Why do you think people write prequels, sequels and other
books based on another author’s work? Do you like reading (or writing) fan fiction?
Is it OK to modernise an old classic –especially
a children’s book -- by removing portions that we would now consider racist or
otherwise offensive? Does knowing
objectionable things about an author alter how we view his/her writing? Should it?
I personally don’t think writing a remastered version or a fanfiction about an existing book is a big deal. For me if the book is enjoyable to read, there is no boundaries, even if the book is far different from the original. I myself don’t write fanfictions about my favorite books, and I don’t often read them too, although in between my reading time, I sometime put down the book, close my eyes, and imagine what I would’ve written.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, the author tackles a problem about the change in the writing style when a person rewrites or creates a spinoff of a story. Some fanatic of a book would say that the new version is not respecting the original one, and the writing style of the person compared to the author is completely different. However for me, forcing the writer to imitate the writing style of the original, and to not let them write what they want seems more irritating. Original is the original, even if the person knows about the author perfectly, it’s impossible to write the same way as he did, and at the end it won’t be like what we expected. On the other hand, reading a spinoff about a sequel that is written in a completely different tone and mood is usually fun, because than the readers can explore the world view of the story from various perspectives. The film, “The Jungle Book”, by Disney might’ve been non-identical from the book written by Kipling, although there could’ve been some filmographic problems if they animated with the dark and sly mood as Kipling did in the book.
Of course, completely changing the settings and story is not allowed, although I think it is appropriate to exclude meaninglessly exaggerated racial or offensive parts. Authors are also humans, they also have biased opinions and beliefs, however those have some possibility to effect the children’s ethics and behaviors. As the article uses, the famous comic series Tintin is a good example. I think it is ok to remain the personality of Tintin as a racist person, although when republishing the book, it is better to erase parts that are offensive against specific group of people. Yet this doesn’t mean people doesn’t need to pay attention in to the original book, however we can look at them as a literary heritage of the past people, and as a tool to know how the story actually looked like.
Rio,
DeleteI agree with you that there is no problem in changing the original text as long as we can still identify it's source. Time goes by and the people change, that is why the stories need to change as well. It is not something that starting happening now. Most stories as we know them are derived from old legends, folklore and mythology. Well know stories such as Snow White, Beauty and the Beast and Little Red Riding Hood are far more drastic and brutal then we know them. In the original story of The Sleeping Beauty written in 1638 by Italian writer, the prince is unsuccessful in trying to wake the princess up so he instead rapes her while she's unconscious. Then he returns home to his wife. And when the kids are born, his mother tries to kill them by ordering the cook to slit their throats and prepare a meal for the prince from their flesh. Just imagine the uproar of parents if such a story appeared these days. That's why I do not see a problem with omitting inappropriate parts when rewriting tales.