lol. this is absurd. the entire technical instruction manual industry just went through a year-long ultimately unsuccessful effort to remove “master-slave” from the terminology. there was no actual pushback, but it’s use is so pervasive, it’s too hard to fix everywhere. going to take years.
it’s arguably easier to do with a novel only a few read per year.
Gatekeeping instead of actually trying to argue your point? Cute.
Some gatekeeping is good, actually. I’m not going to ask someone who has never done X about how we should preserve and value X.
Just to add a little:
If someone like VFS says “How can you value X? X is dumb/worthless/unprofitable/etc”
And I ask, "Have you ever [done/eaten/experienced] X?
He says “No.”
We can exclude his thinking about X. That’s good gatekeeping. He’s welcome to go eat a strawberry and report back on his thoughts on strawberries, but until then you are GATEKEEPEN’D!
LOL at thinking that one has to be a published novelist to be able to speak intelligently about censorship and editing issues surrounding novels.
Ah yes, we must fire all the librarians who are not themselves published novelists. Conceded. Where do I go to buy your novel so that I may be enlightened prior to writing mine?
Wow these guys have really come around on the whole nomodsnomasters thing.
You guys are really itching for a fight. Go back and read the original exchange.
We’re talking about VERY BROAD life experiences. Like, eating food. Have you ever eaten food? If not, please don’t be a restaurant critic.
Yeah, VFS provided an example of a novel that got censored in subsequent publications, and you started grilling him on if he’d ever written a novel. Not read a novel, mind you. You required writing one before proceeding.
Oh, I guess I’m the one being silly. Obviously just as many people have published novels as have eaten food.
where the fuck i say that? certainly not in this thread, or the original exchange.
here’s what i said: “yes you can love the art and also hate some part.”
You don’t value the legacy of an artist.
The changes, like you, don’t place enough value on doing something that takes years of effort and contributes to your personal legacy. I don’t think my children should edit my work to say the opposite of what it says. Even if I was racist. ESPECIALLY if I was racist.
Go write a different book. Or read one of the millions of other amazing children’s books to your kids. The only legit reason to make hundreds of edits to Dahl’s books is to make his millionaire heirs a few more millions.
ty. btw i provided multiple examples of edited novels and one textbook, as well as shakespeare plays. i even name dropped some editors itt.
ETA: how can you appreciate the EDITS if you’ve never been an EDITOR yourself, huh?
on the contrary, i can value the legacy AND make some edits or add footnotes, or move the book into a different grade curriculum. we all can. you are just defending an extreme position that doesn’t describe our experience, and you are stubborn about it.
is that the issue with Dahl? they are trying to say the opposite? are you sure?
Is it better that the heirs profit off of the racist edition than off the censored edition? Is it better to cease publication of the book at all than it is for the heirs to continue to profit one way or the other?
The Dahl edits proposed zero footnotes, zero editor names on the cover or title page. Just hundreds of clunky edits that made the prose worse and reversed the meaning of entire passages in many cases.
This is a different topic, but I think they should leave the books as they are. If people want to buy slightly racist quirky books, fine. I’m not into banning books. I’m just opposed to Weekend at Bernie’s’ing a guy to make his work aesthetically worse while also saying the opposite of what he said.
so is your problem that they could have done better edits, not that they attempted edits at all?
No, I don’t think they should do anything. I was just correcting your interpretation of what was happening.
but as long as the “meaning” was staying the same, and artistically still appealing, you’d be ok with it?
from the same OP article. Dahl himself edited out oompa-loompas as Black pygmies. why do you think he wouldn’t continue editing his works if he stayed alive?