Cultural Vandalism and the Rotten Rewriting of Roald Dahl

Ok, I’m officially triggered.

Perhaps I’m being a tad melodramatic here but I’ve just read that 100’s of Roald Dahl’s words will be ‘updated’ for ‘relevancy’ by Puffin in their latest print run of his books. This is linked to the recent acquisition by Netflix of the Roald Dahl Story Company.

This is horrendous news, in my opinion, and nothing but cultural vandalism, politicking and purging one of the world’s best loved authors and stripping him of his own unique spirit.

“Having power is not nearly as important as what you choose to do with it.” — Roald Dahl

As someone who grew up on his books, what stood him apart WAS his wonderfully descriptive (and sometimes outrageous) use of language. It is what captivates a child’s mind and brings the character to life. That’s how we understand how monstrous the Trunchbull is, how ginormous Augustus Gloop is and how despicable Mr Twit’s beard is.

Have our sensitivities really become that brittle? I understand times have changed but but perhaps a warning at the start would have sufficed. Disney did the same with Dumbo. Instead a new generation of kids won’t get to read Roald in its full razzle-dazzle.

“Children are not so serious as grown-ups and they love to laugh.” — Matilda

Some of the changes are bordering on the ridiculous. In Fantastic Mr Fox a description of tractors, saying that “the machines were both black”, has been cut. Black is a colour, is it not? Who in their right mind would get offended by that sentence? Any mention of fat or ugly has had the same treatment.

Directly from the horses mouth — each of the descriptions was purposefully exaggerated and hyperbolised as:

“I find that the only way to make my characters really interesting to children is to exaggerate all their good or bad qualities, and so if a person is nasty or bad or cruel, you make them very nasty, very bad, very cruel. If they are ugly, you make them extremely ugly.” — Roald Dahl

I am sure Roald Dahl himself would be horrified at this news. He had a rebellious streak that showed in his writing, in fact most of his stories consisted of the child defeating the oppressive adult.

This might be an overzealous reaction by a purist and a fan. But this is a form of whitewashing, it’s changing history. If this is allowed, then what other ‘offensive’ content from the past could be next to be diluted?

It actually sets a dangerous precedent that original work can be amended and edited long after the authors death or without his consent — to the extent where words are being attributed to him that he didn’t actually say.

A great quote from the CEO of PEN America:

“The problem with taking license to re-edit classic works is that there is no limiting principle. You start out wanting to replace a word here and a word there, and end up inserting entirely new ideas.”

I completely agree.

Not to take this down a dark dystopian path but it reminds me of another sinister quote…

“The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron–they’ll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually changed into something contradictory of what they used to be” — George Orwell, 1984

Below are some screenshots of some of the changes.

I do wish someone from the estate would have spoken up when these horrific changes were suggested and quote directly from one of his best-loved characters:

“I understand what you’re saying, and your comments are valuable, but I’m gonna ignore your advice.” — Fantastic Mr Fox

To end, I think the BFG said it best when he said:

“Don’t gobblefunk around with words.” — The BFG

No more gobblefunking please. Ever.