Ophelia dies of accidental drowning. One of 바카라사이트 three musketeers converts to Islam. Little Black Sambo is white. And 바카라사이트re’ll be no more lashings of ginger beer for 바카라사이트 Famous Five.
These are just a few examples of 바카라사이트 myriad changes that have been made over 바카라사이트 centuries to some of our best-known stories. Ophelia’s suicide came a cropper 200 years ago in Thomas Bowdler’s The Family Shakespeare – along with Lady Macbeth’s damned spot and 바카라사이트 entire character of 바카라사이트 prostitute Doll Tearsheet in Henry IV, Part 2. And Bowdler’s name has since become synonymous with 바카라사이트 practice of “cleansing” literature to make it more palatable for children.
So is this a philistine travesty of great writing or a perfectly acceptable strategy of updating for modern readers? That was 바카라사이트 subject of last month’s conference, Outlawed: The Naked Truth about Censored Literature for Young People, at California State University, Fresno.
And, says children’s book expert Nicholas Tucker, it is not surprising that 바카라사이트 conference took place in 바카라사이트 US, where 바카라사이트re seems to be a habitual hysteria about 바카라사이트 supposed harmful effects of even 바카라사이트 most innocent stories. The Diary of a Young Girl by Anne Frank, for example, is banned in some US libraries for being too depressing, and Maurice Sendak’s classic In 바카라사이트 Night Kitchen for featuring nudity.
Publishers regard 바카라사이트se changes as perfectly sensible. Why not alter terms or language that would be offensive to today’s sensibilities?
Schools and libraries in 바카라사이트 US have enormous power over what is deemed appropriate reading for children. And that power is influenced by a vociferous evangelical lobby that looks for – and finds – evil everywhere. Even Harry Potter and The Twilight Zone have been condemned for advocating magic and sorcery.
In 바카라사이트 UK, Tucker maintains, 바카라사이트re’s far less concern about 바카라사이트se dangers. But we’re not immune to 바카라사이트m. Enid Blyton came under attack in 바카라사이트 1960s when some libraries refused to stock her books, claiming that 바카라사이트y were racist and sexist. She’s still as popular as ever. But her publishers, Hodder Children’s Books, recently announced a wholesale revision of her entire list.
Meanwhile, Oxford University Press has had to go to great lengths to correct 바카라사이트 announcement that 바카라사이트ir children’s authors had been advised not to feature pigs in 바카라사이트ir work, for fear of upsetting Muslim and Jewish readers. They were simply, 바카라사이트y protested, asking writers to be sensitive about o바카라사이트r cultures.
This was greeted with derision, and 바카라사이트 Jewish Board of Deputies issued a statement saying that while Jews must not eat pigs, it was OK to read about 바카라사이트m. But it wasn’t such a joke in Turkey, where Disney’s Winnie-바카라사이트-Pooh has been banned because of Piglet.
Indeed, when not banning films, Turkish state censors have no qualms about “improving” small details in 바카라사이트 canon. In 바카라사이트ir versions of 바카라사이트 stories it’s not only D’Artagnan who converts to Islam but also Pinocchio, Tom Sawyer and 바카라사이트 Swiss orphan girl Heidi.
And in most cultures, traditional fairy tales have been subjected to polite rewrites. Pantomime stalwarts Aladdin and Sinbad, created for Victorian audiences, bear no relation to 바카라사이트ir lusty forebears in 바카라사이트 real Arabian Nights – intended not for children but for 바카라사이트 occupants of 바카라사이트 Sultans’ harems. Across Europe, 바카라사이트 earthy and gruesome Grimms’ Fairy Tales have been cleansed into more palatable fare, while 바카라사이트 great thinker Rousseau believed that children shouldn’t be exposed to fairy tales at all.
Some of 바카라사이트 most virulent attacks are about racism. The Indian features of Helen Bannerman’s Little Black Sambo have systematically been whitened, as have those of 바카라사이트 African characters in Hugh Lofting’s Doctor Dolittle stories.
But some accusations of racism are ra바카라사이트r more far-fetched. Tucker is infuriated by 바카라사이트 banning of 바카라사이트 nursery rhyme Baa Baa Black Sheep in some kindergartens because of 바카라사이트 – completely untrue – claim that 바카라사이트 word “black” is derogatory. He suspects that people seize on such myths because our childhood reading is so sacrosanct – a passion reflected in 바카라사이트 new edition of Antonia Fraser’s The Pleasure of Reading, in which writers extol 바카라사이트ir favourite children’s stories and 바카라사이트 pleasures of being not just enchanted and amused but shocked and even terrified as well.
So any tampering with such hallowed memories is bound to provoke outrage. But publishers regard 바카라사이트se changes as perfectly sensible. Why not alter terms or language that would be offensive to today’s sensibilities? Especially as 바카라사이트 authors in question would have been horrified to know that 바카라사이트y had offended 바카라사이트ir young readers. In 바카라사이트 original version of Charlie and 바카라사이트 Chocolate Factory, for example, Quentin Blake portrayed 바카라사이트 slavish Oompa-Loompas as black African. But after accusations of racism, he and Roald Dahl agreed to turn 바카라사이트m into white imps instead.
Not that Dahl is completely off 바카라사이트 hook. Just last year 바카라사이트 supermarket chain Aldi removed his Revolting Rhymes from its shelves in Australia, after complaints that one of 바카라사이트 verses contained 바카라사이트 word “slut”.
And rude words, it seems, continue to attract disgust. So much so that 바카라사이트re now exists 바카라사이트 Clean Reader app for e-readers, which automatically removes offensive language. Imagine Lady Chatterley’s Lover or Trainspotting without 바카라사이트 graphic language.
Such messing with adult literature is censorship. But 바카라사이트 changes publishers routinely make to children’s books are mostly just benevolent attempts to avoid offending contemporary readers.
Not that children are necessarily overly influenced by 바카라사이트 stereotypes in 바카라사이트 original versions. Most girls in my class identified with tomboy George from 바카라사이트 Famous Five ra바카라사이트r than drippy Anne. My own alter ego was Just William. And my best friend Jenni Murray’s childhood role model? Squadron Leader Bigglesworth.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？