Even Augustus Gloop ain't safe (Dahl being censored)

hyperseven

hyperseven

hyperseven

Soldato
Joined
1 May 2013
Posts
9,913
Location
M28
The linked article has a list of all the changes across Dahl's books for modern audiences.

2001“So I shipped them all over here - every man, woman, and child in the Oompa-Loompa tribe”2022“So, they all agreed to come over - each and every Oompa-Loompa”
Click to expand...


Article:

 
If a non-binary Oompa-Loompa isn't in the chocolate factory working his dam hardest 24/7, I'm just not entertaining the whole book, film and anything linked with Dahl himself.

*Edit - James and the giant peach was ***** as well.
 
Last edited:
Ah, I know exactly what you're looking for.

Hang on, I'm sure I've got some here somewhere....


*modem sounds*


Ah yes, here you go:

this-is-unacceptable.gif
 
I'm not angry, I'm just disappointed. Fortunately I have a large bookshelf full of Roald Dahl books and other offensive material, which I will happily pass down to my children so they can apparently become massive racists as well :cry:

Out of interest, who loses money if I order 1000 books and then send them back as faulty? Is it the retailer or publisher? Asking for a friend ;)
 
Last edited:
Haggisman said:
The OP is almost as illiterate as the people making these changes.

TL;DR; Roald Dahl books are being butchered in the name of wokery
Click to expand...

Oh ok, so it's like you are not allowed to call them men or women oompa-lumpa just like, mmmm, "them" or "they" oompa-lumpa?
 
BUDFORCE said:
Oh ok, so it's like you are not allowed to call them men or women oompa-lumpa just like, mmmm, "them" or "they" oompa-lumpa?
Click to expand...

In essence yes, but they've also gotten rid of a lot of the flowery and over-the top language and descriptions which make the books so entertaining and interesting to read. Apparently nobody is fat. Or ugly. Colours no longer exist, etc.
 
Haggisman said:
In essence yes, but they've also gotten rid of a lot of the flowery and over-the top language and descriptions which make the books so entertaining and interesting to read. Apparently nobody is fat. Or ugly. Colours no longer exist, etc.
Click to expand...

But "Willy Wonka" is still good?
 
Updating books so they can still be enjoyed is fair enough.

I was reading Mrs Pepperpot to my son a few years ago, and there's this bit where she's trying to give a clue to a girl in school about the teacher's question. The answer is 'Chinese' or 'China' so Mrs Pepperpot, of course, uses the racist eye thing that used to be common. Would be good to not have that sort of thing in there really.

Some of this Dahl stuff seems heavy handed, though.
 
I feel I've learned a lot from this thread, infact on Monday morning I am going to email the CEO of my organisation and say I would like to become the diversity champion.
 
GaryTheSnail said:
Is this a new role within the workplace? 100K a year to correct everyone?

Then who corrects you? The Diversity Master?
Click to expand...

Careful, that has connotations of slavery (are we allowed to use that word anymore?)

cheesyboy said:
Updating books so they can still be enjoyed is fair enough.
Click to expand...

Is it though? Are there not new authors who are able to write new books which reflect current attitudes?

I don't think updating historic works of art is "fair enough" in all honesty. Do we need to redo the Mona Lisa as a transgender Mona Liam, change Romeo and Juliet to be above the current age of consent (and have an amicable separation instead of killing themselves), and rewrite "12 years a slave" as "12 years doing a difficult job I didn't like very much"?

They are products of their time and should be enjoyed (and treated) as such. I've found that is part of the charm, and certainly gives an insight into the thoughts and attitudes of society at the time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom