Lost In Sensitivity Editing

Does literature mirror society? The following commentary dwells upon an aspect of the topic.  Never mind its ironic anomaly, a new currency is circulating in the landscape of free expression. Sensitivity editors are toning up the writings of classic make, whose illustrious authors are long dead. Previously, the compositions were hailed as laudable works of literature. They still are, except for a new found zeal for retouching here and cropping there. That is, without the approval of authors who breathed their last long ago. 

Some of today’s saints of sensitivities find some of the lines in some of these once lustily acclaimed literary gems not in tune with the 21st century landscape, and hence inconvenient or derogatory. In deference to such sentiments, a number of literary works are getting reworked to suit the new awareness. Till recently, such proposal would have met with a torrent of condemnations, calling the action a sacrilege. But then times seem to change drastically, and do not seem to spare even what is supposed to be a rich trove of commendable words acknowledged as above-average literature of one genre or the other.

What about other creations of art and cinema? Perhaps one is asking too many questions and too fast in a short commentary like this one. But these are logical reactions from a close chronicler of events and developments.  

Hindsight-bound

Does the defined refinement denote sections of society are developing thinner skin?  The bug could catch up with other strands in more environs. Laudable literature represents appreciation in good faith by all generations, contemporary and those to succeed. We read for what the pen pushers scribed echoing the good and the bad of their contemporary times. Then why not delete someone’s remarks not approved by the all-knowing few or narrow picture-holders waking up to the wisdom of hindsight? 

Hollywood star John Cena got himself embroiled in a controversy two years ago, when he told a Taiwanese interviewer in Mandarin regarding his latest feature film: “Taiwan is the first country that can watch F9.” The Fast & Furious actor quickly apologised on social media for calling the island Taiwan “a country”. “I made a mistake, I must say right now. It’s so so so so so so important, I love and respect Chinese people.” China might have accepted the profuse apology. For the action charged franchise movie grossed a massive $135.6m in China alone to become one of the biggest openings in recent years.

In 2021, when the bestselling author Elin Hilderbrand asked her publishers to remove a reference to Anne Frank from her latest novel, Golden Girl, and apologised to readers for including an “offensive and tasteless” passage in the book. The much criticised portion, which was deleted subsequently, had a child character who compared hiding in an attic to the life of the Holocaust diarist, Anne Frank. The comparison made the two children laugh, which some readers found to be “casual antisemitism”. 

Should paraphrasing essentially replace direct quotes that rub the newly emerging sensitivities pertaining to what was created long ago? The valued better-versed ones might rescue the situation with their thoughts that heretofore were held high as critically sound as a meritorious measure of timeless wisdom.  

The past is not always glorious. In certain respects, many an incident of the ages gone by could be listed in highly unflattering terms in today’s realm. Past events and actions cannot be clinically looked into from the standards of the present times. Or else, things would be out of context and far away from submitting fair perspectives of the days and ages gone by.  For instance, The Merchant of Venice by the greatest English writer William Shakespeare would otherwise be held with probing questions deploring its putrid odour emitted by religious bigotry. It could attract scorching glares for the manner a Jew is viciously portrayed during what Europe prides as the Renaissance. 

Agatha Christie’s novels were recently rewritten for modern sensitivities. Their original passages underwent rework or were removed altogether in the new editions. A fair guess would be that the original copies are likely to be prized possessions—collector’s items. The flavour of the “original” could be invigorating while those actively against the objectionable-passages might deride the banned books as sources of social poisoning.

A breed of sensitivity readers is on the employ for editing purposes to ensure that literary works adapt to changed times. References to people’s taste, habits, dresses, ethnicity, colour and physical contours could now frequently find the sharp edge of deletion. Passages are purged, some characters are culled, dialogues rewritten and dictions substituted by ones palatable to nurse the sensitivities of the ones badly bothered by the original compositions. There may also be millions who would not want to hear anything pertaining to criminals, traitors and clones of the likes of Hitler and Mussolini. They might find unbearable the very presence of books portraying them or written by the vicious villains unbearable. Can all this be categorised as censorship? We may call the culling an exercise in positive portrayal for palatable presentation.    

In and out

Gird up your loins for new lessons, lest you draw long faces and grim looks for not being abreast of the times and what’s in and what’s really out. Nearly six decades after it was first published in 1964, A Caribbean Mystery, in its latest edition reads an amateur detective musing at a West Indian hotel worker smiling at her with “beautiful teeth” in lieu of the original: “such lovely white teeth”. The list is longer.

In Christie’s 1920 debut-novel, The Mysterious Affairs at Styles, the leading character Poirot described a character as “a Jew, of course”. The four words ran afoul of the scissors of the new sensitivity readers, and were made to do the vanishing act in the new version. This just might be the beginning. Others could queue in for the next target- editing. Hence, tribes of the writing world, you have nothing to fear, but to make adjustments to the latest reading culture. 

Author of 66 detective novels and 14 short story collections, Christie, the Queen of Crime, ranks the best-selling novelist of all time. Yet the sensitivity music does not spare her. Nor might others, in the course of time. 

(Professor Kharel specialises in political communication.)