That's a way of saying it's not a big deal. I don't think that's relevant to the thread topic. People have a problem with the censorship itself, not the importance or lack thereof regarding it.
no, it's a way of saying that no idea, opinion, or plot device present in the story has been removed. my big-picture viewpoint is that the coercive suppression of ideas is a necessary component of censorship. it could be similarly helpful for one or more of you to define what you think censorship is instead of just asserting that it's obvious.
which new message deviates from the original work? can you be more specific?
You already quoted that.
i quoted changes in adjectives. descriptions. you said that the revisions push a new message that is different from the original. can you elaborate on the old and new messages and how they differ?
Certain words have certain meanings. Other words have other meanings. How is nuking certain words from the story and replacing them not censorship of the idea of the original word?
so again it seems that your definition of censorship is just "change." i think that's too vague to be useful. "nuking certain words and replacing them" happens literally every time any written work is edited by anyone.
what controls for me is the use of coercion and the suppression of ideas and opinions. sure, you can say "every word relates to an idea," but i don't think it's useful to call all forms of editing censorship.
When I say a person is fat, that means something specific (that they have an overabundance of fat). If I say they're enormous, that is much more vague. It could be that Augustus Gloop is a powerlifter. You don't know anymore because the new word is more vague. That's the whole point of changing it.
whether or not an edit causes confusion for the reader really doesn't have anything to do with the question of "is this edit censorship."
where exactly is censorship taking place? if that is censorship, then i would submit that the word no longer has any meaning. at least no meaning beyond "anytime anyone does something i personally would not have done."
Please, Gary, you're smarter than this.
feel free to elaborate. i made it clear what i think censorship entails and why this doesn't fit the criteria. "i am obviously right" doesn't interact with what i said at all.
You making this post is fucking stupid. Mocking people for having a problem with censorship, even if you don't think it is important, is not okay. If you have a problem with the thread then you can proceed to fuck off and leave the rest of the people discussing the topic alone. The world does not revolve around Gary's List Of Important Things Gary Takes Seriously.
i'm not mocking anyone for having a problem with censorship. if the roald dahl books were actually being censored, i'd probably agree with you all.
i'm mocking you lot for sounding like a bunch of 14-year-olds who say bedtime is fascist.
Show Posts