zlacker

Why not explain the historical context of these books instead? (That’s I what do with my children.) My children appreciate the transparency and extra discussion. That leads to a better longer term outcome for society than with the ease and convenience that censorship provides. History’s mistakes tend to repeat when society forgets them. We can’t rely on educational institutions doing our job for us since the same trend of censorship is happening in their realm.

>>chaost+(OP)
Fair enough, and I applaud your approach, but IMO there's a time and place, and bedtime wasn't one of those times or places I wanted to get into these kinds of discussions.

>>chaost+(OP)
Because there are enough (a veritable deluge of) alternatives that do not require extra work on my part.

Which is probably why the Dahl copyright holders are doing this(1). Not to appease some sort of modern sensibilities, but to make money. Apparently they think the investment will pay off.

(1) a less money-focused reason could be because they truly believe these stories deserve to be shared in the future, and see the things they changed as barriers to that goal while of little import to the message. But again, they think this step will "pay off" - in continued popularity / enduring part of culture then.

>>Beldin+aD
Maybe read other books instead of helping destroy classics?

Yeah, I agree that the copyright holders are acting rationally, but long term this will destroy our democracies. A key premise of Fahrenheit 451 is that they end up with sanctioned book burnings because of something boring like political correctness.

>>bentco+AB
Maybe read other books instead of helping destroy classics and advancing societal censorship?