February 21, 2023 - 2:30pm
We can’t yet rule out the possibility that Puffin has pulled off a fabulous marketing wheeze. When news broke over the weekend that future editions of their Roald Dahl books would contain hundreds of edits relating to “weight, mental health, violence, gender and race” — the word “fat” removed, for instance, the “Cloud-Men” of James and the Giant Peach swapped for “Cloud-People”, and the phrase “ladies and gentlemen” replaced by “folks” — I immediately marched down to our local children’s bookshop to order a box-set of the original editions that I so enjoyed as a child.
Sixty pounds poorer, it later occurred to me that this might have been what Puffin had intended all along, given that a media furore around free speech is pretty much a guaranteed sales boost. Even the Prime Minister has waded in, with a spokesman (sorry, spokesperson) yesterday insisting that “the Prime Minister agrees with the BFG that you shouldn’t gobblefunk around with words.” The Puffin publicity team must be licking their chops at so much free advertising.
And I had to admit to myself, too, that I had been inconsistent on another point. My apparent commitment to artistic freedom had not entirely sustained itself when I was actually faced with choosing which books to add to my son’s shelf. Crucially, I had decided against the box set containing The Witches — a book which betrays Dahl’s well-documented antisemitism, given that it features a gang of hook-nosed, money-grubbing women who kidnap and murder children.
I rushed out to buy the old editions of Dahl because I dislike the aggressive, Americanised ideological campaign that is driving such acts of censorship, and I am alarmed by its recent acceleration. Another successful children’s author, Philip Pullman, is among those cheering it on, commenting that Dahl’s publishers ought to “let him go out of print” in order to make way for “wonderful authors who are writing today who don’t get as much of a look-in.” Pullman is a fool if he thinks that this campaign will not eventually come for him, too — delve deep enough, and every author is vulnerable to cancellation.
But that doesn’t mean that I think adults should not pay attention to the politics of children’s fiction. On this point I am forced to agree with the woke editors wielding their big red pens: children’s literature has moral power. We cannot just throw it open to the ‘marketplace of ideas’ and hope for the best — not when children are so very malleable, and when so many adults are so very keen to expose them to their own preferred dogma.
Given that we are currently in the middle of an ideological shift comparable to the Reformation, we shouldn’t be surprised that access to children’s minds is a site of conflict (“give me a child till he is seven years old,” said St Ignatius Loyola, “and I will show you the man.”) What we are really fighting over is not whether children’s fiction should contain a political message, but rather what that message ought to be, and who ought to control it: should it be parents themselves, or the array of (often childless) teachers, publishers, and writers who are rushing to the front lines of the culture war?
The decision to edit Dahl posthumously is an escalation on the part of this latter group of culture warriors, and a troubling one, since it demonstrates their increasing willingness to rewrite history to their own ends. Given their fervour, I am certain that children’s bookshelves are going to remain a battleground.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeHave you considered the possibility that this says more about you than Roald Dahl?
I read the book a couple of years ago to my daughter and never picked up any anti-Semitism.
The witch finder generals will always be able to find something they can twist to meet their preconceptions. I remember my wife being told not to ask clients whether they would like black coffee in case some black person, of whom none attended the centre at the time, might deem it a racial slur.
The witch finder generals will always be able to find something they can twist to meet their preconceptions. I remember my wife being told not to ask clients whether they would like black coffee in case some black person, of whom none attended the centre at the time, might deem it a racial slur.
I came here to post almost the exact same thing. I read The Witches several times as a child and never in a million years would ever have equated them with Jewish women.
Even if he did exhibit casual anti-antisemitism (and it’s not that clear at all in his books), it would have been of its time, I suppose. And he did more than most people alive today to fight real názis, I mean he was an RAF pilot and he shot názis out of the sky, FFS.
Roald Dahl’s antisemitism was clearly not “of its time” and should not be condoned as such. The following quote is from the 1980s: “There’s 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 is always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.” Having said that I don’t think his antisemitism is particularly transparent in his children’s books and I do not agree with the new bowdlerized versions.
Roald Dahl’s antisemitism was clearly not “of its time” and should not be condoned as such. The following quote is from the 1980s: “There’s 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 is always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.” Having said that I don’t think his antisemitism is particularly transparent in his children’s books and I do not agree with the new bowdlerized versions.
This is a common allegation against fantasy writers. Goblins are often perceived as Jewish (even if they are derived from Norse and Germanic mythology), see JK Rowling. Tokein’s dwarves have the same allegation made against them.
This post was removed for some reason. It’s clearly not heavily downvoted and I’ve no idea why anyone would flag it.
It really is about time that Unherd clarified what is going with the comments section.
I can see your point but I think Ms. Perry is saying that, as a parent, it’s her place to choose books for her own son, for whatever reason. When he grows up he’ll have plenty of time to read it himself. (Or before that, if he’s one of those old-fashioned, sneaky kids.)
But I would warn him, I found “The Witches” rather scarey! And I never read it til I was thirty-ish!
This will go against the grain here, but I think there IS a case for extremely limited & transparent changes to older books. For example I have a stash of Asterisk books from childhood with occasional depictions of Africans which are grim by just about anyone’s standards (the kids love them so we read them, but we have talked about the pictures!).
This will go against the grain here, but I think there IS a case for extremely limited & transparent changes to older books. For example I have a stash of Asterisk books from childhood with occasional depictions of Africans which are grim by just about anyone’s standards (the kids love them so we read them, but we have talked about the pictures!).
I read the book a couple of years ago to my daughter and never picked up any anti-Semitism.
I came here to post almost the exact same thing. I read The Witches several times as a child and never in a million years would ever have equated them with Jewish women.
Even if he did exhibit casual anti-antisemitism (and it’s not that clear at all in his books), it would have been of its time, I suppose. And he did more than most people alive today to fight real názis, I mean he was an RAF pilot and he shot názis out of the sky, FFS.
This is a common allegation against fantasy writers. Goblins are often perceived as Jewish (even if they are derived from Norse and Germanic mythology), see JK Rowling. Tokein’s dwarves have the same allegation made against them.
This post was removed for some reason. It’s clearly not heavily downvoted and I’ve no idea why anyone would flag it.
It really is about time that Unherd clarified what is going with the comments section.
I can see your point but I think Ms. Perry is saying that, as a parent, it’s her place to choose books for her own son, for whatever reason. When he grows up he’ll have plenty of time to read it himself. (Or before that, if he’s one of those old-fashioned, sneaky kids.)
But I would warn him, I found “The Witches” rather scarey! And I never read it til I was thirty-ish!
Have you considered the possibility that this says more about you than Roald Dahl?
Delighted that these new editions are out. Ugly old Mrs Twit will no longer have her feelings hurt. But there’s still a problem – all of those old editions of Roald Dahl are still out there, in charity shops, attics, even (perish the thought) bookshelves in children’s bedrooms. Since these old editions are harmful (so much so that they have had to be censored), then surely, the best thing to do is to burn them? It’s important to be on the right side of history, you know.
The rise of internet-based secondhand book reselling has prompted some publishers to buy secondhand books from the wholesalers to prevent the cannibalisation of new sales. The books are then pulped. Unadulterated editions of popular authors might already be being destroyed.
Fahrenheit 451 should be burnt.
What is the correct temperature?
What is the correct temperature?
The rise of internet-based secondhand book reselling has prompted some publishers to buy secondhand books from the wholesalers to prevent the cannibalisation of new sales. The books are then pulped. Unadulterated editions of popular authors might already be being destroyed.
Fahrenheit 451 should be burnt.
Delighted that these new editions are out. Ugly old Mrs Twit will no longer have her feelings hurt. But there’s still a problem – all of those old editions of Roald Dahl are still out there, in charity shops, attics, even (perish the thought) bookshelves in children’s bedrooms. Since these old editions are harmful (so much so that they have had to be censored), then surely, the best thing to do is to burn them? It’s important to be on the right side of history, you know.
“…I am forced to agree with the woke editors wielding their big red pens: children’s literature has moral power. We cannot just throw it open to the ‘marketplace of ideas’ and hope for the best — not when children are so very malleable, and when so many adults are so very keen to expose them to their own preferred dogma….”
So what do you think parents are for then? Just bystanders?
The point is not to care if there was or wasn’t any anti-Semitism in Dahl, or Shakespeare, or anything. And equally, not to care if Woody Allen was misogynistic, or was objectifying or simply lusting after young woman, or whatever. Because, all those getting antsy, now that the tidal wave of the erosion of freedom of expression has hit the shore, need to understand that free speech is a package deal. You don’t get to choose what is and isn’t allowed from a particular stance, say feminism, because it’s pretty obvious, the same weapons will be used against you by others who come from different stances when they get into positions of power over you. A freedom that is allowed only as long as no one exercises it, is not a freedom.
To suppress the past is to rewrite it, and there are no circumstances in which this can be justified, not even for the sake of children. Embrace what comes out of the past and into the future in it’s full sinister splendor, no matter how uncomfortable this makes us.
The whole point of Mrs Twit being ugly was the fact that her inner ugliness influenced her outer ugliness. It was a lesson for children to learn about the benefits of being nice! They’ve taken out a huge lesson from the book! Sounds like these censors and critics are too stupid to be working in literature! And I stand by the word “stupid” because frankly I think they need to hear it and not be protected from the truth!
According to that same argument, Augustus Gloop must be, and must remain, “enormously FAT”! Simply saying he was “enormous” completely nukes the lesson that this character was meant to impart.
According to that same argument, Augustus Gloop must be, and must remain, “enormously FAT”! Simply saying he was “enormous” completely nukes the lesson that this character was meant to impart.
The whole point of Mrs Twit being ugly was the fact that her inner ugliness influenced her outer ugliness. It was a lesson for children to learn about the benefits of being nice! They’ve taken out a huge lesson from the book! Sounds like these censors and critics are too stupid to be working in literature! And I stand by the word “stupid” because frankly I think they need to hear it and not be protected from the truth!
“…I am forced to agree with the woke editors wielding their big red pens: children’s literature has moral power. We cannot just throw it open to the ‘marketplace of ideas’ and hope for the best — not when children are so very malleable, and when so many adults are so very keen to expose them to their own preferred dogma….”
So what do you think parents are for then? Just bystanders?
The point is not to care if there was or wasn’t any anti-Semitism in Dahl, or Shakespeare, or anything. And equally, not to care if Woody Allen was misogynistic, or was objectifying or simply lusting after young woman, or whatever. Because, all those getting antsy, now that the tidal wave of the erosion of freedom of expression has hit the shore, need to understand that free speech is a package deal. You don’t get to choose what is and isn’t allowed from a particular stance, say feminism, because it’s pretty obvious, the same weapons will be used against you by others who come from different stances when they get into positions of power over you. A freedom that is allowed only as long as no one exercises it, is not a freedom.
To suppress the past is to rewrite it, and there are no circumstances in which this can be justified, not even for the sake of children. Embrace what comes out of the past and into the future in it’s full sinister splendor, no matter how uncomfortable this makes us.
Yet those same ideologues have no problem with allowing children access to violent video games and music with violent lyrics during their formative years – both of which the childern will spend arguably more time consuming. Strange times.
The point is, wether or not I think the Dahl books are unsuitable for my childern, only I know what’s best for them and only I get to make the choice. I do not care what other “concerned citizens”, politicians, moral busybodies or “equality activists” consider to be suitable for “modern audiences”- and they do not get to take the choice away from me.
Good point. We’re all relaxed about children viewing violent pornography, free speech and all that, but the word ‘fat’ is an abomination. Peculiar times, indeed.
Perhaps if we allow dr@g queens to read the books to the children, all will be forgiven?
I’ve taken up the habit of seeing what happens when real words are used, so here goes: drag. See if it passes the test.
I’ve taken up the habit of seeing what happens when real words are used, so here goes: drag. See if it passes the test.
To be fair plenty of firmly Progressive parents are also personally strict on violent games & toys, at least in my experience.
Good point. We’re all relaxed about children viewing violent pornography, free speech and all that, but the word ‘fat’ is an abomination. Peculiar times, indeed.
Perhaps if we allow dr@g queens to read the books to the children, all will be forgiven?
To be fair plenty of firmly Progressive parents are also personally strict on violent games & toys, at least in my experience.
Yet those same ideologues have no problem with allowing children access to violent video games and music with violent lyrics during their formative years – both of which the childern will spend arguably more time consuming. Strange times.
The point is, wether or not I think the Dahl books are unsuitable for my childern, only I know what’s best for them and only I get to make the choice. I do not care what other “concerned citizens”, politicians, moral busybodies or “equality activists” consider to be suitable for “modern audiences”- and they do not get to take the choice away from me.
The solution to this is for authors to write disclaimers stating that their words are not be changed to suit the sensibilities of a future generation.
Talking about sensibilities, is anyone really offended by Dahl’s words? Or is just a subset of people who run Diversity and Inclusion consultancies? I work a lot on LinkedIn and these seem to be springing up all over the place lately, most of them headed by college-educated women who are one the most easily offended people in the world. Could it be that that they have created a niche industry that makes its money from finding offence e.g. sensitivity reading, ‘inclusive’ publishing etc.?
The National Review wrote an interesting article about this and what Dahl thought about censorship in general:
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/puffin-books-from-publisher-to-censor/
The solution to this is for authors to write disclaimers stating that their words are not be changed to suit the sensibilities of a future generation.
Talking about sensibilities, is anyone really offended by Dahl’s words? Or is just a subset of people who run Diversity and Inclusion consultancies? I work a lot on LinkedIn and these seem to be springing up all over the place lately, most of them headed by college-educated women who are one the most easily offended people in the world. Could it be that that they have created a niche industry that makes its money from finding offence e.g. sensitivity reading, ‘inclusive’ publishing etc.?
The National Review wrote an interesting article about this and what Dahl thought about censorship in general:
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/puffin-books-from-publisher-to-censor/
I am most disgusted with Pullman. Given how much there is in His Dark Materials that can easily be construed as problematic the fool should keep his mouth shut instead of drawing attention to himself.
That’s not quite what Pullman said. He said if we as a society decide we don’t like something then it should go out of print not edit it to fit current society. But we, as a society, have not decided that. Editing Dahl feels like covering for a problematic white middle class man, which we are so very good at doing and need to stop.
That’s not quite what Pullman said. He said if we as a society decide we don’t like something then it should go out of print not edit it to fit current society. But we, as a society, have not decided that. Editing Dahl feels like covering for a problematic white middle class man, which we are so very good at doing and need to stop.
I am most disgusted with Pullman. Given how much there is in His Dark Materials that can easily be construed as problematic the fool should keep his mouth shut instead of drawing attention to himself.
I’m wondering if there’s not an element of corporate profiteering here. Keep pushing ‘new’ and ‘progressive’ authors while cancelling the old ones to keep people buying new books instead of passing down the old ones. A sort of planned obsolescence for literature I wouldn’t be shocked if this was all cooked up in a corporate boardroom.
I am much more skeptical of modern books for children than I am of the ‘classics.’ If I had to save only one set of books, it would be the older ones. Once in a while I’ll find a new book that actually has a wholesome and intelligent message and add it to my personal canon. I.e., this ploy wouldn’t work on me.
I am much more skeptical of modern books for children than I am of the ‘classics.’ If I had to save only one set of books, it would be the older ones. Once in a while I’ll find a new book that actually has a wholesome and intelligent message and add it to my personal canon. I.e., this ploy wouldn’t work on me.
I’m wondering if there’s not an element of corporate profiteering here. Keep pushing ‘new’ and ‘progressive’ authors while cancelling the old ones to keep people buying new books instead of passing down the old ones. A sort of planned obsolescence for literature I wouldn’t be shocked if this was all cooked up in a corporate boardroom.
Updated version:
Give me a boy till he is seven years old and I will show you the woman.
Now that’s just plain binary!
How beastly of you!
(Apologies to Zoophiles)
Shame on you.
Honestly, I have no idea how the Church of Woke could rewrite your statement to make acceptable.
I am surprised your comment has not been expunged.
Now that’s just plain binary!
How beastly of you!
(Apologies to Zoophiles)
Shame on you.
Honestly, I have no idea how the Church of Woke could rewrite your statement to make acceptable.
I am surprised your comment has not been expunged.
Updated version:
Give me a boy till he is seven years old and I will show you the woman.
Will the kerfuffle lead to increased sales? Hard to say. For every parent rolling their eyes and digging their own copies out of the attic, is there another who now thinks that their little darlings can safely read these stories without ‘trauma’? I doubt it. Look at Gillette’s sales figures after their campaign of white-man-bad advertising. People dislike this, save for a few middle class idiots.
Will the kerfuffle lead to increased sales? Hard to say. For every parent rolling their eyes and digging their own copies out of the attic, is there another who now thinks that their little darlings can safely read these stories without ‘trauma’? I doubt it. Look at Gillette’s sales figures after their campaign of white-man-bad advertising. People dislike this, save for a few middle class idiots.
Would it not be good business and good politics to offer multiple editions of the same stories marked Original; Slightly bowdlerised; Full on woke – giving all shades of opinion and sensitivity a free choice.
The Bible is published in numerous versions so that those who enjoy the King James Bible can buy it and others who want a more contemporary version can suit themselves. I am sure Roald Dahl would be as indulgent as God has been over the updating of his message.
Would it not be good business and good politics to offer multiple editions of the same stories marked Original; Slightly bowdlerised; Full on woke – giving all shades of opinion and sensitivity a free choice.
The Bible is published in numerous versions so that those who enjoy the King James Bible can buy it and others who want a more contemporary version can suit themselves. I am sure Roald Dahl would be as indulgent as God has been over the updating of his message.
Speaking of children, I will make sure mine only read the originals. I’m also creating a bookcase of ‘banned’ books so that they will always have access to them. Sad that I can’t just count on taking them to the library once a week for new books as my Mom once did with me.
Speaking of children, I will make sure mine only read the originals. I’m also creating a bookcase of ‘banned’ books so that they will always have access to them. Sad that I can’t just count on taking them to the library once a week for new books as my Mom once did with me.
My class read James and the Giant Peach and The Great Glass Elevator out loud when I was seven. Wonderful experience.
My class read James and the Giant Peach and The Great Glass Elevator out loud when I was seven. Wonderful experience.
“Given that we are currently in the middle of an ideological shift comparable to the Reformation”
Rare to see such an open acknowledgement of this reality. I would argue our current theological shift is actually larger than the Reformation, more akin to that which Rome experienced under Constantine, converting from pagan polytheism to Christianity. The re-paganization of the West is well underway.
“The Final Pagan Generation” is a great (but very long) book about this process in ancient Rome, told from the perspective of the pagans who ere being displaced. It makes fascinating reading today.
The iconoclasts are certainly out in force.
And most of them have no idea where the term “iconoclasts” even comes from.
I heard a great line several years ago: “the writing is on the wall for your civilization when you no longer remember what ‘the writing on the wall’ refers to.” This falls into the same category.
And most of them have no idea where the term “iconoclasts” even comes from.
I heard a great line several years ago: “the writing is on the wall for your civilization when you no longer remember what ‘the writing on the wall’ refers to.” This falls into the same category.
The iconoclasts are certainly out in force.
“Given that we are currently in the middle of an ideological shift comparable to the Reformation”
Rare to see such an open acknowledgement of this reality. I would argue our current theological shift is actually larger than the Reformation, more akin to that which Rome experienced under Constantine, converting from pagan polytheism to Christianity. The re-paganization of the West is well underway.
“The Final Pagan Generation” is a great (but very long) book about this process in ancient Rome, told from the perspective of the pagans who ere being displaced. It makes fascinating reading today.
Two points: 1) it wasn’t just Puffin that did this – the Dahl family are also apparently fully behind it (as they would have to be, given copyright laws). Another classic example of biting the hand that feeds (and bred) you.
2) If children’s literature does have the moral power Perry describes, how many crimes have been committed by the millions of adults who read his work as children from the early 1960s onwards? If his work has such a terrible effect on young minds, there should be huge amounts of evidence to demonstrate it – so where is it?
No they are not – the Dahl family no longer own the copyright to Dahl’s work – they sold it to, of all companies, Netflix! Which explains a lot.
No they are not – the Dahl family no longer own the copyright to Dahl’s work – they sold it to, of all companies, Netflix! Which explains a lot.
Two points: 1) it wasn’t just Puffin that did this – the Dahl family are also apparently fully behind it (as they would have to be, given copyright laws). Another classic example of biting the hand that feeds (and bred) you.
2) If children’s literature does have the moral power Perry describes, how many crimes have been committed by the millions of adults who read his work as children from the early 1960s onwards? If his work has such a terrible effect on young minds, there should be huge amounts of evidence to demonstrate it – so where is it?
I just did the same thing – found his works on eBay and plan to buy at least one copy of each. I did the same thing with the woke-targeted Dr. Seuss books (though I waited a while for the overheated prices to cool down.) But the damage to society will be permanent. Don’t expect libraries to carry the originals.
Hardly anyone patronises public libraries these days, save for a few pensioners and tramps.
Hardly anyone patronises public libraries these days, save for a few pensioners and tramps.
I just did the same thing – found his works on eBay and plan to buy at least one copy of each. I did the same thing with the woke-targeted Dr. Seuss books (though I waited a while for the overheated prices to cool down.) But the damage to society will be permanent. Don’t expect libraries to carry the originals.
I do hope that Puffin has also employed a fact checker to highlight all the departures from the words written by the author.
I do hope that Puffin has also employed a fact checker to highlight all the departures from the words written by the author.
Who can forget Bowdler and his Family Shakespere?.
Exactly – Woke will die
Buy an old set of Dahl to read, and the (soon to be rare) Americanised version as a curiousity, and as an investment for the future
Who can forget Bowdler and his Family Shakespere?.
Exactly – Woke will die
Buy an old set of Dahl to read, and the (soon to be rare) Americanised version as a curiousity, and as an investment for the future
It’s just Netflix protecting its investment… so transparent
You watch it, Jane – they’ll be coming for you next.
You watch it, Jane – they’ll be coming for you next.
It’s just Netflix protecting its investment… so transparent
It’s an excellent point. When we try to turn back Woke in schools and children’s publishing, it’s a tactical error to claim we just want to keep moral instruction out. We must have the courage to insist that we’re trying to keep IMMORAL instruction out and explicitly point to exactly the material we’re talking about.
It’s an excellent point. When we try to turn back Woke in schools and children’s publishing, it’s a tactical error to claim we just want to keep moral instruction out. We must have the courage to insist that we’re trying to keep IMMORAL instruction out and explicitly point to exactly the material we’re talking about.
I immediately marched down to our local children’s bookshop to order a box-set of the original editions that I so enjoyed as a child.
So did I – onto Amazon right away!
I immediately marched down to our local children’s bookshop to order a box-set of the original editions that I so enjoyed as a child.
So did I – onto Amazon right away!
To my mind, it would be better to address people’s sensitivity to certain words and attitudes by highlighting the prominent people in politics, sport and culture who have overcome racial. sexual and religious stigmas to prosper and reach the top. For example when a farmer commented on the fact that Rishi Sunak had a bit of a tan, Mr. Sunak just shrugged it off, giving the remark the contempt it deserved…
Life can be cruel and I would suggest that mollycoddling youngsters does not prepare them for the shock of what they will have to endure when they go out into the big bad world. Mental health issues and even suicides have increased enormously in recent years which must tell one something.
Raoul Dahl like Grimm (in his fairy stories) wanted to make children shudder and allow them to feel superior and snigger at the all-powerful grown-ups.
..
To my mind, it would be better to address people’s sensitivity to certain words and attitudes by highlighting the prominent people in politics, sport and culture who have overcome racial. sexual and religious stigmas to prosper and reach the top. For example when a farmer commented on the fact that Rishi Sunak had a bit of a tan, Mr. Sunak just shrugged it off, giving the remark the contempt it deserved…
Life can be cruel and I would suggest that mollycoddling youngsters does not prepare them for the shock of what they will have to endure when they go out into the big bad world. Mental health issues and even suicides have increased enormously in recent years which must tell one something.
Raoul Dahl like Grimm (in his fairy stories) wanted to make children shudder and allow them to feel superior and snigger at the all-powerful grown-ups.
..