/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21676083]

This is beyond fucked.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11765213/amp/Roald-Dahls-books-REWRITTEN-remove-offensive-language-create-world-no-one-fat.html

>selling out to Netflix
Explains it

[Anonymous No.21676086]

>>21676083
I'm not reading that. Summarize it for me.

[Anonymous No.21676095]

>>21676083
>daily mail

[Anonymous No.21676098]

>>21676086
>The pc LIBERALS have reWRITTEN Roald Dahl.
>a "fat BITCH" is now only a "BITCH". This is literally the apocalypse
That's about it.

[Anonymous No.21676107]

roald dahl is an anagram of hard ad lol

[Anonymous No.21676108]

>>21676098
>This is literally the apocalypse
Its not just censorship its a blatant perversion of the text.

[Anonymous No.21676111]

>>21676086
>Augustus Gloop in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory can now only be described as 'enormous'.
>Mrs Twit's 'fearful ugliness' has been chopped to 'ugliness' and Mrs Hoppy in Esio Trot is not an 'attractive middle-aged lady' but a 'kind middle-aged lady'.
>Gender is also eliminated with books no longer referring to 'female' characters.
>Miss Trunchbull in Matilda, once a 'most formidable female', is now a 'most formidable woman', while her 'great horsey face' is now called 'her face'.
>Oompa-Loompas who were once 'small men' are now 'small people' and Fantastic Mr Fox's three sons have become daughters.
>In The Witches, a paragraph describing them as bald under their wigs is followed shortly by a new line: 'There are plenty of other reasons why women might wear wigs and there is certainly nothing wrong with that.'
>A witch posing as a 'cashier in a supermarket' now works as a 'top scientist' and Matilda reads Jane Austen instead of Rudyard Kipling.
>Mental health was another focal point for sensitivity readers with the words 'crazy' and 'mad', which Dahl used in a comic fashion, removed from his books.
>The Big Friendly Giant in The BFG no longer wears a black cloak and characters cannot turn 'white with fear', as the words 'black' and 'white' no longer exist in the new editions.
>Elsewhere, the Cloud-Men in James and the Giant Peach are now known as 'Cloud-People'.

[Anonymous No.21676113]

>>21676083
As long as they keep the pedophile rape in that's okay.

[Anonymous No.21676114]

>>21676083
>>21676111
This is just for one kiked edition/publisher, right?
Anyway, anglo shitholes need to be nuked

[Anonymous No.21676224]

>>21676108
It's really stupid but I don't exactly have high expectations from netflix. I take it as a given that if Netflix is adapting something that means it's going to be a steaming pile of sanitized shit.
Article was still cringy. The usual Dailymail outrage bait.

[Anonymous No.21676254]

>>21676224
>Netflix
This isn't Netflix adaptation. Book publishers are editing the books.
Just because Netflix is also bad you shouldn't defend people rewriting books.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/feb/18/roald-dahl-books-rewritten-to-remove-language-deemed-offensive

[Anonymous No.21676259]

>>21676095
You can find this news elsewhere. Another paper dissected multiple books to find the changes and they were extensive.

[Anonymous No.21676264]

This is worse than the time Borges' whore of an ex-wife forced the di Giovanni translations out of print. What the hell?

[Anonymous No.21676266]

my favourite one is this https://archive.is/MYuXG#selection-3731.0-3741.132

[Anonymous No.21676276]

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

[Anonymous No.21676279]

The Witches

[Anonymous No.21676282]

Matilda

[Anonymous No.21676290]

James and the Giant Peach

[Anonymous No.21676295]

The BFG

[Anonymous No.21676303]

The Enormous Crocodile / Esio Trot

[Anonymous No.21676305]

Fantastic Mr Fox

[Anonymous No.21676306]

>>21676098
>>21676224
Reddit

[Anonymous No.21676308]

>>21676098
Read the thread, stupid.

[Anonymous No.21676313]

The Twits

[Anonymous No.21676316]

George’s Marvellous Medicine

[Anonymous No.21676324]

>>21676111
>>The Big Friendly Giant in The BFG no longer wears a black cloak and characters cannot turn 'white with fear', as the words 'black' and 'white' no longer exist in the new editions.
>>A witch posing as a 'cashier in a supermarket' now works as a 'top scientist'
>>In The Witches, a paragraph describing them as bald under their wigs is followed shortly by a new line: 'There are plenty of other reasons why women might wear wigs and there is certainly nothing wrong with that.'
HOLY KEK

[Anonymous No.21676328]

>>21676111
>Mrs Hoppy in Esio Trot is not an 'attractive middle-aged lady' but a 'kind middle-aged lady'.

> Matilda reads Jane Austen instead of Rudyard Kipling.

These are my favourites. Trying to eliminate Kipling from history because it's too embarassing, let's focus on relationship drama and for that matter attractiveness is verboten. Even though it's unavoidable in human interactions. Language now serves not to illustrate, but to conceal our thoughts.

[Anonymous No.21676333]

>>21676328
>Language now serves not to illustrate, but to conceal our thoughts.
The Anglo spirit

[Anonymous No.21676335]

>>21676224
Be outraged. Be very outraged.
This is only the start of a road we do not want to go down.

[Anonymous No.21676336]

>>21676324
Oh, shit the "black" thing is real! Colours have been cancelled.

[Anonymous No.21676347]

Provided that it's true, intentionally mangling the texts to suit an agenda is definitely fucked, yeah. Dahl has been on their hitlist for a while. Don't expect this braindead shithole to care about it though.

[Anonymous No.21676403]

>>21676347
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/feb/18/roald-dahl-books-rewritten-to-remove-language-deemed-offensive

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/celebritynews/roald-dahl-books-given-inclusive-overhaul-by-sensitivity-readers/ar-AA17D05l

[Anonymous No.21676418]

>>21676347
>can't verify facts
>concludes with a meaningless babble

[Anonymous No.21676511]

>>21676347
Honestly it pisses me off. I loved Dahl's books as a kid, and extensive woke rewriting where women's attractiveness, anybody's fatness or the colour black can no longer be mentioned is fucking ridiculous.

They should let the consumer decide access publish these new versions with some kind of "special sensitivity rewrite edition" warning on the cover, and make sure the originals are also in print.

[Anonymous No.21676521]

>>21676511
More likely to put a "special chudlet racist edition" warning on the normal covers

[Anonymous No.21676526]

>>21676086
Penguin Random House has decided that Dahl's books are problematic and has had their editors quietly rewrite parts of them, removing, among other things, any mentions of someone being fat or needing to lose weight or fast being presented as a negative thing, any mentions re women's attractiveness or lack of it, mentions of colours white and black, mentions of "women" (witches) working as a cashier etc and instead writing them working in STEM, etc etc

These new sensitive editions are nonetheless sold as Dahl's original works

[Anonymous No.21676530]

>>21676521
Can't be a special edition if it's the original unabridged version? It's misleading the consumers imo to rewrite the books like this and not mark it clearly on the cover

[Anonymous No.21676547]

>>21676083
THIS is why /lit/ is filled with "/pol/". It's not /pol/, it's LEFTIST POLITICS invading literature and /lit/ browsers responding to it.

[Anonymous No.21676550]

Daily reminder to keep physical copies of all your media

[Anonymous No.21676571]

>>21676547
It's only in your head chud, nothing's happening

[Anonymous No.21676590]

>>21676547
That has been the case since 2013. Every time leftists cry about /pol/ or "culture war" it is immensely dishonest since a literal state-operated psychological warfare campaign went into hyperdrive in the early 10s and /pol/ and the like is just a reaction to it by people who have the intellectual independence to go "what the fuck is this" instead of blindly acquiescing to literally every single thing Harvard and the NYT declare like some kind of meat puppet

[Anonymous No.21676626]

>>21676254
Netflix didn't buy just the adaptation rights but literally all rights to everything Roald Dahl. This wouldn't be happening without their permission (or order).

Friendly reminder that when they bought the rights they also branded him a vile antisemitist.

[Anonymous No.21676630]

>>21676590
meds, schizo

[Anonymous No.21676633]

>>21676547
nah. we got brigadded by /pol/cels and reddit refugees in 2015. /lit/ became targeted as some kind of intellectual epicentre of 4chin that must be conquered.
And lets not pretend that "the right" hasn't relished in banning books (even organising ritualistic book burnings).

[Anonymous No.21676634]

>>21676633
>/lit/ became targeted as some kind of intellectual epicentre of 4chin that must be conquered.
literal headcanon

[Anonymous No.21676638]

are they actually publishing them edited or just changing shit on netflix? i'm not reading the article, or the thread

[Anonymous No.21676640]

>>21676630
cold washcloth to your face, personally attacked individual

[Anonymous No.21676643]

>>21676590
>/pol/
>intellectual independence
lol, maybe even lmao

[Anonymous No.21676644]

>>21676630
>>21676643
triggered samefag

[Anonymous No.21676654]

>>21676547
I've stopped viewing it as a left v right thing and see it as an American tabloid media driven "culture wars" V reasonable people thing. Whether it's tranny trying to get Roald Dhal rewritten or a magashit trying to shut down a public library, they're all the same hysteria driven mess to me.

[Anonymous No.21676665]

>>21676654
Nah, banning tranny manuals from schools is a good thing. Fuck you. Your children will 40% and you try to paint a false balance.

[Anonymous No.21676681]

I don't understand why they cant just do what Disney do and put some sort of reflective note about outdated ideas before the book.

Would love to gut the "sensitivity readers" alive tho

[Anonymous No.21676688]

>>21676681
Almost like the actual point isn't to be inclusive and sensitive.

[Anonymous No.21676691]

>>21676681
>outdated ideas
like being fat = bad? You're the same as sensitivity readers bro

[Anonymous No.21676727]

>>21676665
Your like a hysterical, menopausal woman.

[Anonymous No.21676738]

>>21676550

>magashit book burning ritual.

[Anonymous No.21676741]

>>21676418
Whom are you quoting?

[Anonymous No.21676746]

>>21676727
>Your
>on a literature board
Seething tourist

[Anonymous No.21676846]

>>21676665
What about banning Harry Potter? Do you approve of that?

[Anonymous No.21676860]

>>21676691
Nah I mean "outdated" as in "the alphabet mafia doesn't agree with it". They preserve it but put a note saying they "dont agree with it". I had one come up the other day when rewatching Recess for fucks sake and i couldn't even spot what was wrong.

Seems a better way to do it tbf

[Anonymous No.21676891]

>>21676654
>le fake centrist
>theyre just as bad as one another!
one side has overwhelming control over the media and uses said control with extreme prejudice to confuse, discombobulate and torture its political enemies (aka the general public).
there's nothing fair about this at all, it is a one sided massacre of everything we've held dear as a people for 200-300 years.
youre not wise, youre just ignorant or purposefully playing the fool. fuck yourself down a toilet

[Anonymous No.21676898]

>>21676891
You reiterated exactly what he said

[Anonymous No.21676922]

>>21676898
are you fucking completely illiterate? do you have testicles for eyes? have you completely lost the ability to discern an apple from an orange?
my stance couldnt be more different. you couldnt tell your polka dots from your horizontal stripes.

[Anonymous No.21676923]

>>21676891
>discombobulate
You can't use that word anymore, the Robert Downey Sherlock movie cringified it.