|
I guess my objection to the "updating" of archaic works is that there is no consent from the author possible. If an editor said to an author "this choice of words is problematic" the author has the choice to change it or not. Making these kinds of changes without permission of the author (or heirs) strikes me as hubris.
and my biggest problem with the quotes cited in #37 above isn't the use of "dago" v. Levantine, it's the mysogeny. Where do editorial changes stop?
|