[ SECRET POST #5908 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5908 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Tombstone - Kurt Russell and Val Kilmer]



__________________________________________________



03.
[The Other Boleyn Girl]



__________________________________________________



04.
[Mass Effect]



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________




















08. [SPOILERS for Iron Widow]




__________________________________________________



09. [WARNING for inevitable JKR wank]




__________________________________________________



10. [WARNING for discussion of antisemitism]




__________________________________________________



11. [WARNING for possible discussion of sexual abuse]


































Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #845.
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

[(Anonymous)]

I actually think the changes are pretty boneheaded, but not because censorship or snowflake or whatever. The things that are truly vicious in the Roald Dahl books aren't just matters of words, most of the time. Like, taking the weird racist jokes out of "Great Glass Elevator" is probably a good call, since it's not story-essential anyway, and in the same spirit of how Dahl himself revised the Oompa Loompas...but you can't make the character any less mean to fat kids by saying that Augustus Gloop is "enormous" instead of "enormously fat." It's there in the story itself and how Gloop is treated by the author, regardless of the words used.

Is the viciousness fun to read as a kid? I suppose it depends on the kid. I Maybe if we didn't live in a hellscape viciousness wouldn't be as appealing as it is, but that's a matter beyond Roald Dahl. I don't think the vicious was what I liked about the books, but memory can be fickle so who knows.

A friend of mine suggested that really it seems like the publisher desperately wanting to be able to keep selling an old reliable favorite without getting criticized for it by a new generation of readers, or in other words: so they can keep making money. And I think that's really what the bottom line here is in this case: "how can we be performative in a way to ensure continued sales?"