Bowdlerising texts is wrong in my opinion. If people wish to produce an alternative version that fits their mores, that's absolutely fine but the original texts were of their time and as such should be left uncensored. If it placates, the concerned, I suppose the books could come with a warning slashed across the cover.
We'll it's nice to have a weekend discussion anyway. If it becomes unpleasant, it can bggggr off onto it's own thread. Benefit of the doubt so far. @pansyface
Storm Betty I'm sure it's more relatable than just calling it storm 23B but I still don't see the point of it. Amazing that we've got to this time of year with just two named storms though.
I did some weeding yesterday which isn't a great confession for a gardening forum but I ended up with a few meals worth of potatoes which tells you a lot about the state of the weeds around here right now.
If you can keep your head, while those around you are losing theirs, you may not have grasped the seriousness of the situation.
I'm not sure what you're aiming at, Pansyface. I read a headline on msn homepage (which is where so much garbage comes from, granted) regarding a female author (a 'Dame') who seems to believe that children's books should be (effectively) censored. I am sorry if you feel that I shouldn't have made any comment about this in Curmudgeons Corner.
Reasonable @Xen. but why not express your own opinion?
I can see why the name of AG's novel was changed but I don't see the need to censor older literature just because we have moved on in our appreciation of sexual and racial equality. After all, Shakespeare's plays were written to be performed by men and boys pretending to be women? Much has changed since then but we still have pantomime dames played by men.
As for the Bible or any other religious tract, they're all about controlling society and especially women with ideas. Far too much bigotry on so many levels but, sometimes, beautiful language and poetry so to be appreciated in parts but not swallowed whole.
Vendée - 20kms from Atlantic coast.
"The price good men (and women) pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men (and women)."
Oh dear. I thought I'd implied my own opinion in my first post(s) - particularly as I said that my comment was a "complaint" about this kind of pseudo-censorship. Hostafan1 and B3 seem to have got that point.
Books which have already been published, and history, should never be censored. Books may have been written when people were less sensitive (I'm not saying if that was a good or bad thing) but if we aren't able to read publications in their original form we will get a very distorted view of world as it was.
Just by the by, why did you elect for that setting as opposed to the more commonly used “Public profile”? Many of us are curious to know why that is sometimes chosen.
Sock puppets , people that change their user name and post contentious issues, have to hide behind a private profile.
Gardening on the wild, windy west side of Dartmoor.
Posts
I read a headline on msn homepage (which is where so much garbage comes from, granted) regarding a female author (a 'Dame') who seems to believe that children's books should be (effectively) censored.
I am sorry if you feel that I shouldn't have made any comment about this in Curmudgeons Corner.
I can see why the name of AG's novel was changed but I don't see the need to censor older literature just because we have moved on in our appreciation of sexual and racial equality. After all, Shakespeare's plays were written to be performed by men and boys pretending to be women? Much has changed since then but we still have pantomime dames played by men.
As for the Bible or any other religious tract, they're all about controlling society and especially women with ideas. Far too much bigotry on so many levels but, sometimes, beautiful language and poetry so to be appreciated in parts but not swallowed whole.
Hostafan1 and B3 seem to have got that point.