A problem has risen up for me that seems not to have been discussed before: politically biased books. Not only do some of the authors happily state their political or moral views, but some of them are openly hostile versus females, other nations and other races, some of these views making me embarrassed even to read them. Now I assemble them and upload them so my name is linked with those oeuvres and I am somewhat identified with them.

What can I do? Obviously we live in freecountries, so censorship is out of the question. Should I attach a caution label to those books? Just leave them the way they are and trust the readers to be mature enough to discern the biased views from the entertainment? This really does upset me to a certain point. Help and advise would be highly appreciated.

(Examples: Henty, Ballantyne, Optic, Kingston to name but a few)

A problem has risen up for me that seems not to have been discussed before: politically biased books. Not only do some of the authors happily state their political or moral views, but some of them are openly hostile versus females, other nations and other races, some of these views making me embarrassed even to read them. Now I assemble them and upload them so my name is linked with those oeuvres and I am somewhat identified with them.

What can I do? Obviously we live in freecountries, so censorship is out of the question. Should I attach a caution label to those books? Just leave them the way they are and trust the readers to be mature enough to discern the biased views from the entertainment? This really does upset me to a certain point. Help and advise would be highly appreciated.

(Examples: Henty, Ballantyne, Optic, Kingston to name but a few)

I'd suggest leaving them as they are. People are mature enough (one hopes!) to realise that a book is the product of the culture in which it was written, and that (to name but one example) 19th century attitudes to black people were very different from those which we'd consider acceptable today.

you raise an interesting point. these old pd books were written in a dramatically different social context and things which shock us were considered perfectly normal (the role of women, the attitude towards different races, etc. as you mention). i think that it is interesting and useful for us to read these books in keeping this perspective in mind, from a sociological point of view, to remember that society has evolved and see to see this evolution.

if you feel uncomfortable with some of these views (although, since you did not write them, you are not responsible for them) it might be a good idea to mention in your description of the book that they contain examples of some very outdated values which you do not endorse, and to keep that in mind while reading them.

however, i don't think there is any reason for you to feel uncomfortable (although if you find a really extreme example which you are too uncomfortable with, you can of course choose not to publish it) : i think it's very important for us to see examples of this precisely because it's important to remember how things used to be ; this can help us more clearly understand our current society and how we got here, and also help us to be more enlightened ourselves by being confronted with viewpoints which might make us uncomfortable in a contemporary setting. "he who does not remember history, is doomed to repeat it."

this is a very common dilemma and one i think it's good to be aware of ; the Tintin books are considered classic children's comic books today and they are really a treasure i think. however some of them present quite shockingly racist (by our standards today) stories and attitudes. when we read them, we should think "oh my, look how racist our society was at the time these were written ; look how we have changed our perspective since then," and even examine why people had these opinions at the time and how they shaped many historical events, rather than thinking "oh, Hergé thought africans were a bunch of monkeys, they must really be so."

the Tintin books are considered classic children's comic books today and they are really a treasure i think. however some of them present quite shockingly racist (by our standards today) stories and attitudes. when we read them, we should think "oh my, look how racist our society was at the time these were written ; look how we have changed our perspective since then," and even examine why people had these opinions at the time and how they shaped many historical events, rather than thinking "oh, Hergé thought africans were a bunch of monkeys, they must really be so."

I completely agree, Zelda. Another example are the "Dr. Thorndyke" detective stories of R.A. Freeman. Excellent stories, but they contain some quite shockingly crude (by today's standards) stereotypes of Jewish characters. Unfortunately, anti-Semitism was rife in the society in which Freeman grew up (late 19th and early 20th century Britain), and he is reflecting the views of that society.

Your point about using such things as an example of how our views have changed is, I think, a very well-made one.

Racist or not, I was quite shocked by Kingston's statement in "Afar in the Forest" to the point that his "heroes" shoot "savages" on sight just for good riddance and seem to find that quite normal. That "IS" shocking.

Racist or not, I was quite shocked by Kingston's statement in "Afar in the Forest" to the point that his "heroes" shoot "savages" on sight just for good riddance and seem to find that quite normal. That "IS" shocking.

Unfortunately, mtravellerh, it was the prevalent attitude of the time that black Africans were "sub-human".

H. Rider Haggard who, as I'm sure you know, wrote many African adventure stories, was widely criticised during his lifetime for his "reactionary" attitude that African peoples should be permitted to govern their own affairs. The prevailing attitude at the time, certainly in Britain, was to treat them like "children" and believe that they were "better off" being ruled by the European colonial powers.

It's interesting to speculate which attitudes of ours will shock our grandchildren. :chinscratch:

It's interesting to speculate which attitudes of ours will shock our grandchildren. :chinscratch:

Our profligate use of limited natural resources (eg oil) would be a strong candidate.

We should also consider that the "offensive" views and attitudes in fiction novels are not always the author's but the characters'. Of course, it is often a product of the time and society, and the author is usually with the characters in this matters...

This is a case were it is important that the copyright year for the book is available in the beginning of the book.

This is a case were it is important that the copyright year for the book is available in the beginning of the book.

I fail to see your point.:blink:

I think warnings in the book description would suffice.

I fail to see your point.:blink:
It would allow the reader to know when it was written and apply the appropriate filters to understand what the author's mind set may have been, culturally.

I tend to add a cautionary note in the post if I'm uploading anything particularly controversial.

I always add the note if the author uses the N***** word to refer to black people.

We've had some trouble with book titles. I converted Ronald Firbank's "Sorrow in Sunlight" using this (the original) English title. In the USA the book was released as "The Prancing N*****."
HarryT was hesitant about uploading Joseph Conrad's "The N***** of the Narcissus" under the original title, and found that it had also been issued as "The Children of the Sea" so went for that.
And surely no one will ever publish Agatha Christie's "Ten Little N******"" again. It's been appearing lately as "And Then There Were None."

I don't feel bad about uploading occasional controversial works, but often do the opposing point of view, to redress the balance. So I do both religious and atheist works; both classical liberalism and anarchism and marxism etc.

I tend to add a cautionary note in the post if I'm uploading anything particularly controversial.

I always add the note if the author uses the N***** word to refer to black people.

We've had some trouble with book titles. I converted Ronald Firbank's "Sorrow in Sunlight" using this (the original) English title. In the USA the book was released as "The Prancing N*****."
HarryT was hesitant about uploading Joseph Conrad's "The N***** of the Narcissus" under the original title, and found that it had also been issued as "The Children of the Sea" so went for that.
And surely no one will ever publish Agatha Christie's "Ten Little N******"" again. It's been appearing lately as "And Then There Were None."

I don't feel bad about uploading occasional controversial works, but often do the opposing point of view, to redress the balance. So I do both religious and atheist works; both classical liberalism and anarchism and marxism etc.

And that's why you are awesome, Patricia :)

I think that if I do some opposing viewpoints then no one can accuse me of bias.

There are some books that i wouldn't care to do at all, though. E. g. One of the most heavily downloaded books at the Internet Archive this week is an anti-semitic rant, with the usual conspiracy theory about world domination. It's badly-written, poorly-argued and incoherent. I can't work out why anyone with anything approaching a critical faculty would want to read it.

As someone who has only downloaded books from this website, I just appreciate the effort and commitment of those who create the ebooks. I do not attach any particular association between the person who worked and ultimately uploaded the ebook and the book content, unless the person explicitly mentions how they feel about the book. The only impression I have about the folks who generously provide these books is that they (you) must foster a tremendous love of literature and the written word.

I don't think it is necessary to include any kind of statement about the book's content. Anyone who reads much should know that books that were originally written 20, 30, 50, 100+ years ago use different language, styles and orientations than more recently written and published works.

Thanks for all you do.

And surely no one will ever publish Agatha Christie's "Ten Little N******"" again. It's been appearing lately as "And Then There Were None."


Isn't this a spolier for the book?

I really do not like that old books are not published under the original title. For me reading an old book is much more then just reading the text. I want to place it in its historical context. And it the title is wrong that becomes impossible.

Isn't this a spolier for the book?

I really do not like that old books are not published under the original title. For me reading an old book is much more then just reading the text. I want to place it in its historical context. And it the title is wrong that becomes impossible.

It's only a spoiler if you consider that titles like "Murder on the Orient Express" are also a spoiler :).

"Ten Little Niggers" (and yes, I am going to use the original title because that's what it was called) has had a slightly unfortunate title history. After that title became "unacceptable" in, I think, the 1960s or 70s, it was republished as "Ten Little Indians". Then that name became "politically incorrect" too, so it was renamed yet again to "And Then There Were None". Let's hope it has more luck with that title, because it's one of Christie's best.

It's only a spoiler if you consider that titles like "Murder on the Orient Express" are also a spoiler :).

"Ten Little Niggers" (and yes, I am going to use the original title because that's what it was called) has had a slightly unfortunate title history. After that title became "unacceptable" in, I think, the 1960s or 70s, it was republished as "Ten Little Indians". Then that name became "politically incorrect" too, so it was renamed yet again to "And Then There Were None". Let's hope it has more luck with that title, because it's one of Christie's best.

Oh geez. :) Sometimes I think that political correctness has its drawbacks, too. ;)

I think that if I do some opposing viewpoints then no one can accuse me of bias.

There are some books that i wouldn't care to do at all, though. E. g. One of the most heavily downloaded books at the Internet Archive this week is an anti-semitic rant, with the usual conspiracy theory about world domination. It's badly-written, poorly-argued and incoherent. I can't work out why anyone with anything approaching a critical faculty would want to read it.

Well, the books that I do upload are not superficially political, but sometimes there is some stratus of the public mind popping up or open emitting a really bad smell. But I think I will just put a little caution label on if I notice and let people decide for themselves.

It's only a spoiler if you consider that titles like "Murder on the Orient Express" are also a spoiler :).


I meant that it refer to what happens in the end and who is the killer.

If a specific version of the text is distributed electronically I think it is wrong to change the title.

I meant that it refer to what happens in the end and who is the killer.

If a specific version of the text is distributed electronically I think it is wrong to change the title.

wrong? As long as the title has been used sometime along the way, I see nothing wrong at all in this.

wrong? As long as the title has been used sometime along the way, I see nothing wrong at all in this.

I wrote that if you publish a specific edition were the text exactly corresponds to that edition then you should keep the title. I know that people here seems to mix versions when they do an ebook version but I think that is a not optimal thing since that new version cannot be referred to. And if a new version is made by combining several versions of the book then it should have a publishing date or contain information that reflects that.

Unfortunately it seems that Gutenberg does not contain information about what version the text is based on but if a book is proofed against a specific version then I think it should be stated what version it is based on.

I wrote that if you publish a specific edition were the text exactly corresponds to that edition then you should keep the title. I know that people here seems to mix versions when they do an ebook version but I think that is a not optimal thing since that new version cannot be referred to. And if a new version is made by combining several versions of the book then it should have a publishing date or contain information that reflects that.

Unfortunately it seems that Gutenberg does not contain information about what version the text is based on but if a book is proofed against a specific version then I think it should be stated what version it is based on.

We use mixed versions because that is the way PG is working. Most of the texts here on MR are taken from PG because it is the biggest and, as far as the proofing is concerned, most reliable online source.

When I proof a book against a specific printed version, I do generally say what it is. For my Dickens books, for example, I use my complete set of "Oxford Illustrated Dickens".

The whole idea of words being offensive, I find somewhat ironic. The "N" word, as some like to refer to it, was not originally an offensive or derogatory word and, in fact, derived from the same Spanish word for "black". It's just that the people of the time were lazy in their enounciation and mispronounced the word and later it did become a derogatory word, not because of the word itself but because of the attitude of the users of the word.

In a similar way the perfectly good word "Queer", meaning odd or unusual, became derogatory because of the attitude of the people using the word and how they applied it. I regret that so many good words are no longer available for use in their original meanings because of "political correctness".

Another example of "political correctness" vs. "attitude" is the book entitled, "Little Black Sambo". This book was not even about a person of the Negroid race but was about an East Indian boy. But the use became so politically charged that a local restaurant founded by two men named Sam & Bo had to change the name from SamBo's to something less offensive.

As for what our grandchildren may find offensive in todays literature, just think how offended our grandparents would be offended by, what to us is rated PH-13, but to them would be considered too sexually explicit.

Bottom line, IMO is that it is the attitudes of people, not the particular word used that should be critized. I really became aware of how any word should be considered Ok when used in proper context back when I was 30. In a public park, where a dog show was taking place (I was there just enjoy the park), they announced over the loudspeaker, "The showing of the bitches will be at two o'clock." I actually physically cringed because they had used the "B" word on the loudspeakers. Later that day, after careful consideration, I realized that it was a proper usage of the word and made me begin to examine my own attitude and how I used words. I now try to use words properly, whether they are PC or not.