5 ms·
A translation is a translation, a book is a book. Would you agree to retouch some paintings in the Louvre for the greater good? Or, less radically, take the ori
by low_tech_love 3y ago
A translation is a translation, a book is a book. Would you agree to retouch some paintings in the Louvre for the greater good? Or, less radically, take the originals down and put retouched versions up?
- at_a_remove 3y agoLook at all of those unrealistic beauty standards and white skin. It's time for the Ministry of Truth to put up the correct paintings.
- jankyxenon 3y agoI personally wouldn’t touch an updated classic with a 10 foot pole - but there’s a market for sanitized classics. If the publishers think it will help them sell more books, it’s hard to fault them for it.
- awesome_dude 3y agoI have a print of the Mona Lisa with sunglasses, a moustache (and goatee), the original is untouched, and unharmed by the print existing.
- okanat 3y agoBut you do know that the original one is the one in Louvre and saw a least a detailed photo of it, maybe even the real thing. Racist, misogynist or whatever, the art in its original form is still there. When the books are censored the opposite happens. The original in the people's mind changes and the original nuances of the art is lost. Moreover we lose our understanding of progress. The change of the worldview and the values is an important part of understanding art. If we would like to show the progress we made and our current values, we should create our own classics for generations to read and understand us, rather than muddying the water between us and the previous generations.
- awesome_dude 3y agoBooks aren't being "censored" Please show me where all the book burnings are taking place. Please show me where librarians are being threatened physically for stocking the originals. Please show me where laws are being made preventing you from owning/accessing a copy of the original.
- crote 3y ago> Please show me where laws are being made preventing you from owning/accessing a copy of the original. This one is just called "intellectual property rights". If you don't already have a copy of the original, you won't be able to get one if the rightsholder chooses to withdraw it from sale.
- awesome_dude 3y agoApparently me not selling you a copy is preventing you from buying any of the trillion other copies left in circulation. Also in no other industry is a company forced to sell you a version of anything, otherwise where can I buy me a brand new Ford AC Cobra
- low_tech_love 3y agoIf you think that a book is the same as a car then it seems to me that you missed the point entirely. Have you ever written?
- awesome_dude 3y agoThe point has been clear all along. No books are being censored. Nobody is preventing anyone from accessing the original version. The publisher is not, and should not, be forced by anyone to produce any version at all. If you had been an author you would understand that selling your rights to a publisher is no guarantee that the book will even be printed, there have been numerous examples over the decades of rights being acquired for a work and then never exercised such that that work is never published (this is especially common with movie rights), Complaining that you as an author want to retain a right on editorial actions is fine if you dont sell that right. But if you were an author you would know that that doesn't always happen. Complaining as a consumer makes very little sense. It's fine to air your grievance, but the truth is you have no right on what is produced at all.
- low_tech_love 3y agoAre you selling that by passing it as the original, or by telling people that these are minor changes for the greater good, and that it’s mostly the same as the original?
- awesome_dude 3y agoNobody is presenting the changes to the book as "original"
- mavhc 3y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL1iGnKQ5Rs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL1iGnKQ5Rs