Lor detected The Telegraph last Friday in an article with an eloquent title The rewriting of Roald Dahl. The most recent editions of works by the celebrated Welsh children’s book writer have been published in more neutral terms compared to the former. It is not a coincidence, but an editorial operation conceived and implemented for the purpose of eliminate or sweeten any references to gender, race and weight. Is called cancel cultures, or censorship. The initiative of the Puffin publishing house (belonging to the publishing giant Penguin Books) was carried out in agreement with the Roald Dahl Story Company and the author’s heirs: the rewriting in order to “correct” terms that could be offensive to the sensitivity of Today. The series of modifications to the works of the Welsh writer intended for children is long.
Roald Dahl censored: via “fat”, “dwarf”, “small”, “ugly”
First of all words like “fat”, “dwarf”, “small”, “ugly”. They have been used by the author to describe negative characters and thus create a stereotype. And this is true. But for this, and this is serious, or at least debatable, they have been changed: a work of literature, a classic, it has been changed so as not to be offensive to any of today’s readers.
The rationale implied by the operation is that the general sensibility has changed a lot since the time in which Dahl wrote and published his texts. In addition to the words, in fact, changes have also been made to the expressions and episodes that could be somehow out of step with current sensitivity. In short, not updated to the MeToo era, but not only.
Notable changes concern all gender stereotypes in describing the personalities, characters and professions of the female protagonists but also the terms “mad” and “crazy” (“mad, crazy”), words related to old stereotypes on mental health problems.
The Umpa-Lumpas and racism de The Chocolate Factory
In the past, Dahl himself had been asked to change his artwork as some of the references were deemed racist. In the first edition of Charlie and the Chocolate FactoryThe Umpa-Lumpa were in fact described as “black pygmies” of the “African jungle”, found by Willy Wonka who had enslaved them. Dahl edited the text and redefined them as fictional beings.
Any examples? Matilda’s Miss Trinciabue, from “formidable female” becomes “formidable woman”. Matilda herself now reads Jane Austen and John Steinbeck instead of Rudyard Kipling and Joseph Conrad (considered racist). The Umpa-Lumpa de The Chocolate Factory they become “little people” and Augustus Gloop “huge” and no longer “hugely fat”. Occurrences of “white” and “black” have also been removed, even in reference to a coat.
Roald Dahl’s Witches and Misogyny
Particularly censored according to the Telegraph, Witchesa children’s novel written by Roald Dahl in 1983, with 59 modifications. Already in the eighties, when the book came out, the writer was accused of misogyny for the description of witches (and it doesn’t matter that the most positive character in the story is the protagonist’s grandmother).
Also on the occasion of the release of the film with Anne Hathaway inspired by the book, in 2020, there were sharp criticisms: in the film version the witches had hands with only two fingers and many people with one disability and hand and arm malformations they had criticized the choice, which associated a physical characteristic with the monstrosity and wickedness of witches. Both Warner Bros, who had produced the film, Warner Bros, and Anne Hathaway apologized.
Therefore, if in the original (where witches wear wigs) Dahl had written: «You can’t go around pulling the hair of every woman you meet, even if she wears gloves. Try it and see what happens.” Puffin’s new version reads: “Also, there are many other reasons why women might wear wigs and there’s certainly nothing wrong with that.”
Again, if in general Dahl’s women are supermarket cashiers or businessmen’s secretaries, in the new edition they are scientists or entrepreneurs.
Sensitivity readers: Roald Dahl’s censorship to ensure inclusiveness
In this type of operation, publishing houses are now guided by competent figures on the subject: in particular, Puffin relied on the sensitivity readers of the company Inclusive Minds. The task I declare, is to change literary works to ensure “inclusion and accessibility in children’s literature”.
To explain your choice, the Roald Dahl Story Company wrote an official statement: «We want to make sure that Roald Dahl’s wonderful stories and characters continue to be enjoyed by all children today. Our guiding principle has been to keep the plots, the characters and the irreverence and edgy wit of the original text. Any changes we made were small and carefully considered.”
The criticisms of Salman Rushie & Co.
Naturally, many voices have been raised against this editorial initiative. Among all, the writer Salman Rushdie, in a Tweet: “Roald Dahl was certainly no angel, but this is absurd censure. Puffin Books and Dahl’s company should be ashamed.”
Equally alarmed the comment by Suzanne NosselCEO of Pen America (community of over 7,000 writers supporting freedom of expression). “Amid fierce battles against book bans and restrictions on what can be taught and read, theediting selective way to make literary works conform to particular sensibilities could represent a dangerous new weapon.
The dictatorship of political correctness?
Especially in the Anglo-Saxon world, yes for some time demonize Shakespearean plays or Gone With the Wind as a vehicle of racist and colonialist stereotypes. It seeks to that is, to govern not only the language in use but also literature, purifying it of words and expressions that could offend someone. But if it makes sense, indeed, not to use the word “black”, “young lady” or “handicapped” in everyday life, it is really disturbing that we can get to censoring classics and, in any case, texts from the past, in the name of a new sensibility. There is a third way, as he told us some time ago Cinzia Sciuto, co-director of Micromega and one of the authors of Can’t say anything anymore? (Utet), in this article: «Stopping telling classic fairy tales to our children is an option. The other is to educate them to a different and inclusive sensibility, and to read everything».
iO Woman © REPRODUCTION RESERVED