Interesting post, Samuel. I was just putting the finishing touches to my post for later today, and typing 'content warning...' on it, when your newsletter popped into my inbox...oh dear!
I think you raise some interesting and worthy points in here. I have written about sensitivity readers before, and I have mixed feelings: I think your points on allowing readers to access a text and appreciate the historical and cultural context of the time it was written, as well as reflect the reality of how some people did (and still do) think, can be a useful tool. To erase this can deflect from historical accuracy. As both a reader and a literary researcher/writer, these sorts of discoveries are invaluable of course. However, I have written before about such changes to outdated (but still popular) children's books, as I know from my Gen Z child that their generation find it much more unacceptable to find some of the content of these allowed to be re-published. I don't have a definitive answer! But I do have in my possession an original copy of The Home, which just arrived, and hope to start later today : )
Yes, I think all decent people have mixed feelings about this; it's a thorny issue! My feeling is we should talk about it as much as possible – and we must interrogate what sensitivity readers do and the decisions they make, because they're only human. Obviously, I think the expurgation here was wrong-headed, and that the Publisher's Note should have been enough.
I wrote briefly about the Roald Dahl thing on my Instagram – I don't seem to be able to link to other pages in Comments? Having probably never read Mansfield Park, and certainly having never read Edward Said on Mansfield Park, Dahl's sensitivity readers replaced what they believe to be bad imperialism (Conrad and Kipling) with what they have decided is good imperialism (Austen). Madness.
I hope you enjoy The Home – and that I haven't spoiled it for you by writing about it so much. (And I hope that I haven't overstated its brilliance!)
Your writing about it again a second time actually made me want to read it more!! I just finished The Essence of the Thing this morning - which I enjoyed immensely - thanks for the rec : )
Oh! Thank you for the recommendation! I actually have no idea how that works, or what it means, but I appreciate it hugely, Kate, and will return the favour when I have my head around it!
Interesting post, Samuel. I was just putting the finishing touches to my post for later today, and typing 'content warning...' on it, when your newsletter popped into my inbox...oh dear!
I think you raise some interesting and worthy points in here. I have written about sensitivity readers before, and I have mixed feelings: I think your points on allowing readers to access a text and appreciate the historical and cultural context of the time it was written, as well as reflect the reality of how some people did (and still do) think, can be a useful tool. To erase this can deflect from historical accuracy. As both a reader and a literary researcher/writer, these sorts of discoveries are invaluable of course. However, I have written before about such changes to outdated (but still popular) children's books, as I know from my Gen Z child that their generation find it much more unacceptable to find some of the content of these allowed to be re-published. I don't have a definitive answer! But I do have in my possession an original copy of The Home, which just arrived, and hope to start later today : )
Thanks, Kate.
Yes, I think all decent people have mixed feelings about this; it's a thorny issue! My feeling is we should talk about it as much as possible – and we must interrogate what sensitivity readers do and the decisions they make, because they're only human. Obviously, I think the expurgation here was wrong-headed, and that the Publisher's Note should have been enough.
I wrote briefly about the Roald Dahl thing on my Instagram – I don't seem to be able to link to other pages in Comments? Having probably never read Mansfield Park, and certainly having never read Edward Said on Mansfield Park, Dahl's sensitivity readers replaced what they believe to be bad imperialism (Conrad and Kipling) with what they have decided is good imperialism (Austen). Madness.
I hope you enjoy The Home – and that I haven't spoiled it for you by writing about it so much. (And I hope that I haven't overstated its brilliance!)
Your writing about it again a second time actually made me want to read it more!! I just finished The Essence of the Thing this morning - which I enjoyed immensely - thanks for the rec : )
Oh! Thank you for the recommendation! I actually have no idea how that works, or what it means, but I appreciate it hugely, Kate, and will return the favour when I have my head around it!
No problem! It took me ages to figure out how to do it too... : )