I am obligated to read the author's Heinlein book as evidenced by my screen name. Wasn't expecting to engage in commerce this early in the morning, but the world has its surprises.
We've always had "Children's Bibles " and "Abridged" works, and that was fine, because you knew you were getting a watered down, lesser version. This is so sinister, they are trying to pretend that Dahl and Fleming are crappy writers like they are. It's just jealousy. The Jo Ross-Barnett's of the world will never write a sentence as good as Dahl, all they have is "identity".
The argument over abridged works is long and, while you and I might fall on opposite sides of that argument on balance, there are a decent points to make on either side.
However, on these points we would assuredly agree:
The pulling of the unexpurgated versions (in the case of Fleming full stop, and of the ebooks in Dahl's case) is positively Stalin-esque.
And
There is a considerable amount of jealousy and self-importance at play here--censorship being championed and executed by people who haven't a creative bone in their body, and who thus crave the power and noteriety of being able to control thise whose creativity they envy.
For all those crying “Censorship” when sane people advocate taking graphic books depicting sex out of school libraries, I say “Look in the mirror”. What else is this sanitization of literature but censorship?
As quoth every petty tyrant with double standards throughout history
There is of course a key difference, it is worse.
The "taking graphic books depicting sex out of school libraries" people are not (generally) saying there should not be graphic books depicting sex, just that those books should not be in specific places where they may expose children to topics that they are not mature enough for. OTOH the "sensitivity readers" want everyone everywhere to only read the approved narrative
Thank you for this. Very good read. I agree with every point. Strange that these arbiters of what is allowable for us to read, watch and listen to turn their backs on the obscene filth that is being pushed on our children within the government and private schools. Or worse, they advocate for it.
The world is making me feel oddly religious, of late. Which is surreal, given my rather strongly agnostic tendencies. But "Vice shall be praised as virtue, and virtue denigrated as vice" and all sorts of other things that scream "John didn't just have a love for funny mushrooms!" seem to be occurring of late.
Though the "mark of the beast without which one cannot trade in the markets" wasn't mentioned as being *revocable* in order to control people... but that does have an uncomfortable fit with some of the recent banking schemes being floated and the concept of "social credit".
Not that I'm likely to suddenly embrace apocalyptic christianity, but it is kinda weird. Or maybe it's just good ol' human pattern matching.
Same here. I'm a pretty lame Christian truth be told, but my church-going upbringing is always in the background. Most of my time and attention during Sunday service and Wednesday Night Supper was spent thinking about other stuff, trying to stay awake, playing tic tac toe or hang-man and begging Luden's Cherry Cough Drops from my Grandpa. Still, I recognize today some of what was forewarned in Bible. Consequences will be dire.
Dahl and Fleming FOUGHT scum of this ilk with naked steel; of course scum of this ilk would come for them. Dahl suffered serious head injuries for his troubles. I read that and of his personality and first to spring to mind was was the classic case history of neurological and psychological insult, Phineas Gage.
Disinhibition and unpleasantness correlate to a great degree with brain insult.
If you look at the West's social and political maladies; one group of people is associated with most of them in disturbingly large part. We keep schtum about this but it is becoming increasingly obvious we probably shouldn't. Even the most cynical liberal is wide open to being exploited for their liberalism. Dahl's disinhibition meant he physically couldn't do this; but he paid a high price.
Fleming was probably one of THE key actors in bringing down the Third Reich (See 'One Day in August'). The Bond novels are indirect comment on England's Farewell to Empire; loss of standing and loss of purpose. They are also comment on the USA's opposite journey; the substitution of SPECTRE for SMERSH saying understatedly "We might have the wrong ally here."
I can see why some would want to Bowlderise him: he had their cards marked and his novels subtly work against them while upholding older values for truth.
Even without any of this palaver; these publishers were feeding off the dead. There are few things more morally repugnant than that; and what is more, off the corpses of men that FOUGHT that we be free. If they are YOUR publishers: walk. I shan't be putting money in the pockets of these grubby reprobates again; and neither should anyone else.
I’m both 100% Jewish and 100% anti-censorship. That said, I certainly understand why Wagner wasn’t played in Israel for a long time. But no one advocated changing the notes! Just so we’re clear about what we’re dealing with, here’s a quote from Dahl: “There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity, maybe it’s a kind of lack of generosity towards non-Jews. I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere... Even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.” To me that puts precisely zero pebbles on the pro-censorship side of the scale. But then, Caravaggio was probably a murderer, and I’m generally anti-murder.
Which, frankly I've always found really fucking weird. I'm 100% *not* Jewish, and I don't really "keep track" all that stringently (people's religion is mostly a side note, for me) but I'd say that more often than not, by a fair amount, I get along rather *well* with Jews. The long history of societal animosity towards them just *baffles* me.
I expect "electric tension" is triggering to people who have been tazed by the police so the improved one is still bad...
@WanjiruNjoya Mar 2
What Fleming wrote: “Bond could hear the audience panting and grunting like pigs at the trough. He felt his own hands gripping the tablecloth. His mouth was dry”.
Sensitivity writers changed that to: “Bond could sense the electric tension in the room.”
I am obligated to read the author's Heinlein book as evidenced by my screen name. Wasn't expecting to engage in commerce this early in the morning, but the world has its surprises.
ha ha Dan is on the West Coast so he's still asleep; when he's awake and commenting I'm sure he'll get a kick out of this.
Fantastic 😊 I hope you enjoy it. Red Planet was one of my favorites of the Heinlein Juveniles. Say hi to Willis for me when next you see him!
We've always had "Children's Bibles " and "Abridged" works, and that was fine, because you knew you were getting a watered down, lesser version. This is so sinister, they are trying to pretend that Dahl and Fleming are crappy writers like they are. It's just jealousy. The Jo Ross-Barnett's of the world will never write a sentence as good as Dahl, all they have is "identity".
The argument over abridged works is long and, while you and I might fall on opposite sides of that argument on balance, there are a decent points to make on either side.
However, on these points we would assuredly agree:
The pulling of the unexpurgated versions (in the case of Fleming full stop, and of the ebooks in Dahl's case) is positively Stalin-esque.
And
There is a considerable amount of jealousy and self-importance at play here--censorship being championed and executed by people who haven't a creative bone in their body, and who thus crave the power and noteriety of being able to control thise whose creativity they envy.
For all those crying “Censorship” when sane people advocate taking graphic books depicting sex out of school libraries, I say “Look in the mirror”. What else is this sanitization of literature but censorship?
"But it's different when we do it"
As quoth every petty tyrant with double standards throughout history
There is of course a key difference, it is worse.
The "taking graphic books depicting sex out of school libraries" people are not (generally) saying there should not be graphic books depicting sex, just that those books should not be in specific places where they may expose children to topics that they are not mature enough for. OTOH the "sensitivity readers" want everyone everywhere to only read the approved narrative
Absolutely!
Thank you for this. Very good read. I agree with every point. Strange that these arbiters of what is allowable for us to read, watch and listen to turn their backs on the obscene filth that is being pushed on our children within the government and private schools. Or worse, they advocate for it.
The world is making me feel oddly religious, of late. Which is surreal, given my rather strongly agnostic tendencies. But "Vice shall be praised as virtue, and virtue denigrated as vice" and all sorts of other things that scream "John didn't just have a love for funny mushrooms!" seem to be occurring of late.
Though the "mark of the beast without which one cannot trade in the markets" wasn't mentioned as being *revocable* in order to control people... but that does have an uncomfortable fit with some of the recent banking schemes being floated and the concept of "social credit".
Not that I'm likely to suddenly embrace apocalyptic christianity, but it is kinda weird. Or maybe it's just good ol' human pattern matching.
Same here. I'm a pretty lame Christian truth be told, but my church-going upbringing is always in the background. Most of my time and attention during Sunday service and Wednesday Night Supper was spent thinking about other stuff, trying to stay awake, playing tic tac toe or hang-man and begging Luden's Cherry Cough Drops from my Grandpa. Still, I recognize today some of what was forewarned in Bible. Consequences will be dire.
Yep. I guess more of that stuff from when I was a kid managed to stick to the grey matter than I thought. 😁
Dahl and Fleming FOUGHT scum of this ilk with naked steel; of course scum of this ilk would come for them. Dahl suffered serious head injuries for his troubles. I read that and of his personality and first to spring to mind was was the classic case history of neurological and psychological insult, Phineas Gage.
Disinhibition and unpleasantness correlate to a great degree with brain insult.
If you look at the West's social and political maladies; one group of people is associated with most of them in disturbingly large part. We keep schtum about this but it is becoming increasingly obvious we probably shouldn't. Even the most cynical liberal is wide open to being exploited for their liberalism. Dahl's disinhibition meant he physically couldn't do this; but he paid a high price.
Fleming was probably one of THE key actors in bringing down the Third Reich (See 'One Day in August'). The Bond novels are indirect comment on England's Farewell to Empire; loss of standing and loss of purpose. They are also comment on the USA's opposite journey; the substitution of SPECTRE for SMERSH saying understatedly "We might have the wrong ally here."
I can see why some would want to Bowlderise him: he had their cards marked and his novels subtly work against them while upholding older values for truth.
Even without any of this palaver; these publishers were feeding off the dead. There are few things more morally repugnant than that; and what is more, off the corpses of men that FOUGHT that we be free. If they are YOUR publishers: walk. I shan't be putting money in the pockets of these grubby reprobates again; and neither should anyone else.
I'd say that the modification means they've forfeited the copyright on the works. They're publishing bad fanfiction now, not the actual books.
Morally, anyone at all could reprint the originals at this point.
I’m both 100% Jewish and 100% anti-censorship. That said, I certainly understand why Wagner wasn’t played in Israel for a long time. But no one advocated changing the notes! Just so we’re clear about what we’re dealing with, here’s a quote from Dahl: “There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity, maybe it’s a kind of lack of generosity towards non-Jews. I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere... Even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.” To me that puts precisely zero pebbles on the pro-censorship side of the scale. But then, Caravaggio was probably a murderer, and I’m generally anti-murder.
Which, frankly I've always found really fucking weird. I'm 100% *not* Jewish, and I don't really "keep track" all that stringently (people's religion is mostly a side note, for me) but I'd say that more often than not, by a fair amount, I get along rather *well* with Jews. The long history of societal animosity towards them just *baffles* me.
Sorry, complete tangent there. 🤪
One of the Bond bowdlerizations is bad enough that I joked about it on twitter - https://twitter.com/di2nu/status/1631120721152970752
I expect "electric tension" is triggering to people who have been tazed by the police so the improved one is still bad...
@WanjiruNjoya Mar 2
What Fleming wrote: “Bond could hear the audience panting and grunting like pigs at the trough. He felt his own hands gripping the tablecloth. His mouth was dry”.
Sensitivity writers changed that to: “Bond could sense the electric tension in the room.”