Censorship and Roald Dahl: Free the BFG

Can the censorship of Roald Dahl's books be justified after death? Here's Amelie's argument for AGAINST censorship

Amelie Baker
6th March 2023
Image Credit: Flickr
His books have been invaded, his characters imprisoned by a foreign pen - Roald Dahl is under siege from his publishers, but can this onslaught of censorship really be justified?

Puffin Books, Roald Dahl’s publishers, have deemed his books and language a danger to the livelihoods of their readers: his socially incorrect phrasing apparently equalling the fictitious villainy of the Witches and the Twits. Puffin have taken it upon themselves to save their readers from the wicked wording of these books, with ‘fat’, ‘black’ and ‘white’ among the words struck from their new classics collection - a real knight in shining armour moment. Sarcasm aside, although Puffin's intentions may be pure, the misguided act of shielding their little readers from the ugliness of the real world hiding in the political implications of words like ‘fat’ only reveals far more malicious implications. Whilst only minor and almost insignificant, those changes compromise the author's integrity and the freedom to make those choices. If free speech is being jeopardised, then at what point does Puffin's censorship become less about protecting their readers and more about control?

Puffin, despite their noble notions of protection, are only imposing their own modern sense of right and wrong onto books that are over 40 years old. Whilst Roald Dahl may not have held the most progressive beliefs (Oompa Loompas? Only slightly problematic), they were still his views and his decisions in spite of whether they were right or wrong. If we held writers like Shakespeare or Austen, or even Disney, to that same standard, there would be little left of those stories once Puffin were through with them. Is this really the future that we want, where the offensive is avoided and hidden, our independent ability to decide what is right and wrong disabled?

There are those, however, that argue children’s literature should be made ‘appropriate’ for children. I couldn’t agree less. If our literature had to constantly adhere to a core set of moral values, the creative diversity of ideas would slowly be eroded, and the ability to criticise those ideas would similarly fade. Children’s literature needs to be creative, and needs to introduce questions of right and wrong.  If children are not taught to question their reality, simply because parents prefer avoiding difficult conversations about Roald Dahl’s use of ‘fat’, then there is little hope. Without learning innate critical thought processes, then children will forever take life at face value. And if they were living in one of Roald Dahl’s books, that means they would probably end up eaten by Witches or killed by a psychotic headmistress, which is no way to live at all really. 

Censorship must always be treated with horror. To deny access to literature in its intended form is to deny children their rights to free thought. And if the books really offend you that much, simply pick another one. 

It is still a free world despite Puffin's efforts, so lets keep Roald Dahl free, and those offended by him can choose to remain free of Roald Dahl.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments

  1. Great writing and clear understanding of the problems perceived in children being 'corrupted'by reading. They should be able to draw conclusions from all texts and question underlying issues. That is why it is important that we keep reading a great variety or works!

ReLated Articles
magnifiercross
linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap