Keep Off My Books!

Do you like it when publishers/editors decide to reword your favorite books, for whatever reason?

In the last week here in "Tattered But Still Lovely", there have been a couple mentions of childhood favorites being "reworded".

I feel that if a book is edited, even if it is in the public domain, there should be a notation about it somewhere in the book. To edit and not let the reader/buyer know is sneaky, imho.

How do you feel?

I wholeheartedly agree, and the same goes for abridging. Why do they want to cut stuff out and then not say so?! Why is that a thing?! If you shorten it, fine there are people who go for that, but STATE IT CLEARLY on the cover and title page. What is the point of hiding it?? Are they really trying to sneakily save a few cents by using a handful less pages or something?! Come on!

Yes, it should say so very clearly, both in general, and preferably also marked in the text.

On the other hand there can be good reasons for doing so. I am reading a book of related short stories, and there are two or three points that I am getting tired of. Yes, it was needed when the stories were published separately, but in the collection that information is not needed at length in each one. (My best guess is that the publisher of the book didn't dare do to a fairly recent author's work what they know she would have done herself were she still alive.)

Fuzzi,

You mentioned an Eric Kincaid edition of The Jungle Book. I was just destroying my eyes trying to pull his version of The Wind in the Willows out of the full text collection, because he (or the editor) blithely mention dropping two chapters that "in no way interrupt the sense or flow of the story." and then call the rest of it "LIGHTLY ABRIDGED." I call it a gyp.

In the first paragraph, they drop the end of the sentence: "Spring was moving in the air above and in the earth below and around him, penetrating even his dark and lowly little house with its spirit of divine discontent and longing.

Most abridgements will list an editor or an adaptor, but they lacked the courtesy of a name to blame.

Why? Why? Why? It's not like it's a terribly long book?

>4 2wonderY: I just have to point out that the word "gyp" is very derogatory would be better replaced with something not derived from an ethnic group, like "a ripoff," for example.

My apologies. I'd never noticed that. But you're right.

It's okay, a lot of people have grown up hearing it as commonplace and never been made aware of its origins. What matters is now you know, and so now maybe you will be able to gently nudge someone from using it in the future. :)

Here's part of my rant from the Dog and Pony Show thread (http://www.librarything.com/topic/160576#4353378) against those who edited "The Jungle Book" text for the edition illustrated by Eric Kincaid, but didn't have the honesty to acknowledge it anywhere on/in the book! Read on:

As I reread a passage from "Mowgli's Brothers", suddenly I realized it didn't sound right...

...they took out the "thee" and "thou" wording, and they took out Mother Wolf's name, "Raksha" from that chapter!

Here is the original text:

"And it is I, Raksha (The Demon), who answers. The man's cub is mine, Lungri--mine to me! He shall not be killed. He shall live to run with the Pack and to hunt with the Pack; and in the end, look you, hunter of little naked cubs--frog-eater-- fish-killer--he shall hunt thee! Now get hence, or by the Sambhur that I killed (I eat no starved cattle), back thou goest to thy mother, burned beast of the jungle, lamer than ever thou camest into the world! Go!"

There is NO notation anywhere in the book or cover indicating that it has been "edited".

Grumble, grumble, grumble...

Okay, I was mistaken about their messing with Mother Wolf's name, but look at the rest of the passage, photographed below:



The editor not only changes the "thee" to "you", but these as well:

The original:
or by the Sambhur that I killed (I eat no starved cattle), back thou goest to thy mother, burned beast of the jungle, lamer than ever thou camest into the world! Go!"

Is rendered:
or by the Sambhur that I killed (for unlike you we eat no starved cattle), go back to your mother, burned beast of the jungle, lamer than when you came into the world! Go!"

The next paragraph has more changes, and I'm not talking about a "thee" being changed, but sentence structure, and the addition of words not in the original text.

If an editor wants to make changes, whatever, but he/she should be honest enough to have a notation somewhere on the book, stating that it has been edited/abridged.

OK, I'll admit ignorance, why is "gyp" derogatory?

Oh yes. I hate when they don't tell you that something has been reworded or abridged. I am not against the whole practice of changing things but it should definitely be very clear. It should be included in any descriptions online and be printed on the covers. When they do kiddy versions of things like Gulliver's Travels, it would be nice if the publishers had a child's level explanation of the difference.

"Gyp" comes from "gypsy" who were in the past stereotyped as a deceiving, cheating, crooked race of people.

Ahh, I see, thanks MerryMary. I like to learn something new.

I agree. Rewording or abridging seriously interfere with the author's intention and should be announced visibly and openly. Maybe we could demand big fat warning notices, like the ones on cigarettes?

ETC

I am discovering that abridging happened a lot when SF novels were translated in Dutch back in seventies. I... uhm... have ePubs of the original English text, and books of the Dutch text, and I discovered whole chapters were missing from the Dutch text of The Forever War. No notice anywhere, and to me they sure seemed essential.
I never want the abridged novel, and aside from high school students who are forced to read something, I can't really imagine anyone who does (but maybe I am too much of a book lover to be able to imagine such a person)...

Translations are another can of worms. The same happened to children's fiction in my days, as I found out much later, where often references to the original country are weeded out and names changed to make them more familiar or even pronounceable.

Name changes in translations, while I understand why they happen (especially in children's books) annoy me too. Albus Perkamentus just isn't as special as Albus Dumbledore. And don't get me started on Wemel/Weasley or Hermelien/Hermoine... Always forces me to think about which character Dutch kids are talking about.

>10 bernsad:/12 Yes, and "gypsy" itself is a name that was slapped on them by other people and carries the negative connotations you mention. They are actually Romani people.

>10 bernsad:/12/18 According to Arnim's Isabella von Ägypten they were thought to have come originally from Egypt, which gave rise to the form "gypsy" in English. If I remember correctly, that idea crops up in Philip Pullman's The Golden Compass, too.

>10 bernsad:, 12, 18, 19: Coincidentally, Jim Hines blogged about this very issue last week:
'Gypsies' and other fantasy beings

>20 Sakerfalcon: That's an awesome post, thanks for sharing!

>14 MissWatson: So maybe something like this should be stamped across the covers of abridged books

ABRIDGEDBOOK ABRIDGEDBOOK ABRIDGEDBOOK

WARNING: THE TATTERED BUT LOVELY ABRIDGMENT ASSESSMENT TEAM (TBLAAT) HAS DETERMINED THAT READING ABRIDGED TEXT MAY CAUSE HEADACHES, BLURRED VISION, COGNITIVE DISCONNECTS, LIBRARYTHING RANTS, AND GENERIC HATRED OF ANONOMYOUS EDITORS. ABRIDGED TEXT IS ALSO CLOSELY LINKED TO CHRONIC READING DISPLEASURE DISORDERS.

ABRIDGEDBOOK ABRIDGEDBOOK ABRIDGEDBOOK

Exactly!!

LOL.

A rant on abridgment struck a nerve with others, did it? ;)

As a young child, I read abridged books until I realized what they were, and then I wanted to read the unabridged versions. I dislike Readers' Digest adaptions, but at least they let you know they've removed/changed the text.

There were lots of Readers Digest classics at the book sale, and handsomely bound. But I passed on them, expecting them to be "pre-digested"

I have a few of the Reader's Digest The World's Best Reading editions. There is a disclaimer claiming that it contains the complete text on most. I admit I am usually buying them for the pictures. :-)

>22 alco261: LOL! Don't we wish!

>22 alco261: That sums it up nicely!

" CHRONIC READING DISPLEASURE DISORDERS"

Bwwahahahaahah!

That is exactly what I got reading the changed version of the text from The Jungle Book. I suppose their reasoning was to update the language, but it isn't as if it was written in the time of King James and wasn't understandable. Kipling chose that language purposefully. *sigh*

22> I am quite late with this - but I want a like button. I wonder if Tim could implement a version of this across abridged covers. Probably not a high priority, but I bet it'd make a lot of folks happy. Hmm, maybe I could put it on my abridged covers...

(30) Let us know how to do that!

Here's something that made me mad...

...a "horsey" series about a horse called Bonnie has been "updated" and reprinted by Poppet Books:

Barbara Van Tuyl was an American author. She wrote one very popular pony series, the first two books in the series written with co-author Pat Johnson. She also wrote quite a few non-fictional equine works. I don't know anything at all about her fellow author Pat Johnson however.

The Bonnie series has recently been re-printed in a revised/updated edition which apparently includes modern technology such as cell phones! Added to this is also the fact that the book's covers are pretty awful. I would therefore advise against these and stick to the original copies if you can get hold of them!

http://barbaravantuyl.ponymadbooklovers.co.uk

Why do some feel that a book needs to be "updated"?