Commentary


Penguin Random House announces unbowdlerized Dahl books

Penguin Random House, which holds the publishing rights to Roald Dahl’s books, had replaced Dahl’s texts with bowdlerized versions. They wanted to “make the books suitable for modern readers,” who evidently have reverted to the Victorian era. They discovered, though, that a lot of people today aren’t “modern readers” and can stand to read what an author actually wrote. As a result, Random Penguin has announced it will issue editions with the original text along with the sanitized versions.Stack of Roald Dahl books. Source: Wikimedia

Perhaps I should mention I’m not a fan of Dahl as a person. His reaction to Khomeini’s murder contract on Salman Rushdie was “This kind of sensationalism does indeed get an indifferent book on the top of the best-seller list — but to my mind it is a cheap way of doing so.” He characterized himself as antisemitic and said, “There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity.” The portrayal of the Oompa Loompas is creepy, no matter how movie makers dress it up. For that matter, the punishments inflicted on the “bad” children in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory are rather horrible. They didn’t do anything that bad!
(more…)


A Worldcon in Egypt?

The Chengdu Worldcon is collapsing from lack of organization, likely made worse by the need to satisfy the governmental authorities. A bid for Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, has fortunately been withdrawn. It’s hard to say whether China or Saudi Arabia is worse on human rights, but Saudi Arabia holds a clear edge in sheer brutality. Replacing the JeddahCon bid is one for PharaohCon in Cairo.

You don’t have to be a flaming libertarian to recognize that every country in the world has human rights issues. The question is how serious they are and how they would affect people attending the convention. Egypt isn’t as bad as Saudi Arabia or China, nor as good as the United States or Canada. How concerned should potential supporters be about what it is doing and might do?
(more…)


“The right side of history” 2

Once again, let’s look at an expression which is loaded with meaning that most people don’t think about. Some writers use it without thinking, others because they’re promoting their particular philosophy. The expression is “being on the right side of history.” If you don’t support a certain cause, you supposedly aren’t on the right side of history.

What does that mean, though, and why do you want to be on that side? It’s an idea that comes from the philosophy of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and its two bastard children, Marxism and Fascism. This idea, called historicism, holds that history inexorably follows a certain path. Your only choice is to go with the tide or against it.

If you put the phrase into your writing without thinking about it, you could be lending support to historicism without knowing it.
(more…)


Redefining “equity” 1

In a previous post, I quoted a statement by Hamline president Fayneese Miller referring to “a purported stand-off between academic freedom and equity.” This got me thinking about the way some have tried to change the meaning of the word “equity.” It’s hard to tell what Miller meant, since she’s the only one doing the purporting. Others, though, have tried to shift the meaning of “equity” from its traditional one.

The Merriam-Webster definition of “equity” gives several technical meanings in law and finance, as well as “justice according to natural law or right; specifically: freedom from bias or favoritism.” Equity means applying the same standards to everyone; it rejects, for example, laws giving special privileges to the nobility or denying rights to people on the basis of their appearance, sex, or religion.
(more…)


Dark clouds over the Chengdu Worldcon

The video of the Chengdu presentation at Smofcon 2022 is up on YouTube. It provides some insight into how the 2023 Worldcon is going. Mostly, it’s going badly. The presentation was about a month ago, but I haven’t seen any significant change since then. Correct me if I’ve missed anything. My focus here isn’t on the logistical issues as such, but on the underlying problems.

PR #1 wasn’t out then and still isn’t out. Ben Yalow said that members won’t receive it “until everything is locked in to the satisfaction of people who get very nervous. … We’re holding off on releasing PR 1 until everything in PR 1 we know is absolutely, completely certain.”
(more…)


It’s not what you say…

“It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it.” A book I picked up today in the library reminded me of that saying. It’s The Reformation, a part of the “Turning Points in World History” series. The book consists of essays by different authors. One of them, “The History and Premises of Protestantism” by Hans J. Hillerbrand, includes a half-hearted apology for John Calvin. Other parts of the book are more straightforward about his career of persecuting heretics, but Hillerbrand’s careful phrasing struck me. I’m thinking of these two quotes, found in the same paragraph:
(more…)


Algorithms don’t need defending 2

I’m constantly annoyed by the statements that people ignorant of software development make about “algorithms.” They don’t have the least idea what one is, yet they think they’re competent to declare how evil an algorithm is.

Let me focus on one article, because it’s from Reason, which I expect better things of. The piece is “In Defense of Algorithms,” by Elizabeth Nolan Brown. A look at her bio shows that she’s got the background to write about many things, among which she claims “tech,” but she doesn’t mention any experience with the computer industry or software development. She should have known better than to pick up this topic and put a dent in a record of excellent articles.
(more…)


Stanford’s laughable “Elimination of Harmful Language” document 1

Some things are sillier than any parody you could make of them. An example is Stanford University’s recent “Elimination of Harmful Language” document. It was greeted with so much laughter that Stanford has hidden it behind a login screen. Fortunately, the Internet Archive still lets you see the document, so we can still make fun of it. Try to imagine writing an article adhering to its demands. It would have no color (oops, can’t say that — racist!), and the effort would leave you gasping (belittles people with asthma!) and drive you insane (insults people with psychiatric issues!).

It starts with a self-own: “Content Warning: This website contains language that is offensive or harmful. Please engage with this website at your own pace.” Further on, it self-owns the self-own by telling you that a “trigger warning” “can cause stress about what’s to follow. Additionally, one can never know what may or may not trigger a particular person.”

That last is actually the one piece of sensible advice in the whole clown act. Psychological experts have found that warning someone that scary stuff is coming only makes the reader more anxious. So naturally they don’t follow their own advice.

For the rest, I can’t do better than pick out some gems:
(more…)


The Dedham Library Christmas tree incident 2

A branch of the Dedham, Massachusetts library decided not to put up a Christmas tree this year because it made some people “uncomfortable.” This has led to an acrimonious controversy which several news outlets have covered.

The situation goes to show how violently hostile people become over minor issues. More specific to this blog, it shows the kind of pressure libraries come under with increasing frequency.
(more…)