Agatha Christie novels to be rewritten to battle modern sensitivities

[Still Waters]

Popular classic Agatha Christie novels are said to have been rewritten to battle modern sensitivities, according to The Telegraph.

Christie’s Poirot and Miss Marple mysteries serious are being released in new editions by publisher HarperCollins that will see passages reworked or removed.

As The Telegraph shared that parts were removed including references made to people smiling and comments on physiques.

Christie’s books are not the first to face modern edits, as books by Roald Dahl and Ian Fleming were both edited by publishers.

The updated versions of Christie’s work are set to be released or have been released over time since 2020 by the publisher, HarperCollins.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/agatha-christie-novels-rewritten-battle-081701700.html

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/mar/26/agatha-christie-novels-reworked-to-remove-potentially-offensive-language

[Orphalesion]

I'm very split on this issue. On one hand I can understand it, there's a lot of older, very famous science fiction I refuse to to read because it has homophobic statements (Heinlein especially) and I do worry about the ideas those statements put into the mind of young, impressionable readers.

On the other side...literature is art and and I do believe we shouldn't change art only because it doesn't fit comfortably with our modern sensibilities.

Unless those changes happen through the wish of the original author, that is.

Maybe a compromise could be to release both "amended" and "legacy" versions? The latter would have the original text, the former the updated one?

Edited March 26, 2023 by Orphalesion

[Ell]

Whereas I quite understand that the mention of chickens, buffalo's and downspouts in Christie's books may offend the sensitivities of sensitive people, I am opposed to removing them as that would constitute a 1984 rewrite of history.

 

Instead I propose to either not teach how to read to sensitive people or to give sensitive people electroshock therapy - free of charge of course. 

[Piney]

37 minutes ago, Ell said:

Whereas I quite understand that the mention of chickens, buffalo's and downspouts in Christie's books may offend the sensitivities of sensitive people, I am opposed to removing them as that would constitute a 1984 rewrite of history.

 

Instead I propose to either not teach how to read to sensitive people or to give sensitive people electroshock therapy - free of charge of course. 

Or let Darwinism take it's course with "sensitive" people. 

*If your that bothered with the world, here's your noose* 

[Orphalesion]

7 minutes ago, Piney said:

Or let Darwinism take it's course with "sensitive" people. 

*If your that bothered with the world, here's your noose* 

I really like that you put "sensitive" under quotation marks because I think you hit the nail on the head with that. I'm willing to bet the people who call for those changes or decided on them are neither part of the groups they assume to speak for, nor are they hyper sensitive persons. They are probably bored people who want to look good and progressive in the public eye. 

And rather than tackling actual issues...because that would be difficult and uncomfortable to them...they do crap like this or discussing whether Caucasian narrators discourage non-Caucaisan people from watching damn BBC documentaries. (Personally I'd say if they want to expand their audience they might want to think about broadening their topics beyond the millionth documentary about the Tudors, Victorian homelike or World War II/Hitler)

Or they are people who think that they know what's good for other groups, without being actual part of that group. And think that people need to be coddled and protected rather than being given the tools to stand for themselves. And that is both patronizing and insulting and helps nobody.

[Piney]

1 hour ago, Orphalesion said:

I really like that you put "sensitive" under quotation marks because I think you hit the nail on the head with that. I'm willing to bet the people who call for those changes or decided on them are neither part of the groups they assume to speak for, nor are they hyper sensitive persons. They are probably bored people who want to look good and progressive in the public eye. 

And rather than tackling actual issues...because that would be difficult and uncomfortable to them...they do crap like this or discussing whether Caucasian narrators discourage non-Caucaisan people from watching damn BBC documentaries. (Personally I'd say if they want to expand their audience they might want to think about broadening their topics beyond the millionth documentary about the Tudors, Victorian homelike or World War II/Hitler)

Or they are people who think that they know what's good for other groups, without being actual part of that group. And think that people need to be coddled and protected rather than being given the tools to stand for themselves. And that is both patronizing and insulting and helps 

My middle son, who is half Black and I were just talking about sensitive White people and their stupid SJW ideas.

My relative caregiver and his cross dressing boyfriend were out of the closet in the 50s and didn't give a **** what people thought.

[+Hammerclaw]

That will be for a niche audience. There are no worse words that can appear on a cover to most readers than "revised" or "abridged".

[Alchopwn]

14 hours ago, Still Waters said:

Popular classic Agatha Christie novels are said to have been rewritten to battle modern sensitivities, according to The Telegraph.

Christie’s Poirot and Miss Marple mysteries serious are being released in new editions by publisher HarperCollins that will see passages reworked or removed.

As The Telegraph shared that parts were removed including references made to people smiling and comments on physiques.

Christie’s books are not the first to face modern edits, as books by Roald Dahl and Ian Fleming were both edited by publishers.

The updated versions of Christie’s work are set to be released or have been released over time since 2020 by the publisher, HarperCollins.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/agatha-christie-novels-rewritten-battle-081701700.html

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/mar/26/agatha-christie-novels-reworked-to-remove-potentially-offensive-language

Yep, you can just tell these are going to sell like hotcakes ROFL.  I know I only read murder mysteries because I am a sensitive and caring soul.

Edited March 27, 2023 by Alchopwn

[Eldorado]

The light-hearted escapades of Jeeves and Wooster have become the latest victims of the seemingly relentless march of literature's word police. 

PG Wodehouse's books on the pair's aristocratic misadventures have been identified as having what the publishers describe as 'unacceptable' prose. 

The comic novels have had passages cut or reworked for new editions by Penguin Random House, as well as trigger warnings added to warn readers of ‘outdated’ themes.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/news/publishers-rewrite-jeeves-and-wooster-books-to-remove-unacceptable-prose-by-pg-wodehouse/ar-AA19VgOY?

[Ell]

In my opinion the corruptions of the texts annihilate any copyright claims upon those texts. 

 

It is time for pirate editions.

[Eldorado]

Peter Pan gets gender shake-up in latest Disney film

Disney’s live-action retelling of Peter Pan and Wendy will include “Lost Girls” among the troupe of children led by the boy who never grows up.

David Lowery, the film's American director, has defended the decision to break from tradition in favour of gender inclusion, in a new adaptation that also includes a black actress in the role of Tinker Bell.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/movies/peter-pan-leads-the-lost-girls-in-disney-film-that-favours-gender-inclusion-and-diversity/ar-AA1a6SJk

[Antigonos]

On 4/16/2023 at 5:08 PM, Eldorado said:

The light-hearted escapades of Jeeves and Wooster have become the latest victims of the seemingly relentless march of literature's word police. 

PG Wodehouse's books on the pair's aristocratic misadventures have been identified as having what the publishers describe as 'unacceptable' prose. 

The comic novels have had passages cut or reworked for new editions by Penguin Random House, as well as trigger warnings added to warn readers of ‘outdated’ themes.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/news/publishers-rewrite-jeeves-and-wooster-books-to-remove-unacceptable-prose-by-pg-wodehouse/ar-AA19VgOY?

This is absolute insanity. First Agatha Christie, and they’re going after Wodehouse? What could possibly be unacceptable about Jeeves and Wooster? 

Older editions are nicer anyway, so anyone looking to collect the works of these authors will be better off avoiding new ones regardless.

These people have lost their minds.

[TrumanB]

This is ridiculous. I am big Agatha's fan and this political correctness will only butcher her work.

I understand why title of one of her books is changed to And there were none (because of the n-word) but this is madness. Luckily I have old editions.

[darkmoonlady]

Instead of edited, I'd rather see annotated versions with notes sections discussing the historical context of the problematic passages. That way it's a learning lesson. 

[+and-then]

I'm shocked that they haven't tackled Conan Doyle's famous detective stories yet.  I mean, how DARE he write characters based on the 1880s-90s Victorian era Britain.

[CrimsonKing]

7 minutes ago, and-then said:

I'm shocked that they haven't tackled Conan Doyle's famous detective stories yet.  I mean, how DARE he write characters based on the 1880s-90s Victorian era Britain.

Well you just gave them the idea!