|
|
Post by Jason Aiken on Mar 11, 2023 12:33:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by karasuthecrow on Mar 11, 2023 13:19:04 GMT -5
Am so upset and depressed with this new I grow with Goosebumps and as an adult I admire Stein a lot but now, looking how he will allow the censorship of his own work is soooo heartbroking, especially when they are light horror child books.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason Aiken on Mar 11, 2023 13:21:19 GMT -5
Am so upset and depressed with this new I grow with Goosebumps and as an adult I admire Stein a lot but now, looking how he will allow the censorship of his own work is soooo heartbroking, especially when they are light horror child books. Stine evidently was unaware of it and did not give permission. |
|
|
|
Post by cromfelge on Mar 11, 2023 13:32:07 GMT -5
We had similar cases in Germany.
I get that people don't want to read books that aren't appropriate anymore to their children but then again why does it have to be these books?
There's so many children's books coming out every year, why do we have to alter an old work of fiction just so you can read it to your children nowadays? If you don't like it, just read a newer one.
And ofc altering adult's books like Bond is just dumb obviously.
(Luckily Conan/Howard and their fanbase are against these things so much that they likely won't allow changes like these)
|
|
|
|
Post by johnnypt on Mar 11, 2023 15:29:14 GMT -5
I'm trying to decide which is worse: changing things or banning them altogether. Supposedly Fleming made changes to Live and Let Die to make it less with the racial language. That's fine as far as it goes, as long as the original is still there. I'm mean friggin' Dr. Seuss was banned!
There's a somewhat famous example of censorship of sorts in animation known as the Censored Eleven. These were eleven Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies cartoons that were not put into syndication due to their racial nature. Having seen all of them, I basically agree with the call, they're not something kids would enjoy. One of them is in black and white so I know I'd be switching over to Tom & Jerry or the Three Stooges if one of those came on. The one Bugs Bunny toon, All This and Rabbit Stew, is something I don't have any reservations in calling a racist cartoon. The one Chuck Jones toon included, Angel Puss, I find more unpleasant due to the subject matter (trying to kill a cat by drowning) than the racial element. In other words these probably weren't going to be seen on TV anyway. There's actually one bona fide classic on the list, Clampett's Coal Black and De Sebben Dwarves, but you do have to be a sophisticated viewer to understand what Bob was going for (supposedly Duke Ellington asked him to do it). Warners has toyed with releasing a DVD of all eleven on one package but backed off a few times and right now with the atmosphere todayc, it's unlikely they'll do it now.
But that's preferable to how Disney treats Song of the South. They want to pretend it never happened, now down to tearing down rides and getting rid of songs. It's a historically significant film in that James Baskett who portrayed Uncle Remus was given an honorary Academy Award, making him the first black actor to receive one (Hattie McDaniel won hers in normal fashion for Gone With the Wind). Having seen it a number of times, I never got the idea he loved being a slave, which seems to be the crux of why people want it removed from existence.
Lord knows reading as much Burroughs and Howard as I have, I've seen enough uncomfortable descriptions (Burroughs' worst one I'd say was Adoplh Bluber in Tarzan and the Golden Lion, where he writes in stereotypical German accent misspelling, some people think it's anti Semetic). But I wouldn't want it changed. I mean if people have to deal with Milton who doesn't translate to today's society, is a bit long winded and his jokes are terrible, they can deal with some period specific writing. Whenever I hear people talking banning Huckleberry Finn because of the racial language, my reaction is "So you missed the point completely then."
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason Aiken on Mar 11, 2023 15:52:31 GMT -5
I am of the mindset that I want to read a book as it was originally published or as the author originally intended, warts and all. If the author later edited his works such as ERB and apparently Ian Fleming, I'm fine with that, it's their story and it probably became a matter of business and dollar signs for them in combination of the changing of the times.
But gun to the head, 9 times out of 10 I'll always be more interested in the original text. Especially when original manuscripts are used like with the REH Delreys and REH Foundation Press publications.
To this day there are people who claim Poul Anderson's original version of The Broken Sword is better than his revised edition.
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik on Mar 11, 2023 16:55:51 GMT -5
Seems the Goosebumps edits were done back in 2018 with the ebooks only: www.lamag.com/culturefiles/childrens-horror-author-r-l-stine-discovers-books-with-woke-edits-following-roald-dahl/'The Times said it found more than 100 edits in e-book versions of the series of 62 Goosebumps books. But that was misleading—in fact, while the edits are there, they are not new—they were made in 2018, as part of an ebook launch. Stine’s publisher, Scholastic, confirmed the changes, according to Aussie pub The New Daily." Also of interest: "In a quick turnaround, Dahl’s publisher announced that the original, unaltered versions will see a new release later this year." |
|
|
|
Post by cromfelge on Mar 12, 2023 10:15:57 GMT -5
Also of interest: "In a quick turnaround, Dahl’s publisher announced that the original, unaltered versions will see a new release later this year."
New marketing strategy: 1. Announce you'll edit a classic because of issue XY
2. Wait for ouutcry 3. Multiply the original version's sales |
|
|
|
Post by Erik on Mar 12, 2023 13:53:03 GMT -5
Also of interest: "In a quick turnaround, Dahl’s publisher announced that the original, unaltered versions will see a new release later this year."
New marketing strategy: 1. Announce you'll edit a classic because of issue XY
2. Wait for ouutcry 3. Multiply the original version's sales It's genius, really. It's not too unlike the Dr. Seuss books a few years ago - They pulled a couple titles that were deemed racist, and sales for all the others skyrocketed. |
|
|
|
Post by Lonewolf on Mar 13, 2023 8:20:57 GMT -5
Children's books is one thing, but a select few deciding what should be edited out of books intended for adults is definitely cause for concern.
|
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Mar 13, 2023 16:17:27 GMT -5
It's nothing surprising, so many of us warned about this but we were cancelled to keep the 'balance'.
|
|
|
|
Post by darthgall on Mar 14, 2023 9:25:08 GMT -5
I don't get the outrage; the publishers are private actors and they're acting in what they sense is the best way to respond to the desires of the market; isn't this capitalism at its best?
No one's barging into your house to slap the original texts out of your hands...
(But yes, as noted, hang on to your originals! In addition, this is a good argument for buying physical media as opposed to just getting through streaming... your streaming source might change!)
|
|
|
|
Post by johnnypt on Mar 14, 2023 10:55:11 GMT -5
I don't get the outrage; the publishers are private actors and they're acting in what they sense is the best way to respond to the desires of the market; isn't this capitalism at its best? No one's barging into your house to slap the original texts out of your hands... (But yes, as noted, hang on to your originals! In addition, this is a good argument for buying physical media as opposed to just getting through streaming... your streaming source might change!) But is the market really desiring this? Was there any major outcry about Roald Dahl and James Bond books? Or is this something from someone's mind, putting it onto the public and costing the company untold income since there's not a true market for this and people aren't going to buy it? Disney, among others, has seemingly yet to learn this lesson. Their last three animated pictures did lackluster box office, but Encanto was a big success on Disney+. What set it apart from the other two? This sort of reminds me of around the turn of the century Cartoon Network loudly came out and said they would not be showing any Speedy Gonzales cartoons since they were insulting to Hispanics. They then received a boatload of criticism...from Hispanic groups! There had been no outcry and they requested the toons be put back on. Quietly a year later they did so. See the whole Latinex thing for a modern equivalent. Now interestingly, Boomerang has been showing the same 10 two hour blocks of 13 toons each since at least June-July 2019. My son and I know the rotation by heart at this point. There's not a single Speedy Gonzales cartoon included in those 130. Every other major character is in there except him. You'd think they'd at least include the first one (actually second but they redesigned him) because it won the Oscar in 1955. And I definitely view streaming as an extra, not a main source. You never know when someone will change it or pull it down altogether. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2023 12:31:46 GMT -5
Everyone best keep hold of their Wandering Star/ Del Rey editions  |
|
|
|
Post by johnnypt on Mar 14, 2023 13:35:11 GMT -5
Everyone best keep hold of their Wandering Star/ Del Rey editions Under lock and key! |
|
