> It's an adolescent fantasy that was mocked by the Austin Powers movies. Why is that a negative? If it inspired other art, even as a parody, that makes it a v

> It's an adolescent fantasy that was mocked by the Austin Powers movies. Why is that a negative? If it inspired other art, even as a parody, that makes it a valuable part of culture. James Bond has inspired countless imitations, and has resonated with generations of people around the world. It doesn't need to be high art to be enjoyed. Everyone watching the movies or reading the books today will have a different perception of the material, in the same way we view art produced centuries ago. Art exists within the context of its period, and changing it to suit new generations produces strange results, completely disrespecting the author's intention. Would you feel the same way if we started altering paintings someone considered offensive? That's as ridiculous as these changes. Of course, this isn't new with books. Popular works go through many editions throughout history. We should be able to go back and read older editions, but sometimes these become harder to find, as new ones become more prevalent. Let's hope that won't be the case here.