This is a very funny situation because it's the result of the mental shortcircuit caused by fetishizing both the past and the present at the same time for econo

This is a very funny situation because it's the result of the mental shortcircuit caused by fetishizing both the past and the present at the same time for economic reasons Let's say that I believe that past authors are problematic. Ok, then why reprint their works? Why not print children stories from modern and more sensitive authors? The job of the publisher is not to keep history alive, it's to provide customers with a good selection of children's content. On the other hand the publisher knows that these books are cherished by the general population and are indeed immortal classics. So it would be stupid not to print them and leave a good chunk of money on the table. So here comes the contradiction: we need to publish this author because we want the money, but at the same time we don't agree with him. The solution? Editorialize his works, not with footnotes but by destructively changing the verbiage of the stories! This way we can both get rich and alter history to our liking!