R. Dahl Rewrite - sammy1

Well Dahl's books never did me any harm and I found them pretty amusing. May be the publisher should consider other rewrites so that snowflakes are not harmed. How about all the books on conflicts that have happened throughout history. The publisher could even change the endings so that whatever country you live in won. May be the fact that Nelson lost an arm and an eye is too upsetting for some. You cannot even watch TV these days without a red alert especially on anything made last century. What is the phrase of another time? Well I am still in this time and as far as I am aware nobody died or had attacks of the vapours back then. Just where does it end? Parts of the world must be laughing itself silly at us. We have got soft centred and our ancestors must be turning in their graves.

R. Dahl Rewrite - Adampr

I'm pretty sure none of Road Dahl's books are intended as a factual record of armed conflict. I suppose some of his autobiographical stuff talks about war.

Anyway, did you know he rewrote Charlie and the Chocolate Factory himself in 1970 to take out some of the worst bits? Maybe he just needed a better editor.

R. Dahl Rewrite - Ethan Edwards

Just more idiocy from today's Clown World. Who would have thought we'd have 1984 used as an instruction manual and the film Idiocracy being enacted simultaneously. Apologies for offense to the snowflake community. But there is no right to not being offended. Apologies for the offense that may cause . I'm sure our i**** masters will fix that soon enough.

Next Clown world flushed with its success from "twenty is plenty" launches a new pressure group "five mph is just peachy"

R. Dahl Rewrite - Adampr

The thing is, I don't think anyone told, or even asked, them to change the books. They did it with the single intention of selling more books and making more money. Surely that can't upset people?

R. Dahl Rewrite - Andrew-T

All that has happened in this century is that millions have been given the opportunity to say whatever they like to whomever they like, anonymously and often ignorantly, with no direct comeback. It's a bit like the old kids' game of ringing a doorbell and running away. And some of the recipients can't help themselves keeping the ball rolling while complaining about their (imagined) human right not to be offended gratuitously.

Social media have a lot to answer for.

R. Dahl Rewrite - Crickleymal

I don't know why you're worried about it. This sort of thing has been going on for centuries. Lewis Carroll was edited, Charles Dickens complained about it, Enid Blyton was edited whilst she was alive as was Roald Dahl. Bowdler edited Shakespeare back in Victorian times.

theconversation.com/roald-dahl-a-brief-history-of-...0

Edited by Crickleymal on 24/02/2023 at 10:18

R. Dahl Rewrite - FP

"I don't know why you're worried about it. This sort of thing has been going on for centuries."

Indeed. In a former occupation, I had reason to be aware of this sort of thing. Every age, every culture has its own sensitivities. The Catholic Church until 1966 had a list of banned writings, which at one point included Galileo's works about the movement of the sun and planets.

The history of censorship in the UK since the beginning of the twentieth century shows a gradual relaxation with regard to obscenity. Since then, the recognition of various forms of prejudice have resulted in increased restrictions around what can be said or written about race, religion and so on.

"Just where does it end? Parts of the world must be laughing itself silly at us. We have got soft centred and our ancestors must be turning in their graves."

- Sorry, but this is an over-reaction. Is our society is getting soft-centred anyway? I doubt it, but a controversy about what Roald Dahl wrote has little to do with it. My guess is that this is more about the "anti-wokeness" bandwagon than anything else.

As someone interested in literature, instinctively I always prefer the author's original intention. Dahl's appeal to kids was always partly based on his "naughtiness" and fondness for the grotesque - the frightening, even.

N.B. After the recent controversy, Penguin Books has said it will publish parallel editions of Dahl - a "classic" original edition and one "rewritten to 'cater for the sensitivities of modern audiences'". It would be slightly interesting to know what Penguin Books thinks it knows about the demand for the rewritten version. My guess is that it's small.

R. Dahl Rewrite - Bromptonaut

Another take:

davidallengreen.com/2023/02/a-latter-day-tale-of-t.../

No censorship, just a publisher exploiting the market.

R. Dahl Rewrite - Engineer Andy

Another take:

davidallengreen.com/2023/02/a-latter-day-tale-of-t.../

No censorship, just a publisher exploiting the market.

What 'market'? 999 times out of 1000, the wokerati who complain about ism in books, film and TV rarely consume the products they complain about or in great numbers (and why the get woke, go broke idea is correct over the longer term). They just like using their power to change things in their image, then it's onto the next target.

The problem is that we have so many weak people nominally 'in charge' of firms and organisations who will (on the advice of their either eaully weak-willed and/or politically correct) PR and/or HR management) bend to their will despite the demands being i****ic and/or just from a few people (most of whom are obvious nutcases).

What is sinister is when certain well-connected, highly placed / influential rich and powerful people /organisation fund such 'campaigns' and/or push them behind the scenes, such as BlackRock via their so-called ERG / DEI agendas.

Thankfully in this case, it appears enough normies, even the MSM have pushed back and the publishers have relented:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/02/24/roald-dahl-pub.../

Unfortunately similar things have yet to happen at other firms who've 'gone woke' and now produce terrible content and are losing money hand over fist, such as Disney. The BBC's own foreign-earned income from licencing Doctor WHO and Top Gear, as well as merchandise for the former has dropped dramatically since the politically-correct agenda ruined both shows in various ways. The BBC has in fact now sold the rights to the former to a US entertainment giant because of this huge drop in income.

R. Dahl Rewrite - Crickleymal

Nothing wrong in being "woke" as you call it or politically correct as it was in the 90s. I take it to mean having consideration for other people's feelings and history. If that makes me woke then it's a badge I'm proud to wear. Doesn't make me weak or timid.

R. Dahl Rewrite - alan1302

Nothing wrong in being "woke" as you call it or politically correct as it was in the 90s. I take it to mean having consideration for other people's feelings and history. If that makes me woke then it's a badge I'm proud to wear. Doesn't make me weak or timid.

Agree with you

R. Dahl Rewrite - Engineer Andy

Nothing wrong in being "woke" as you call it or politically correct as it was in the 90s. I take it to mean having consideration for other people's feelings and history. If that makes me woke then it's a badge I'm proud to wear. Doesn't make me weak or timid.

Agree with you

Except that 'being considerate with someone's feelings and history':

a) only works in one direction as regards political ideology or viewpoint;

b) the so-called 'history' of the use of thes 'new pronouns' can be mostly measure in days, weeks and months and was mostly made up by mentally-ill narcisists;

c) facts don't care about 'feelings', especially when the person you're talking about is mentally ill or downright nasty.

As I said, you don't have to be weak of timid to go along with it - you can also be wanting it because it futhers the agenda of intersectionality and division in society, something that the hardline socialists want as part of their 'revolution' plan.

Of course, at some point the 'purity test' lot will come after you and yours when you inevitably fall foul of their ever-changing goalposts of 'standards'. I suspect many already are by just being (quoting another Backroomer here) male, pale and stale. No amount of virtue-signalling can acquit you of that 'crime', can it?

Well, at least all the leftists and weak-minded virtue-signalling wets are now sticking their hands up to acknowledge that fact, mistakenly in the belief that in the long run their side will win out. The normies might take a long time, but eventually they come round once the heat is on them in a big way.

Maybe some proponents hereand elsewqhere think they'll be easily six foot under by that time and thus have nothing to lose by doubling down. Let's just hope that the younger members of their families don't have to pay a heavy personal price for their actions, especially those who aren't prepared to stand up publicly (this forum isn't) and defend their views.

R. Dahl Rewrite - Crickleymal

What on earth are you talking about? None of that made any sense.

R. Dahl Rewrite - Engineer Andy

What on earth are you talking about? None of that made any sense.

It does - believe me. It probably just means you're not up on the wokery debate that much.

R. Dahl Rewrite - alan1302

Unfortunately similar things have yet to happen at other firms who've 'gone woke' and now produce terrible content and are losing money hand over fist, such as Disney. The BBC's own foreign-earned income from licencing Doctor WHO and Top Gear, as well as merchandise for the former has dropped dramatically since the politically-correct agenda ruined both shows in various ways. The BBC has in fact now sold the rights to the former to a US entertainment giant because of this huge drop in income.

Why would the US entertainment giant want it if it's got a massive drop in income?

R. Dahl Rewrite - alan1302

Another take:

davidallengreen.com/2023/02/a-latter-day-tale-of-t.../

No censorship, just a publisher exploiting the market.

Think they did it for a bit of extra publicity as well - they knew there would be a lot of complaints and they are now ensuring the original versions are still available - so they get two markets - the traditionalist and the one that would not have bought the originals. Good business sense whilst keeping the books in the publics minds.

R. Dahl Rewrite - sammy1

Another take:

davidallengreen.com/2023/02/a-latter-day-tale-of-t.../

No censorship, just a publisher exploiting the market.

Think they did it for a bit of extra publicity as well - they knew there would be a lot of complaints and they are now ensuring the original versions are still available - so they get two markets - the traditionalist and the one that would not have bought the originals. Good business sense whilst keeping the books in the publics minds.

I think you are right about the free publicity. A lot of marketing companies dream up controversial advertising causing a great fuss and get double the exposure they imagine.

Still it looks like the publisher has rained their neck back in with a royal intervention.ar least on R.Dahl

R. Dahl Rewrite - Engineer Andy

Another take:

davidallengreen.com/2023/02/a-latter-day-tale-of-t.../

No censorship, just a publisher exploiting the market.

Think they did it for a bit of extra publicity as well - they knew there would be a lot of complaints and they are now ensuring the original versions are still available - so they get two markets - the traditionalist and the one that would not have bought the originals. Good business sense whilst keeping the books in the publics minds.

Unfortunately, this sort of thing has been tried and it failed. On this occasion, wheilst the publisher in the UK has relented - they haven't gone all the way and stopped the publication of the woke version of the books, and already many people are intimating that the original version will bemoved from their traditional children's section in bookshops to at least teenagers, if not adults.

Abroad, there is no plan to sell the originals any more, confirmed by their Dutch counterparts.

A good example where a partial reversal - more likely a temporary respite from the woke trend - is in current-day Star Trek TV, whereby the latest series - 'Picard' season 3, has mainly avoided the wokeness and bad story-telling on the previous seasons and (all) other recent series (Discovery, Lower Decks, Strange New Worlds, etc) with lots of nostalgia (the current terminology is 'memberberries' [see Spider-man: No Way Home as a great example]).

I suspect that Paramount-CBS and their 'Trek' production company 'Secret Hideout' (an offshoot from 'Bad Reboot' for films) is trying this in a desperate attempt to keep the few remaining fans watching in order to hook a lot back along with new extenral funding because they've lost so much money in the franchise since 2009.

The same (as I stated earlier) applies to Doctor WHO, where fan interest is on the floor after it went woke about 7-8 years ago and ramped it up significantly a couple of years later. Many people will see through the PR nowadays and won't return. Unfortunately, the few genuinely 'new' (original) work produced in novels, TV and film these days is often even worse than the repurposed woke rubbish.

A tiny amount is actually very good, but rarely does it get much backing by the money people because so many are now run or influenced by woke orgnaisations like Blackrock or run by weak people who whatever the activists scream for this week.

As I've said on other topics on this section, it's all part of an agenda to break up society to put in place something a lot different, but not something 95% of society would like or want to be part of.

R. Dahl Rewrite - skidpan

stopped the publication of the woke version of the books,

What's all this "woke" nonsense. Why don't you say what you mean in plain english. Is that not possible?

R. Dahl Rewrite - Engineer Andy

stopped the publication of the woke version of the books,

What's all this "woke" nonsense. Why don't you say what you mean in plain english. Is that not possible?

More gaslighting. You know full well what 'woke' is, given you've argued what it entails isn't politically correct leftist stauff several times before, but then of course your ego won't let you admit that, and thus you play the man, not the ball - again.

R. Dahl Rewrite - skidpan

stopped the publication of the woke version of the books,

What's all this "woke" nonsense. Why don't you say what you mean in plain english. Is that not possible?

More gaslighting. You know full well what 'woke' is, given you've argued what it entails isn't politically correct leftist stauff several times before, but then of course your ego won't let you admit that, and thus you play the man, not the ball - again.

What total b******s and you know it.

Close this thread now.

R. Dahl Rewrite - FP

"More gaslighting. You know full well what 'woke' is, given you've argued what it entails isn't politically correct leftist stauff several times before, but then of course your ego won't let you admit that, and thus you play the man, not the ball - again."

".. your ego won't let you..." = personal comment, a bit rich, since you accuse the poster of "playing the man", which he didn't do in the first place.

It's getting boring - the same old stuff, again and again.

R. Dahl Rewrite - FP

"As I've said on other topics on this section, it's all part of an agenda to break up society to put in place something a lot different, but not something 95% of society would like or want to be part of."

Rubbish. There is no agenda "to break up society" and what you call "wokeness" isn't part of anything else.

R. Dahl Rewrite - Xileno

I can't see any purpose to this thread now, we've got any value out of it.

Mod