Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeSteve
I want to know what Author XYZ wrote, pure and unfalsified, unfiltered and unchanged and uncut
|
I'm pretty sure you mean "what Author XYZ
published..." They are called rough drafts for a reason.
Quote:
and not what some officious committee or sensitivity reader, years after the fact, without the author's knowledge or consent, deems correct and proper and inoffensive to modern sensibilities. If an author or one of the author's characters perceived things in a certain way, or described things in a certain way, be it offensive to some or not, that's what I want to read. I find it presumptuous for someone who is, after all, just another person, to appoint themselves a kind of guardian of public morals or chief of language police who decides what's acceptable for everyone else, or what people nowadays can endure or ought to be exposed to. After all, if people don't like what an author writes, or how an author writes, they can lay the book aside and read one by somebody else. There seem to be enough out there.
It's such meddling that has made the term "do-gooder" not one of praise but of opprobrium.
|
And again, it is the author's representatives/agents/rightholders that are making these changes. Not "some officious committee or sensitivity reader" or "do-gooder" (unless such committtee/sensitivity reader was hired by the rightsholders). This is about money, not pressure from wome woke mob.