2023 Editions on the Way [closed]

[Sheila (in LA)]

Oh darn. I'm not a subscriber to the Washington Post so I hoped if I had access everyone would. Here are the first 2 paragraphs:


A number of beloved novels, for both children and adults, are being “retouched” — updated to remove overtly racist, sexist or otherwise offensive language. Publishers and literary estates — including those of best-selling mystery writer Agatha Christie, children’s author Roald Dahl and James Bond creator Ian Fleming — argue these changes will ensure, in the words of the Dahl estate, that “wonderful stories and characters continue to be enjoyed by all children today.”

But it’s a threat to free expression, to historical honesty and, indeed, to readers themselves for contemporary editors to comb through works of fiction written at different moments and rewrite them for today’s mind-set, particularly with little explanation of process or limiting principles. The trend raises uncomfortable questions about authorship and authenticity, and it ignores the reality that texts are more than consumer goods or sources of entertainment in the present. They are also cultural artifacts that attest to the moment in which they were written — the good and the bad.

**********
What surprised me is that it's the author or author's estate in many cases (not just publishers) that has made the decision to rewrite.

Here's the last paragraph:
Literature is often meant to be provocative. Stripping it of any potential to offend dilutes its strength, especially in a moment when there is a concerted effort in this country to limit what can be read and taught. Publishers need not reprint books with no acknowledgment of potentially offensive contents. They can treat the publication of such texts as opportunities to explain why they read the way they do, in introductions and in footnotes. And, if publishers see little option but to change wording, they should at least explain to readers what they are changing and why.

[Carol She's So Novel꧁꧂]

We cross posted Sheila, but I'll leave mine up as we have quoted different things.

We usually try to stay away from political controversy in this group, but I do want to acknowledge the last paragraph as this is important.

I am guessing (only) that GH's heirs may have agreed to the censorship of the Grand Sophy, so that we finally get the long awaited film.

[Margaret]

Sheila (in LA) wrote: "What surprised me is that it's the author or author's estate in many cases (not just publishers) that has made the decision to rewrite."

In the case of the author deciding to revise their own book, I would say that's definitely their prerogative (which doesn't mean I'll ever let go of my original edition of King Kobold, mind you, no matter how well I understand Chris Stasheff's reasons for revising it). Author's estate or publisher is ... iffier.

[Carol She's So Novel꧁꧂]

Since the op has left the group & the last comment is dated June 12

I am closing & archiving this thread.

If anyone else wants to talk about the Georgette Heyer novels that have been edited by sensitivity readers please start a new thread.