Thoughts on Ian Fleming "James Bond" books censored?

[Cubus]

According to leaks, "James Bond" books of Ian Fleming are gonna get reedited with many differences "to make it suitable for the sensitivity of XXI century's readers"

Source: https://deadline.com/2023/02/james-bond-books-rewritten-to-avoid-offense-to-modern-audiences-1235271892/amp/

[Lliam]

It's a sign of the dystopia that is overtaking this country. Welcome Fahrenheit 451 and 1984.
Since when does literature have to be vetted by the thought police.

I say FUCK people's sensitivities. They don't have to read a book if it offends them. But they have no right to forcably socially engineer society to suit their woke agenda.

It's the woke agenda that is the greatest danger to society.

[Guardian45]

Well said

[Lliam]

Thanks, bro.

[Lliam]

Thanks for the MHO, Cubus.

[Cubus]

You're welcome

[KostasKouvalis]

So-called "Conservatives" did this to themselves. If they didn't apologize everytime some snowflake got offended, cancel culture wouldn't exist. I honestly don't feel sorry for them. They started kissing these people's asses, this is what they got.

[Lucy68]

That's it I'm getting sick and tired of all these changes I'm honestly am. This is honestly completely utterly ridiculous like really

[Cubus]

You believe they should left it as it is, even though it containst words that may be racially offensive?

[Gummy_Cluster]

@Cubus
Yes, keep it the same.

[Lucy68]

Thank you for the MHO

[Cubus]

You're welcome

[Daniela1982]

America sucks!

This is what we will have if Biden wins again

[OlderAndWiser]

This is more PC/woke nonsense run amok!

[Leopard23]

Doesn't surprise me. The woke mafia are trying to re-edit everything even 1984.

[loveslongnails]

Dude... the conservatives are doing WAY more editing that the "woke mob" you refer to, which I believe you to mean "the left". It's just being done differently.

[Leopard23]

@loveslongnails in what way?

[loveslongnails]

You need to stop using the word "woke" because you have no idea what it means. Besides, your statement is bullshit, especially now. You right wing nuts have fallen prey to the religious bigots around you, and want to change how history is taught. ODDLY enough, it was ALREADY tainted towards "white supremacy" which you would know if read any fucking textbook from any middle school or high school, but that wasn't enough, was it?

[exitseven]

The same thing will happen with this that happened with the Roald Dahl books. A publisher will re-issue them in their original form and lets face it, who wants to buy a fake version of somebody;s works.

[Gummy_Cluster]

I haven't kept up on the new Bonds, but they said they wanted to change from the Roger Moor/Sean Connery Bonds, to Bonds that weren't Playboy-types. They should just dump the series if they feel the need to change the character.

[exitseven]

@Gummy_Cluster I read a few of Ian Flemings novels years ago. There really were nothing like the movies.

[Gummy_Cluster]

The woke won't be happy until they get a guy or trans Bond. Did you hear that the co-producer of the sitcom Friends, gave 3 million to some university so they could use it for African studies. This was because the woke was mad that the group of friends were all white heterosexuals.

[exitseven]

@Gummy_Cluster If people think that President Trump was a fascist wait until they see the one that will replace him.

[Gummy_Cluster]

They will be begging to get those mean Tweets back.

[Soteris]

Perfectly okey. Books are regularly re-edited to make them more suitable for a modern audience. Everything from updating language to replacing or restructuring the story is how the industry has always worked and is why we can read such things as Shakespeare today. The fact that Conservatives are freaking out over this is fucking embarrassing quite frankly.

[Cubus]

It doesn;t bother you that they only censored setences that are offensive towards Black people, but didn;t cenzored sentences offensive towards Asian people?

[Soteris]

No. Partially because this is a new release intended for a new audience meaning the original works will always be available and partially because this is a capitalist decision. They are not making a moral decision here based on some social narrative that people appear to think, they are surveying and calculating how to make more money which becomes a proxy for what people actually wants to buy.

Can you give me a reason why we should not make a product better according to its customers?

[Cubus]

If it was calculated on how to make more money, then why did they retreat from publishing a similar censored version of Roald Dahl's book after backlash?

[Soteris]

Again, money. Controversy is bad for business so dealing with them is a fairly high priority of companies unless the benefits far outweigh the short term problem of a controversy. It all comes down to the calculations they are doing inside the company.

[Leopard23]

Yes very 1984.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 That is not what 1984 is about. You should read it.

[Leopard23]

Not what its about anymore what with it being re-edited into a more woke friendly version.
1984. Thoughts on the book getting a Woke makeover? ↗

[loveslongnails]

" Can you give me a reason why we should not make a product better according to its customers?" Sure - you're not making the product "better" just because you make it more "palatable" for a certain audience. That concept is shockingly stupid. You can make it more "saleable", but that means nothing. You pointed that out in your own answer, but the FACT is, it becomes a moral decision when you intentional alter the meaning or impact the author intended, simply for a profit.

The reader, or customer, doesn't get to decide that your story would be better with a different narrative, or ending, and then somehow get it changed by the publisher - no matter how many readers might want that. That's fucking fascism, dude. That's the textbook manufactures equivalent of re-writing history, which gets done far too often in this country.

I'm fairly certain that Sam Clemens would punch you in the face if he came back and found you "updating language or restructuring the story" of Huckleberry Finn, or some of his other works, no matter how many centuries he'd been dead! And you'd deserve it.

Your statement that the "original works will always be available" is also simply not true, not universal and not guaranteed by any means. Your writing skills indicate you're smart enough to know that, so why would you be pushing that tale as if it's fact? You don't need to answer that - the rest of my points are much more important.

[loveslongnails]

sorry for the typos : * intentional = intentionally * manufactures=manufacturers

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 1984 has never been about editing books. The reason you think so is first of all because you have not read it and secondly because right wing idiots always yells out "1984" anytime they hear about anyone changing anything about history or whatever such as removing statues.

If anything, it just demonstrates how little you understand about 1984 and why I should ignore you.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails The value of a product is the money it generates. More money = Better in a capitalist worldview. What you consider artistically superior is both subjective and irrelevant. The purity of the authors vision is also irrelevant. Pretty much every Disney movie ever is a complete bastardization of the original classical works that would have the authors spinning in their graves.

Again, we are living in a capitalist world. Not only were these stories originally written to be sold, and thus written to please the readers of their day and not simply for the benefit of the author themselves with few, if any exceptions but its also the customer who is the only one that can reasonably demand edits.

For example, why is any book translated into a different language? Because the customer demands it. This is just as true for James Bond as it is for the Bible.

I am also delighted that you would use Huckleberry Finn as an example, because it has already had the "censorship" treatment applied.. multiple times.. Again, this is normal. Its how it has always worked until you came in here and started to be offended.

As for how I know this? Because we live in an information age. I do not need to go to the library to find an original version of Huckleberry Finn, I can look it up online and see how it has been edited over the years. It is out there if you cared to look.

[Leopard23]

Perhaps if you read the orginial you'd understand it better.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 Ladies first.

[Leopard23]

@Soteris it's 2023 you can't assume my gender

[loveslongnails]

And that's exactly my point. The censored versions of Huck Finn suck. I was able to read a very old copy that my grandparents had, and it was a far better book.

Your "excuse" for censorship and re-writing amounts to nothing more than to champion ALTERING an author's words in the name of capitalism. I AM offended by publishers who've done that and continue to it - because it's OFFENSIVE. I've always been pissed off about that. I don't really care that it's been "normal", it's damn wrong. So the fact that you sit there calling it normal behavior doesn't make it "right", nor should it. Far too many things have "normalized" that should not be.

The original versions of all books are certainly NOT easily available on line, contrary to what you claim. Some are, some are not.

Here is the crux of my disagreement with your line of thinking: " the customer (who) is the only one that can reasonably demand edits." The customer has NO right to demand edits from anyone. It's not the CUSTOMER'S property! A book is not Burger KIng - you don't get to re-write "your way", and supporting the notion that you should is absurd. I think the DeSantis is hiring, and you'd fit right in.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 I guess that is fair. Garbage does not have gender.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails I dont care what version you think suck or not and neither does the publisher of Huck Finn. They care about sales and whole you can get any version of this book, guess which one is selling the most? That is right, the "censored" one. Pure capitalism baby.

Also I can get any version online pretty easily and I can also go to my local library and get whatever version I want from there. If its not in stock then they will simply find a library in my country that does have it and mail it. We have not really lost any significant information since we started using the printing press.

You can also write fan fics or edit whatever book you want. If they still have copyright then it becomes harder to monetize but that is about it. Furthermore, plenty of edits has achieved far higher success than its originals such as whatever film or whatever Disney plagiarizes next.

[loveslongnails]

... and this is why you're a troll, and a dumb one at that. You ARGUE for the right to plagiarize as IF capitalism justifies it. On this point, you're just plain stupid. Additionally, you've lost the POINT of the discussion because the ONLY thing you can relate it to is "financial success".

You also spread disinformation with statements like " We have not really lost any significant information since we started using the printing press." Only a fool would say that. The fact is, you REALLY don't have any freaking IDEA how much you've lost. You idiotically "trust" that the internet version of an original work IS INDEED the actual, original work.

The more I read of your comments, the more I see you're a troll. Are you on the Heritage Foundation's payroll, or DeSantis's payroll?

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails Oh my god you are so stupid. Do you have ANY fucking idea how iterative literature is? Everything is fucking "plagiarized". All those stories with elves, dwarfs and orcs etc.. Where do you think they came from? How much do you think is ripped out of Greek classics like the Iliad? There are fictions that are plagiarized so heavily they become the foundation of entire genres. We are not even TRYING to hide this by for example naming something a "Lovecraftian horror".

But that is just the surface layer of your stupidity. Lets go deeper shall we? You also do not understand the need to edit stories to keep them relevant for modern audiences. For example, trying to read an original Shakespear is fucking painful and I have no ability to read the early versions if the Iliad since I can't read ancient Greek. I can however find a pretty much original version of the text if not the actual original, hard to decide with the imperfect form of copying books from back then.

Enjoy a snipped:
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος
οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,
πολλὰς δ᾽ ἰφθίμους ψυχὰς Ἄϊδι προΐαψεν

Ah yes. Totally worth it. We should definitely preserve the authors intention by getting people to read this.

And there is the 3rd layer of your stupidity. When I read a book, lets say the Hobbit, I am not reading it for the benefit of the author. I am reading it for the benefit of myself. As such, if I can get a better experience by reading a version not "intended" by the author then quite frankly the author can go fuck himself. At the point where I am reading then what is important is MY experience. The author can get their literary works recorded in some library somewhere if someone thinks they deserve it, but that is not relevant to modern culture.

You simply dont understand any of this. Never have, and probably never will. I am done treating you as a human with the capacity to learn.

[loveslongnails]

I'm sorry, but you're the fucking idiot here, and this statement proves it: " As such, if I can get a better experience by reading a version not "intended" by the author then quite frankly the author can go fuck himself. "

You don't even REALIZE how FUCKING STUPID this statement is! That's how goddamn retarded you are. The author's works are MEANT to be understood IN THE TIME IT WAS WRITTEN.

You are essentially extolling the "dumbing down of literature" to meet capitalist expectations for future generations, which you call "modern culture". AND I'M THE IDIOT? You are a fucking troll and a moron, and your hidden agenda is nothing short of Orwellian Doublespeak and fascism.

You Sir, fucking suck.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails Laughable.

Do you know about starship troopers? That trashy space soldier movie from 1997? Well, it is based on a book. Problem is that the book is fucking trash where as the movie is pretty awesome. Why? Because the movie is directed as a parody of the concepts that the book wanted to promote. The movie completely makes fun of the very idea that the author had in mind and drags it up and down through the mud and in the process completely redefined the whole public perception of that universe for the better.

If they never did that to the "original intentions of the author" then we would not have such an amazing fictional world compared to the political shitshow that the original was. This is not a "dumbing down" of literature, it is enhancing it to become something far greater than the original had any god damn right to be.

But again, you dont understand literature. You dont understand culture. You have no foundation to even have an opinion on this topic.

[loveslongnails]

You have no idea what the fuck your talking about. Shakespeare in its original diction is too difficult for you. You're a troll. Altering an author's words is NEVER going to be greater than the original !! You prove your total fucking ignorance by your statements, and you don't even know it. You're a clown. "Enhancing an author's words" makes it greater than the original? You ARE a fucking idiot. Now go away.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails Ahahaha! "Altering the authors words is never going to be greater than the original" my ass.

Starship troopers was written to demonstrate the perfect utopian worldview that the author believed in but his views was so fucking stupid that what he perceived as utopian we define today as cartoonishly evil and dystopian. The parody of starship troopers is sooooo much better than the original could ever be.

[loveslongnails]

Listen up, troll. A "parody" of a work isn't the same as altering a work and republishing it AS the work itself - it's a fucking parody, idiot.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails Nowhere does starship troopers claim it is a parody. You even fail at understanding comedy, what a surprise. Generally speaking, parody is not labeled because that is undermining its value. And again, no one gives a fuck about the original author of Starship troopers or his ideals of a dystopian militaristic future. His vision sucks, much better it be replaced with an actually compelling story and world that understands what it is doing is ridiculous rather than believe that they are a true representation of humanities utopia.

[loveslongnails]

Hey idiot - Starship Troopers is hardly what worth talking about. This here - " no one gives a fuck about the original author of Starship troopers or his ideals of a dystopian militaristic future", is nothing more than your opinion. Nothing more. You constantly make statements as IF you speak for " all people" or "all readers". The only "all" you represent is ALL mighty dollar, which again, ... try and grasp this point troll, is irrelevant to MY point while being the crux of yours.

Starship Troopers? LMAO. Really? A great example of literature brought to the silver screen. LOL This from the man who found Shakespeare to be so much better when dumbed down for the masses.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails... You do realize that Shakespeare was notoriously all about "dumbing (everything) down for the masses". Shakespeare was undoubtedly a master of the English language but he was also probably the person in history that bastardized the language the most. The reason he is famous is because he tore it to pieces and made pretty little knots out of words. Pretty sure that the elites hated his profane usage of their beloved language while the "masses" loved him for talking in "slang" they understood. But I digress, I picked starship troopers very deliberately.

Both because the original was garbage, which is notable today because barely no one has read it. The book did not survive the march of time and simply remains a product of its age and only for its age. Modern audiences are not interested in what it has to say because it has nothing valuable to teach and no interesting stories to tell.

The movie however overturned all of this. In many ways the parody has overturned the original to become the new de-facto original. The original authors vision has been surpassed and replaced for the betterment of everyone because the parody is the superior media.

[Soteris]

When people are thinking about starship troopers today they do not remember the pathetic book, they are thinking of the movie and when new products are being made, such as the recent computer game, they are basing it in the world of the parody and not the original world. Because the original world is objectively inferior.

Here you have an example where its not simply changing out the language for a modern audience, not simply removing some racist phrase here or there, but actively rewriting the whole volume of work to become something completely different and doing so successfully to the point where it has outright replaced the original.

This is what you are fearing and why you are stupid for doing so. If you want to read the original starship troopers, feel free. It is still available, but you will be worse for it.

[loveslongnails]

LOL I would never be "worse" for reading an original document that if written in a language I don't understand, is translated as best as it can possibly be. And I couldn't care less about this example, especially since I saw the movie and thought it was trash on ANY level, even comic.

[loveslongnails]

I have seen nothing that supports your statement that Shakespeare "notoriously dumbed down" his works for the masses. There are some scholars who agree that he made the equivalent of screenplay adjustments for the actors when they performed his works, and I grant this was done in the name of profit, as are current day books which are brought to the screen. That said, it in no way makes it a "better" experience, just a more saleable one. But this strays from my point of publishers re-writing works or editing them to make them sellable. So at this point, I've nothing more to discuss on the subject. Good day.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails You are so childish. First of all, there are objectively dangerous ideas. Hypothetical and otherwise. Plenty of people have fallen for suicide cults or religions which later promoted things like suicide bombings or terrorist attacks. Another, perhaps far better example of a dangerous idea would be Roko's Basilisk which technically endangers you just by knowing but that would also require you to have a basic understanding of the subject or the threat would probably fly over your head.

An extension of this would be books that spread harmful ideas. People are very easily influenced and it does not matter if something is true or not for it to be effective. As such plenty of people have become radicalized by reading things such as Mein Kampf or Atlas Shrugged even though books like these are intellectually bankrupt they succeed in pushing propaganda on you and corrupt the way you think or feel.

As for Shakespeare dumbing down the English language? I am pretty sure that he is the one who truly made a sport of turning a noun into a verb. Things like "Tabled a motion" and "Chaired the meeting" is examples of Shakespeare utterly bastardizing the English language. I challenge you to argue that these make inherent sense and I can assure you that he was soundly criticized for his use of "incorrect" language at the time. Imagine people being upset at the youth making up words like LOL or YEET today and you are not far from how they viewed Shakespeare back then.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails And if you want to continue argue about re-writing works. Then again, Starship troopers is the perfect example of where it has been done and it has been a commercial success as well as a cultural success because people today much prefer this new version.

[loveslongnails]

As I said, I've nothing to learn from your rant, nor from listening to the pot calling the kettle childish. Cling to your Troopers example and how financial success justifies everything or anything. It suits you.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails My argument for starship troopers is not financial. It is artistic. It has more artistic value as a parody of the original than whatever scraps of value the original had.

[loveslongnails]

I no longer care. I was talking about literature, you're talking about pulp trash. I'm done.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails Art is art. There is nothing wrong with "pulp trash", especially if its intelligently constructed. You are such a wuss.

[loveslongnails]

And you're a fucking troll. I hate blocking people. Just go away.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails Is it trolling if what I am saying is correct and you are just upset because your position makes no sense?

[loveslongnails]

My position makes perfect sense, you just don't agree with it. You're a troll for so many other reasons. Now again, kindly go away and play somewhere else.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails You do realize that this is my comment that you are replying to right? No one is holding you hostage here, you can leave literally anytime you want. I do not particularly care if you accept that you are wrong or not, I know that I am correct and I feel that I have proven it beyond a reasonable level of doubt according to my own standards in this conversation. I do not need you to affirm what I already know.

[loveslongnails]

And this... " ... I feel that I have proven it beyond a reasonable level of doubt according to my own standards in this conversation" ... is the most humorous thing you've said so far! As I said, my convo with you on the subject is done.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails Yet you are still here. And if you dont hold yourself to your own standards, then what are you even doing? This should be obvious.

[loveslongnails]

You can say and believe whatever your little mind wants - that doesn't mean it's a standard worth ascribing to, even though that's all you can imagine. Bye for good now.

[Soteris]

@loveslongnails If I knew a better standard then I would be a fool for not adopting it. You are talking as if its not obvious to hold yourself to the highest standards. Maybe that is just you though?

[jamesgoldman]

Stupidity at its finest

First they burn the books then they burn those buildings then the burn the people, fascism 101

[genericname85]

that's exactly how fascism shows it's ugly face. by censorship of litteraure.

[AngryCarl2]

I'll let Lemongrab take this one.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/MIZbGSXeWWE

[OddBeMe]

I think it’s bs. But a publishing company can do what they want with their content. Like Marvel metaversing our freakin minds to death…

[greenice27]

I think it's normal. Because the value judgments of the twenty-first century are different.

[gorydetails]

sounds stupid as hell

[FunkyMonkee]

It's 1984!!

[Wise4myage]

Sad, really sad.

[Guardian45]

F@#% THAT SH! T!