13 ms·

And an explanation of the specific substitutions made. Like, why erase Rudyard Kipling instead of having a conversation about the historical context of racism.

giraffe_lady 4y ago
Well, there's also a significant and growing contemporary movement based on not having conversations about the historical context of racism.
- irthomasthomas 4y ago
  I think it's even broader than that. Just the destruction of context altogether.
matthewdgreen 4y ago
Because a lot of parents are reading these to their younger kids and don’t want to have a conversation about the historical context of racism, or if they do: they want to do it in the context of different books.
- irthomasthomas 4y ago
  So, pretend racism wasn't a thing? Or just outsource the conversation to Netflix and Government?
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  Most people's knowledge of Kipling is limited to 'wrote the Jungle Book,' if that.
boomboomsubban 4y ago
This doesn't seem realistic. Imagine you're a ten year old sitting somewhere reading "Matilda" and came across that line. Maybe there's someone around you can ask who Kipling is, but there's a good chance they either don't know the issues or are going to be unwilling to have a conversation about the historical context of racism with some child over a one sentence mention of Kipling. More likely, the child will continue reading the book gaining at most a recommendation for future reading. I don't know if that small recommendation should be changed, but I don't see it's inclusion as some potential learning moment. The line has been in the book for thirty years, and I doubt it's taught many children about the historical context of racism.
- irthomasthomas 4y ago
  The line has been in the book for thirty years, and I doubt it's taught many children about the historical context of racism. Indeed, because the vast majority of people only know Kipling for The Jungle Book and If. But we must destroy the mans life work because he happened to live in a time of colonialism.
cld8483 4y ago
Or why they tried to erase Joseph Conrad, despite Conrad being famous for his opposition to colonialism. (Probably because they judge Joseph Conrad by the outdated language he used, rather than by the ideas and values he presented. Because they are shallow fools.)
- trieste92 4y ago
  Values like this? > A certain enormous buck n*** encountered in Haiti fixed my conception of blind, furious, unreasoning rage, as manifested in the human animal to the end of my days. Of the n*** I used to dream for years afterwards.
  - cld8483 4y ago
    The values of opposing the European subjugation of Africa. Which you'd know if you read his books and weren't fixated on the outdated language.
    - lostlogin 4y ago
      Is the word the only issue, or the sentiment it is conveying? The passage and others in the book are not made ‘bad’ just because of that word.
      - cld8483 4y ago
        The sentiment Joseph Conrad expressed in his books is that colonialism is evil and corrupts the souls of anybody who participates in it. If you can't read his books because you can't get past the dated language he used, then you are rendering yourself culturally impoverished.
        lostlogin 4y ago
        Have a look at criticism by Chinua Achebe and the latter rebuttals. It’s more complicated than you are making out.
jpoesen 4y ago
Exactly this. Similar example: Tintin in Congo is by today's standards absolutely racist, but reflects the era when it was published. The last decade the (Belgian) publisher was sued multiple times to try and force it off the shelves. Also: calls to remove statues of King Leopold II (who committed horrible atrocities in "his" Congolese colony). In both cases, why not leave access to the original books/statue/... intact but add an introductory section on why this is no longer appropriate today. Or place a contrasting statue, opposite King Leopold II, that embodies the struggle for independence / the colonial horrors / the blight that is racism / etc. Overall it feels like there's a drive to remove "inappropriate" materials from society, instead of leaving them accessible as living proof of the mistakes that were made, and to provide backstory, context, and the "appropriate" contemporary view.
- mauvehaus 4y ago
  > Overall it feels like there's a drive to remove "inappropriate" materials from society, instead of leaving them accessible as living proof of the mistakes that were made, and to provide backstory, context, and the "appropriate" contemporary view. I share this view, but I also recognize that as a white dude, what is to me a learning opportunity about the things that folks (who mostly look like me) have done in the past isn't necessarily seen that way by everyone. Unfortunately, even if you get a whole mess of folks of different backgrounds to have an honest and meaningful conversation about what to do about these many things, you aren't going to please everybody. The easiest solution is to just remove the materials rather than having to continuously justify leaving them available and reinterpret the historical context for them from a contemporary standpoint.
  - irthomasthomas 4y ago
    The easiest solution is to just remove the materials And so doom us to repeat the mistakes of our forebears and bring violent racisim back into fashion? It is racists, more than anyone, who wish to hide the historical roots of racism. That we might find it impossible to recognise it's impending revival.
    - 4y ago
Veen 4y ago
Particularly since Kipling was critical of many aspects of empire and colonialism, and Jane Austen, who they replaced him with, was not.
TheCondor 4y ago
This is the proper solution but it also shifts the goal posts in a way that is dramatically easier for the certain groups to attack and win. You also have to equip the teachers with the materials and skills for that conversation and they have to be up to that task. There are bad teachers that just want to have the kids read books and then test them on content. There are also different theories of interpretation, there is a school of thought the divorces the artist from the art and wants to study the art on its own merit regardless of the views of the artist. I think it's dramatically easier to attack a particular conversation about the artist and historical views and fight to remove that from a class than to "ban a book." There are efforts like the 1619 project which basically exist because of that. I think there are also a lot of class rooms where the teachers don't want to have those conversations just due to classroom culture and dynamics; think a suburban class room with 19 white, probably heterosexual, middle class kids and 1 black kid; how do you have that discussion and not single that student out? Roald Dahl is a very interesting target here, editing "fat" out of the description of Augustus Gloop, I assume, was to be more gentle towards more portly folks. The character seemed to have a real eating disorder though, those are real issues that real people also suffer with. Does a discussion of bulimia and anorexia need to accompany Charlie and the Chocolate Factory? Is it read at an age appropriate for that? Was this edit even material? It seems like the real theme is one of greed and humbleness and the eating disorder is just a foil.
lostlogin 4y ago
> why erase Rudyard Kipling instead of having a conversation about the historical context of racism. This sounds like critical race theory. That gets people far more fired up than changing a few words in some kids books ever will. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory

giraffe_lady 4y ago

Well, there's also a significant and growing contemporary movement based on not having conversations about the historical context of racism.

irthomasthomas 4y ago
I think it's even broader than that. Just the destruction of context altogether.

matthewdgreen 4y ago

Because a lot of parents are reading these to their younger kids and don’t want to have a conversation about the historical context of racism, or if they do: they want to do it in the context of different books.

irthomasthomas 4y ago
So, pretend racism wasn't a thing? Or just outsource the conversation to Netflix and Government?
anigbrowl 4y ago
Most people's knowledge of Kipling is limited to 'wrote the Jungle Book,' if that.

boomboomsubban 4y ago

This doesn't seem realistic. Imagine you're a ten year old sitting somewhere reading "Matilda" and came across that line. Maybe there's someone around you can ask who Kipling is, but there's a good chance they either don't know the issues or are going to be unwilling to have a conversation about the historical context of racism with some child over a one sentence mention of Kipling. More likely, the child will continue reading the book gaining at most a recommendation for future reading. I don't know if that small recommendation should be changed, but I don't see it's inclusion as some potential learning moment. The line has been in the book for thirty years, and I doubt it's taught many children about the historical context of racism.

irthomasthomas 4y ago
The line has been in the book for thirty years, and I doubt it's taught many children about the historical context of racism. Indeed, because the vast majority of people only know Kipling for The Jungle Book and If. But we must destroy the mans life work because he happened to live in a time of colonialism.

cld8483 4y ago

Or why they tried to erase Joseph Conrad, despite Conrad being famous for his opposition to colonialism. (Probably because they judge Joseph Conrad by the outdated language he used, rather than by the ideas and values he presented. Because they are shallow fools.)

trieste92 4y ago
Values like this? > A certain enormous buck n*** encountered in Haiti fixed my conception of blind, furious, unreasoning rage, as manifested in the human animal to the end of my days. Of the n*** I used to dream for years afterwards.
- cld8483 4y ago
  The values of opposing the European subjugation of Africa. Which you'd know if you read his books and weren't fixated on the outdated language.
  - lostlogin 4y ago
    Is the word the only issue, or the sentiment it is conveying? The passage and others in the book are not made ‘bad’ just because of that word.
    - cld8483 4y ago
      The sentiment Joseph Conrad expressed in his books is that colonialism is evil and corrupts the souls of anybody who participates in it. If you can't read his books because you can't get past the dated language he used, then you are rendering yourself culturally impoverished.
      - lostlogin 4y ago
        Have a look at criticism by Chinua Achebe and the latter rebuttals. It’s more complicated than you are making out.

jpoesen 4y ago

Exactly this. Similar example: Tintin in Congo is by today's standards absolutely racist, but reflects the era when it was published. The last decade the (Belgian) publisher was sued multiple times to try and force it off the shelves. Also: calls to remove statues of King Leopold II (who committed horrible atrocities in "his" Congolese colony). In both cases, why not leave access to the original books/statue/... intact but add an introductory section on why this is no longer appropriate today. Or place a contrasting statue, opposite King Leopold II, that embodies the struggle for independence / the colonial horrors / the blight that is racism / etc. Overall it feels like there's a drive to remove "inappropriate" materials from society, instead of leaving them accessible as living proof of the mistakes that were made, and to provide backstory, context, and the "appropriate" contemporary view.

mauvehaus 4y ago
> Overall it feels like there's a drive to remove "inappropriate" materials from society, instead of leaving them accessible as living proof of the mistakes that were made, and to provide backstory, context, and the "appropriate" contemporary view. I share this view, but I also recognize that as a white dude, what is to me a learning opportunity about the things that folks (who mostly look like me) have done in the past isn't necessarily seen that way by everyone. Unfortunately, even if you get a whole mess of folks of different backgrounds to have an honest and meaningful conversation about what to do about these many things, you aren't going to please everybody. The easiest solution is to just remove the materials rather than having to continuously justify leaving them available and reinterpret the historical context for them from a contemporary standpoint.
- irthomasthomas 4y ago
  The easiest solution is to just remove the materials And so doom us to repeat the mistakes of our forebears and bring violent racisim back into fashion? It is racists, more than anyone, who wish to hide the historical roots of racism. That we might find it impossible to recognise it's impending revival.
  - 4y ago

Veen 4y ago

Particularly since Kipling was critical of many aspects of empire and colonialism, and Jane Austen, who they replaced him with, was not.

TheCondor 4y ago

This is the proper solution but it also shifts the goal posts in a way that is dramatically easier for the certain groups to attack and win. You also have to equip the teachers with the materials and skills for that conversation and they have to be up to that task. There are bad teachers that just want to have the kids read books and then test them on content. There are also different theories of interpretation, there is a school of thought the divorces the artist from the art and wants to study the art on its own merit regardless of the views of the artist. I think it's dramatically easier to attack a particular conversation about the artist and historical views and fight to remove that from a class than to "ban a book." There are efforts like the 1619 project which basically exist because of that. I think there are also a lot of class rooms where the teachers don't want to have those conversations just due to classroom culture and dynamics; think a suburban class room with 19 white, probably heterosexual, middle class kids and 1 black kid; how do you have that discussion and not single that student out? Roald Dahl is a very interesting target here, editing "fat" out of the description of Augustus Gloop, I assume, was to be more gentle towards more portly folks. The character seemed to have a real eating disorder though, those are real issues that real people also suffer with. Does a discussion of bulimia and anorexia need to accompany Charlie and the Chocolate Factory? Is it read at an age appropriate for that? Was this edit even material? It seems like the real theme is one of greed and humbleness and the eating disorder is just a foil.

lostlogin 4y ago

> why erase Rudyard Kipling instead of having a conversation about the historical context of racism. This sounds like critical race theory. That gets people far more fired up than changing a few words in some kids books ever will. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory