In more innocent days...

[GrannyGrump]

So, to bring a (slight) derailment -- what is the consensus on "modernizing" punctuation?

I refer here to such examples as these from the late nineteenth/early twentieth centuries:

He said:— or He said,— (using superfluous emdash)

To-day, to-night, to-morrow (I don't know about you, but it takes me out of the story just a bit. Although I know better intellectually, emotionally I keep thinking it is a stray hyphen left after OCR.)

Spaced ellipsis . . . instead of …

Punctuation inside parentheses of parenthetical phrases that today would be outside the parenthesis.

Lack of commas in run-on sentences that cry out for relief.
"I told him although I was ready now I would be on my way later."


Somehow, I can't bring myself to believe that changing these is controverting the author's "vision" -- especially since later authorized editions of these same titles *by the same publisher* very frequently update the punctuation and typography. And yes, the Mark Twain titles are a perfect example; works from the late 1800's were often updated in collections printed in the early 1900's.

[HarryT]

Modern editions of classics almost always modernise spelling and punctuation. There are relatively few versions of "Pride and Prejudice", for example, which retain Austen's original spellings such as "chuse" rather than "choose", "her's", rather than "hers", etc.

[murg]

Originally Posted by GrannyGrump

Spaced ellipsis . . . instead of …

I've seen both styles in modern books.

[GrannyGrump]

Harry, thanks for the validation. I think I will add a note when I do modernize punctuation and spelling -- keep the watchdogs off my back!

[Witty Username]

Originally Posted by doubleshuffle

The author of the article can't be serious when he says Crompton wasn't aware of what he was writing. He must have been making a (rather misogynistic and nasty) joke at the expense of some real maiden aunt's expense, just that, being "a blameless ex-classics teacher" writing a book, he couldn't very well use the same language as the lads down at the pub, could he? If Crompton really didn't realize what he was writing, Sigmund Freud would have had a field day with him...

ETA: I really like "Facsimilist"...

Richmal Crompton was a woman. Who never married.

She was an aunt and a great-aunt so maybe she was the 'real maiden aunt' she was writing about? And playing up to the fact that maiden aunts (and daughters of clergy) would be completely innocent of any other meanings?

[doubleshuffle]

Originally Posted by Witty Username

Richmal Crompton was a woman.

Gosh. That's embarrassing...

Makes the whole thing a lot more interesting, I have to admit. An author to discover?

[Witty Username]

I had to come back to this thread to add more points.

Richmal Crompton was a classics teacher - she would be well aware of innuendo and outright references to sex in ancient literature. Lysistrata by Aristophanes being the most obvious one. I don't believe she was innocent at all in deciding on a giant cock for the maiden aunt.

I think some of the innuendo in the childrens' books was deliberately put there to amuse the adults who had to read them to the children. It's much same today in that modern childrens' films have jokes for the adults so that they will take their kids to the cinema or buy the dvd.

Smutty innuendo has been around for generations - but the beauty of innuendo is that you have to understand it to be offended. So those who are outraged can't admit to it.

[GibbinR]

Originally Posted by Witty Username

I had to come back to this thread to add more points.
...
I think some of the innuendo in the childrens' books was deliberately put there to amuse the adults who had to read them to the children.
...

Actually I think it was slightly different:

'Even William was originally created for a grown-up audience, as she saw Just William as a potboiler (Cadogan, 1993).'

(from the Wikipedia entry on RC):

[leebase]

I like choice. I'd normally rather read a modern english book, I certainly prefer modern translations of the bible.

I think most of us disagree on changing the meaning to suit modern political correctness. I think it's a crime to remove nigger from Huck Finn.

I, for one, would rather read a modern translation of Shakespeare. And I'd like the option to read the original as well.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by leebase

I like choice. I'd normally rather read a modern english book, I certainly prefer modern translations of the bible.

I think most of us disagree on changing the meaning to suit modern political correctness. I think it's a crime to remove nigger from Huck Finn.

I, for one, would rather read a modern translation of Shakespeare. And I'd like the option to read the original as well.

While it is not a written form.
Macbeth done in RAP form is a hoot

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Witty Username

I had to come back to this thread to add more points.

Richmal Crompton was a classics teacher - she would be well aware of innuendo and outright references to sex in ancient literature. Lysistrata by Aristophanes being the most obvious one. I don't believe she was innocent at all in deciding on a giant cock for the maiden aunt.

I think some of the innuendo in the childrens' books was deliberately put there to amuse the adults who had to read them to the children. It's much same today in that modern childrens' films have jokes for the adults so that they will take their kids to the cinema or buy the dvd.

Smutty innuendo has been around for generations - but the beauty of innuendo is that you have to understand it to be offended. So those who are outraged can't admit to it.

They have even been found as ancient graffiti left by the builders of the pyramids. One worker drew a picture of his supervisor with a huge phallus. His meaning is still clear to us modern viewers today. lol.