Dahl Revised

Changes to Roald Dahl’s Books

P. P. Zhang

ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER EPISODE OF ‘HAS WOKENESS GONE TOO FAR?’. But before we dive into today’s topic, I would like to embrace an instance of positive wokeness. As many of you know, Mardi Gras was last weekend and the event continues to make history: Anthony Albanese shone (not literally) as the first ever sitting prime minister to march for the Mardi Gras Parade, for his 35th consecutive year attending the event. 

In more concerning news, recent criticisms surrounding another famous author came to light. He’s the inventor of snozzberries and snozzwangers, the creative genius responsible for the words lickswishy and scrumdiddlyumptious. Yes, it’s none other than beloved children’s author Roald Dahl, who’s headlined recent news as a result of controversy associated with the language used in his books. His most famous works have all had words changed in order to be more inclusive, such as ‘enormously fat’ in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, ‘old hag’ in Witches, as well as making the Oompa-Loompas gender neutral. The Roald Dahl Story Company, along with Penguin Books, tweaked the classics to ensure that “”Dahl’s wonderful stories and characters continue to be enjoyed by all children today”. Ironically, 40 years ago, the author himself threatened to send his Enormous Crocodile to “gobble [anyone] up” who dared to censor his work. 

As a result of the announced changes, Dahl’s books have soared to the top of bestseller lists as readers stockpile on the classic versions before the revised ones are published. Fortunately, after facing mass backlash from other authors and the general public, Penguin Books has vowed to keep printing and publishing the previous versions, in addition to the reworked ones. However, the debate comes down to whether changing the language of the book would actually have any tangible effect on the flow or message of Dahl’s stories. Whilst this may or may not happen, preserving the original authenticity of creative works is always important. Additionally, censorship, especially in literature, a form which has and should continue to be devoid from conformity to social mores, has always been viewed as a negative. 

The skyrocketing popularity of his original works has provided a surprising benefit in the form of increased profits for publishers and the Roald Dahl Story Company. This introduces another possibility for the reasoning behind the changes: rather than political correctness and inclusivity, publishers aim for a greater engagement to the modern audience, which in turn boosts sales and profits. 

First, the controversy surrounding J.K. Rowling’s alleged transphobia, which had knock-on effects. Now, the censorship of Roald Dahl’s works. Both these examples hold heavy implications for future literature, where writers and publishers alike will prioritise the safe and profitable over the potentially controversial.