4 ms·

I see these as two completely different topics. One is about retelling classic stories in a way that is more relevant to modern audience. "Disney's The Little M

I see these as two completely different topics. One is about retelling classic stories in a way that is more relevant to modern audience. "Disney's The Little Mermaid" is most definitely not "Hans Christian Anderson's The Little Mermaid" and is never really presented as such. It's just a retelling of a story that happens to have been first told in some fashion by Hans Christian Anderson As a completely separate issue we have censorship, where Mark Twain or Roald Dahl have their works republished using words that are not their own but still using their name. That's deliberately confusing and masking historical context, and that's objectionable. To object to a retelling of a Hans Christian Anderson story is basically to advocate for unlimited copyright terms.

austin-cheney 2y ago
On one hand there are works like Pride, Prejudice, and Zombies. Its not a whitewashing of the original and its not trying to be. Even better is that it does a moderately good job of preserving the direction of the original story while adding absurd extensions like zombies and busty breasts overflowing their blouses. On the other hand there is Disney's Aladdin. Uggghhh, yeah, its a complete whitewash. Nobody knows what Aladdin really is any more. Call that a new original story about some goofy cartoon who sings songs with some blue vapor clown thing. Don't call it a fairy tale, because its not remotely related to the fairy tale of the same name. Its no different than spinning the historical tragedy of the Trail of Tears into some positive romantic comedy cartoon fantasy to sell movie tickets. Sure, you if look hard enough you might be able to find some sliver of an encounter to support your whitewash idea, but that doesn't make it savory.