Criticism of retouching Roald Dahl’s texts to remove “offensive language”

A publisher who publishes works Roald DahlPuffin Books and the rights holder, have decided rewrite some texts of the London writer for avoid offensive language and adapt them to the new times. This decision resulted removing words like “fat”, “ugly” or “crazy” author’s texts of some works that are already classics of children’s literature. The idea came from the collective Inclusive Minds, a group that promotes inclusive education and the accessibility of the work to children, ensuring that some of the changed terms might offend certain groups.

Publisher Puffin Books has confirmed it has carried out a review of Dahl’s classics to ensure the books are suitable. “for the enjoyment of all minors”, eliminating references deemed controversial regarding characters’ weight or physical appearance, mental health, violence, gender and race.

This news caused a barrage of criticism in different organizations, writers and social networks, which they are not for retouching original words with which Dahl wrote historical texts such as Charlie and the Chocolate Factoryand, Matilda or James and the Giant Peach.

Not to be outdone, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, criticized the decision on Monday, thus joining the controversy that arose as a result of the fact that some passages of children’s novels written by the popular British author, who died in 1990, were modified so as not to offend sensibilities.

From Downing Street, the office and official residence of the British Prime Minister, the official spokesman of Sunak emphasized that “it is important that literary works and works of fiction be preserved and they are not regulated.” “We have always defended the right to freedom of speech and expression,” he pointed out.

Also Salman Rushdie, writer children of midnight and satanic verses, He showed his discomfort with this decision, strongly. “Roald Dahl was no angel, but this is absurd censorship,” he tweeted, adding: “Puffin Books and the Dahl estate should be ashamed of themselves.”

And from PEN América, an organization that brings together more than 7,500 writers, they expressed their rejection and stated that they are worried about this trend. “If we go down the path of trying to correct perceived slights, instead of allowing readers to receive and respond to the books as they are written, we risk they distort the works of great authors and obscure the essential healing that literature offers to society,” said Suzanne Nossel, executive director of the association. In his opinion, “better than changing these texts is to offer an introductory context prepare people for what they will read and help them understand the environment in which it was written.”