Roald Dahl's Books Edited For Sensitivity Language, Hundreds of Changes
Roald Dahl Classic Books Edited for Sensitivity ... Words Like 'Fat' Nixed
2/18/2023 10:30 AM PT
Roald Dahl's classic books are apparently too dated for the 21st century -- because his former publisher and his own posthumous company have edited the crap out of them.
Puffin and the Roald Dahl Story Company -- which oversees his collection -- teamed up with Inclusive Minds last year ... tasking them to pour over RD's published works (specifically, ones for kids) and to alter passages as they see fit, to remove offensive language.
According to reports, hundreds of changes have been made in everything from "Charlie and The Chocolate Factory" to "James and The Giant Peach" ... and other Dahl books in between.
One of the more noticeable tweaks that many are pointing out is the fact that Augustus Gloop -- the gluttonous kid who falls in the river of chocolate and gets sucked up a tube -- is no longer described as "fat," which is what Dahl had previously referred to him as.
The thing that annoys me about the Roald Dahl changes is how stupid they are. A ban on the word “fat” yet keeping in the rest of the description in which Augustus Gloop is clearly fat pic.twitter.com/1Grm0gMwZJ— Anita Singh (@anitathetweeter) February 18, 2023 @anitathetweeter
Here's an old passage describing Augustus ... "A nine-year-old boy who was so enormously fat he looked as though he had been blown up with a powerful pump. Great flabby folds of fat bulged out from every part of his body, and his face like a monstrous ball of dough.'
The 2022 re-write goes like this ... "A nine-year-old boy who was so enormous he looked as though he had been blown up with a powerful pump. Great folds bulged out from every part of his body, and his face was like a ball of dough." In this instance, they got rid of "fat."
While some words were removed, others were completely added in anew -- so, not Dahl's original text -- including one new passage from "The Witches." In that book, there's an idea about witches hiding in plain sight ... who are actually bald under their wigs.
The main character is describing his plan to ID witches in public to his grandmother -- going around and pulling women's hair to see if they're a witch. In the original text, the grandma replies ... "'Don't be foolish,' my grandmother said. 'You can't go round pulling the hair of every lady you meet, even if she is wearing gloves. Just you try it and see what happens.'"
This change to Roald Dahl is so preposterously, laughably pointless it makes you wonder whether the publisher is aware that fiction is an act of creatively making things up. pic.twitter.com/FZ84I3toPB— Stig Abell (@StigAbell) February 18, 2023 @StigAbell
The rewrite is wild ... "'Don't be foolish,' my grandmother said. 'Besides, there are plenty of other reasons why women might wear wigs and there is certainly nothing wrong with that.'"
There are countless other examples circulating on Twitter right now -- including ones where Inclusive removed gendered terms, like "female" -- and a lot of people are saying these changes are ridiculous -- and just another example of woke culture going too far.
Roald Dahl - 2001 authorized Puffin edition vs 2022 authorized Puffin edition.https://t.co/4dnBSjHEvT pic.twitter.com/Psfulj7Krk— Incunabula (@incunabula) February 18, 2023 @incunabula
We'll say this ... another book kinda comes to mind here. One by George Orwell ... 😬