be a cheap $15-$20 dollar book, and soon, you might not be able to buy them at all as nobody will want to part with their copy because of how valuable they have become.
 
I haven't read this longass thread and I'm not going to so sorry if someone has already brought this up but this article is a huge improvement and a sign that the pendulum is swinging back.

The censoring and unacknowledged rewriting of children's literature has been completely normal since the late 70s at least.

I saw Enid Blyton mentioned - her stuff has been being fucked with for years already over race and smacking and just generally being too cool. Here's an article with a note from someone bitching about her in 1938


Here's an article about people getting the vapors over Noddy in the 90s


The internet makes it possible to invisibly rewrite texts, sure, but it also makes it super easy to collect and disseminate evidence of how long this stupid bullshit has been happening. Nobody got as mad about Blyton as fast as people are getting about Dahl right now. People were doing just as egregious things to literature but it was much harder to collate the evidence.

The Blyton stuff was a big enough deal that there is at least plenty of easily accessible evidence about it if you know to look. There's a huge amount of other reworking of children's lit that you have to do be knowledgeable on the subject to even be aware of.

This is a publishing house that was started partially to ensure that unfuckedwith texts of girls' school stories would remain available


Part of the issue when it's UK authors is that there are already multiple Americanized versions; I have multiple editions of some Noel Streatfield books that have huge variations. I expect there's some language in the American publishing contracts that allows for wokeifying as well as turning every jumper into a sweater and every lorry into a truck.

It's absolutely a good thing that this is getting publicity.
People are indeed pissed, but I am not sure Netflix is going to care, as a lot of these companies pushing woke shit have the attitude of "We know best, and we do not care what you have to say, so shut up, you ignorant peasants!" and are large enough to where any sort of backlash is probably not going to impact them all that much as they have captured so much of the market share.


Also, when stuff like this happens, scalpers are going to grab all of the unabridged versions of these books as well, and start charging hundreds or thousands of dollars on eBay or elsewhere on what used to be a cheap $15-$20 dollar book, and soon, you might not be able to buy them at all as nobody will want to part with their copy because of how valuable they have become.
 
Last edited:
Isn't he the guy who tried to be the atheist C. S. Lewis? I remember they started adapting his trilogy after Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, but stopped after the first movie because no one watched it.

The only good thing about The Golden Compass is the Kate Bush song. They do not deserve her. But she contributed. I believe it was also very short notice too.
 
Isn't he the guy who tried to be the atheist C. S. Lewis? I remember they started adapting his trilogy after Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, but stopped after the first movie because no one watched it.
They made a movie that bombed because they cut out most of the anti-Catholic-Church parts. Then they recently made a BBC One series which again nobody watched because most of the episodes nothing fucking happens. Seriously, it had the last season released in December last year and most people didn't even notice.

It's also infamous for having two 12-13 year old protagonists have sex to stop the world ending or something equally retarded.
 
Back