PHOTO COURTESY OF THE GUARDIAN

Agatha Christie and Roald Dahl’s works are set to be revised for offensive language.

Jack Bond, opinion editor, is a senior English major from Marion.

Agatha “Queen of Crime” Christie, author of prominent detective novels such as “The Mysterious Affair at Styles” and “Death on the Nile” is the latest author whose works are to be revised for offensive language.

Publisher HarperCollins has edited and removed passages that echo racist and anti-semitic views. For example, a description of a character as “a Jew, of course” will not be present in the revised version. 

These revisions come not long after book publisher Puffin announced similar changes to the classic children’s novels written by author Roald Dahl. 

Books such as “The BFG” and “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” will be edited to remove offensive language related to gender, race, weight, metal health and violence. Words such as “fat” and “ugly” as well as descriptions using “black” and “white.”

Backlash quickly following the changes led to Puffin announcing the release of “classic editions” which retain the original language. No such announcement has been made for Agatha Christie’s works at the time of writing this.

Although the overwhelming opinion seems to be against rewriting classic literature, there is some good to be had out of this. 

Censoring offensive language makes the books more palatable for modern readers, which in turn increases readership. More readership means more informed masses. Although one could argue that a true intellectual could easily look past the offensive language, being aware of the context in which it was written doesn’t make it any less uncomfortable to read. 

The more important benefit, however, is the effect that this has on children. Kids are very easily impressionable. Assuming they do some independent reading of works with racist and anti-semitic ideas, there is a good chance that they might adopt said ideas.

Ultimately, it is up to the parent to make sure that their children know right from wrong, but they cannot be aware of every little influence on their children’s lives. In this case, children should be protected from radicalized ideas that promote hate and bigotry.

Now that the good things are out of the way, I can explain why this is still a bad idea overall. First and foremost: historical accuracy.

In todays’ day and age, historical accuracy seems to be a hot topic. Usually, it’s used as an argument to disguise bigoted ideas like racism. The best example of this is when certain fans of Assassin’s Creed called for more “historical accuracy” in Assassin’s Creed Origins after the announcement that the main character was not white.

Despite the fact that Ancient Egyptians were likely very ethnically diverse, the game is also the same one in which you leap from hundreds of feet into hay bales and somehow magically survive. Historical accuracy is not important here.

The world of classic literature, however, is much different. We learn a lot about past societies through the literature they produce. To censor classic literature is to change the history textbooks. 

Another issue with censoring literature is that it is a form of whitewashing. These authors were far from perfect, and to try and remove stains from their moral record is problematic. If they were racist or anti-semitic or sexist or classist, that needs to be acknowledged.

They don’t deserve to be painted as angels when they did horrible things and thought horrible thoughts. 

I think what’s being done with Roald Dahl’s works is the ideal way to approach classic literature. Make versions that are more palatable for wider readership and to protect impressionable kids, but also make versions that echo the darker side of human history. 

Hopefully HarperCollins does the same with Agatha Christie’s works. We need to understand past societies and their flaws to know what worked and what didn’t. It’s as they say “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.”

Categories: Opinion