OUR “Matilda” is reading Rudyard Kipling Jane Austen. Loop of Augustus “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” is rude huge, especially in front of Umba Lumba, that is little men little people who work in a chocolate factory. Bond, it’s (?) oh James Bond and prepares to blow out his 70 candles – a little differently than he first appeared on its pages Ian Fleming in 1953.

Countless times the conversation has begun about how to tell the artist from the work and whether we can separate them from each other, but it seems that we have reached the point to separate… work from work. This is evidenced by the latest news that comes to us from abroad and concerns interference in literary texts, written decades ago, smoothed out in places to keep up with the demands of today.

Author: Political correctness

So, some of his most famous tales Roald Dahl (Matilda, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Jimmy and the Giant Peach), as well as books about James Bond for new anniversary reissues of his works. Ian Fleming agent 007 starring, were “rewritten” in terms of political correctness, by replacing some words that are considered offensive by today’s standards (the examples in the introduction to the text come from these changes).

In fact, in recent years, a new quality of intervention of this kind has appeared in major publishing houses, namely: “sensitive reader” (“reader of confidential content”), more specialized, i.e. the case of the curator, whose purpose is precisely to identify and replace what he considers offensive/problematic content.

This, of course, is not the first case of art censorship in recent history. Come back to 2020 V HBO Max temporarily upload “Gone With the Wind” (released in 1939) because of the racist stereotypes it reproduces, the “standards” of our television habits, such as “Friends” it seems that they are now under the microscope of “cancellation culture”, and even modern series like “You” accused of glorifying stalking (but haven’t movies and television always expressed, among other things, some of the darkest human instincts?).

After all, we live in a time when the algorithm, and even more so algorithmic logic, is about to swallow us up. Recall that about a year ago tik tak banned the official account of his museum Charles Dickens because in his name… there was the word “dick”.

For the return to the world of the book, as expected, this intervention in the texts of the past was not particularly perceived, since for the majority it seemed controversial to far-fetched. Of course, every era has its own recruiters and a text written in a completely different context can “kick” us today. “One cannot ignore the historicity of the text, nor can one ignore its various readings in a different light”, as concluded by representatives Psychogios publications.

What is he pointing to? Konstantinos Papadopoulos from Diopter editions as well as controversially interfering with texts, especially when their author is no longer alive: “If the author is dead, the copyright holders must intervene in his text. I would at least doubt such a version, since we believe that the creator himself should make the decision. In other words, it is possible that someone at the time of writing the book had certain political positions, and today he would have others if he had not passed away. It is probably impossible to make this decision on his behalf, because he may never change these positions.

The concept of “cutter” cannot but discourages not only the reader of the text, but also the professionals of the book: “The mere thought of censoring or adapting a text gives goosebumps to any reader, but especially to any person who translates, edits and proofreads and has learned to work from the original text,” comments Kostas Spatarakis from publications of the Antipodes.

This does not imply a lack of judgment: “We may, of course, judge, as always, every text of any age, read or reject it, teach or condemn it according to our principles and preferences. However, in no case can we take the position of the author and replace him, interfering with the text and censoring everything that we consider to be contrary to the abstract “zeitgeist”, or everything that only irritates us,” adds the editor.

How do we say “sensitive readers” in Greek?

Greece may not have created posts for “sensitive readers” yet, despite all this. the concept of a filter does not cease to exist even unofficially. Beginning of birth books the publisher chooses to list which respond “to his quality, which is served by the harmony of form and content, naturally based on the values ​​u200bu200bthat he stands for,” as Psychogios publications say for their part. After this first showing, creators and publishers work together towards this shared vision.

Konstantinos Papadopoulos, on behalf of Dioptra, does not have such a negative attitude towards “sensitive readers”: “S.abroad, and especially in France, study the author’s text and identify points that may need to be revised. And then the author, and only he, must decide what to do with his text. Be that as it may, at the head of publications from the very beginning is the need to keep up with the times: “We’re here because we believe it’s the publisher’s duty. Therefore, we are looking for content that touches on topics that challenge stereotypes or established and rigid positions of our society and culture. Therefore, we have nothing to think about when it comes to change. But no, we will not change the text of the author without his consent and a lawyer,” adds the editor.

However, regardless of the “sensitivity”, any reader automatically filters what they read. “But it’s quite another thing if it comes from a position as authoritative as a publisher.” Kostas Spatarakis notes. And he explains: “The publisher, and indeed the specialized “sensitive” reader as his employee, of course, has the right to express his value and aesthetic positions through the works he publishes. No one forces him to publish works that irritate or offend him. But he has no power over past works, and I highly doubt he has the right to filter based on (non-literary) Value-moral criteria”.

Without bypassing, of course, completely these criteria: “In any case, we judge and decide what to publish based on political and moral criteria, but this does not mean that we go as far as cutting and stitching texts in accordance with our ideas.” says Kostas Spatarakis about antipodes.

Don’t forget how literature (must) use flamboyant language that serves the story and profile of the respective character. This does not mean that every character is here and speaks as he speaks so that we can identify with him, but it does mean that he has become part of a larger story, the purpose of which is to teach us something, to entertain, to excite, to make us think about it… In other words, a gangster can’t talk like a Harvard graduate in a movie.

Because, of course, there are always some thin lines, asking the people of the two above-mentioned publications if they were ever in a dilemma or worried about the text that fell into their hands, they do not have a shining example to stand out.

Of course I have part of the translation that’s another long story. So Antipodes publications may not have been able to handle scary content until now, but it was necessary. involve specialized staff in the translation of specific books. One of these was also “Argonauts” her Maggie Nelson, in which the author describes, among other things, her romance with a transgender artist, a book that raises issues of gender and sexuality. Be that as it may, for the publisher, fidelity to the original text is a fundamental principle.

The invasion of political correctness may not have come to the Greek publishing reality (at least in the official or strict sense), but like everything “imported”, it will most likely come to our lands with a little delay. Therefore, according to Psychogios publications, “We will definitely face such challenges in the future when our maturity and integrity are tested.” And maybe then we’ll start seeing ads asking for “sensitive readers” or whatever they call them.

Kostas Spatarakis, on the other hand, invites us to open up the plan and see the big picture: “We have a long way to go to achieve a sufficient level of sensitivity in our social life, and therefore we are quite far from the excesses that every change of perceptions and principles sometimes brings.”

What he writes, he does not erase

We are definitely going through a time of change and revision for many years of many fixed perceptions of the past, and like every change/crossing, it comes with excess cost. We can filter and judge what happened yesterday and doesn’t match today, we can even label them with sensitive content (perhaps the most honest and subtle tactic that political correctness can use). Above all, we can ensure that the education of the present and the future minimizes as much as possible the ideological and moral anchors that echo the “old world”.

But we cannot erase or “edit” the past, because no matter what we do, it will remain “there”. And what censorship ultimately does to literature – and to any artistic or non-fictional – past, rewrite history on your own terms. And there is nothing more dangerous than this.