[ SECRET POST #5889 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5889 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.




















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 35 secrets from Secret Submission Post #843.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

[(Anonymous)]

1984 was a warning, not a manual

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT - This is an obnoxious response considering we're talking about magical non-existent technology that would retroactively alter the actions of people long-since dead. It's a flippant wish, with zero potential to be made real.

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

[(Anonymous)]

we're also talking about editing the past to make it more compatible with the present; op made it clear they have no issue with changing the books, which is EXACTLY 1984-level

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

[(Anonymous)]

DA

I translate books, and have been thinking about this a lot recently (the moral arguments for and against deliberately changing older books), and your comment hit me hard. But I think I should probably thank you, anon.

The people pushing for "but couldn't you just ..." are loud and pushy and very sure of the rightness of their cause, but sometimes the road to hell really is paved with good intentions.

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT - The thing is, we already do this and have for hundreds of years with abridged books. The only difference between cutting or rephrasing a couple of lines of overtly racist text in a Dahl book and cutting or summarizing the filler chapter in a Dickens novel where two random townies discuss the politics of the day in thinly veiled metaphors about fish mongers is the emotional reaction people have to the edits.