Current Events > James Bond books being rewritten to avoid offense to modern audiences

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/DEADLINE/status/1629919896657068032

James Bond has been censored, not stirred.

A report indicates that Ian Flemings ribald James Bond books have been rewritten to accommodate 21st century sensitivities, removing a number of racial references ahead of the 70th anniversary this spring, The Sunday Telegraph reported. The books are expected to be republished in April.

Flemings thrillers from Casino Royale to Octopussy will be rereleased this spring after Ian Fleming Publications, the company that owns the literary rights to Flemings work, commissioned a review by sensitivity readers.

The news comes amid increased scrutiny in the publishing industry. The Roald Dahl series, including the beloved Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, recently were revealed to have undergone a similar review.

The re-published Bond novels will include a disclaimer: This book was written at a time when terms and attitudes which might be considered offensive by modern readers were commonplace. A number of updates have been made in this edition, while keeping as close as possible to the original text and the period in which it is set.

I'll just read it in Japanese.

I heard the story of Octopussy is about a lesbian that Bond manages to convince to sleep with him.

Wonder what they do about that.

They probably saw all the people reflexively buying old versions of Roald Dahl books that they're not actually interested in and saw dollar signs in their eyes.

modern audience care about Bond?

Has anyone under the age of 70 ever read a James Bond book? This just seems like a waste of paper.

A_Good_Boy posted...

They probably saw all the people reflexively buying old versions of Roald Dahl books that they're not actually interested in and saw dollar signs in their eyes.

Uhh They probably shouldve paid a bit more attention to that dumpster fire then, as the publishers have backtracked on that idea after the unexpected backlash.

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Family/proposed-roald-dahl-books-spark-backlash/story?id=97350999

Agent_Stroud posted...

Uhh They probably shouldve paid a bit more attention to that dumpster fire then, as the publishers have backtracked on that idea after the unexpected backlash.

Read his post more carefully.

So... Nabokov is next, right?

Agent_Stroud posted...

Uhh They probably shouldve paid a bit more attention to that dumpster fire then, as the publishers have backtracked on that idea after the unexpected backlash.

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Family/proposed-roald-dahl-books-spark-backlash/story?id=97350999

How is it a backtrack to keep the old and new versions both in print?

Questionmarktarius posted...

So... Nabokov is next, right?

"I knew it was wrong for a 35-year-old professor to be attracted to a 19-year-old, but..."

Just like the bible

"After feedback we have decided to print both the original and altered versions."

I guess this is the way to market old ass books now

In all seriousness, why do we, as a society, always cater to the easily offended? Im sure the answer boils down to money but Ive never understood it.

Why cant we just say youre gonna have to suck it up. If you dont like it, dont watch / read it. Its that simple ?

BurmesePenguin posted...

How is it a backtrack to keep the old and new versions both in print?

Considering they werent planning on continuing the printing of the original works, a compromise like this is a backtrack even if its a very inconsequential one.

FortuneCookie posted...

"I knew it was wrong for a 35-year-old professor to be attracted to a 19-year-old, but..."

Every paragraph of Lolita will just be a monologuing meta disclaimer like this.

Ian Fleming wrote that all Black people were susceptible to voodoo superstitions and that homosexuality was caused by blurred gender roles stemming from granting women the right to vote.

Yeah, pretty fucked up.

Still, I can't abide by going through his bibliography and doing the cut-and-paste routine. James Bond novels were published by new authors after the death of Fleming. Like, did you know that James Bond has a multicultural son by a Japanese mother? Why not just start with a reboot? Introduce a brand new series of Bond novels and de-emphasize the old ones?

I'm kinda surprised that Bond is still ongoing since, every time there's a new movie or even a prospect of a new movie, the studio comes out of the woodwork to criticize the bigotry and sexual aggression of the old films. Daniel Craig isn't James Bond and there's no nostalgia to be had in these adaptations, so why even call them James Bond? I get that name recognition is a thing, but they'd be better off to adapt the British Avengers at this point. It's not like "Bond" is a big selling point with anyone under 40 and the crowd over that age is more likely to complain about the series going woke than they are to be enticed by a dull mean-spirited sexless man who hates wearing a tuxedo and doesn't mind riding passenger to a strong woman.

It's kind of like if "John Wayne" was a fictional film character played by Marion Morrison, yet progressive studios insisted upon keeping the character alive

Trumble posted...

Read his post more carefully.

Oof! I definitely misread that one! My bad.

rexcrk posted...

In all seriousness, why do we, as a society, always cater to the easily offended? Im sure the answer boils down to money but Ive never understood it.

Why cant we just say youre gonna have to suck it up. If you dont like it, dont watch / read it. Its that simple ?

FOMO for people who want specific editions of a classic book.

It's not even really about catering to anyone specifically. There are employees who have a to job to sell books that are decades old. They'll think up whatever they can to try and get people to keep buying them.

BurmesePenguin posted...

I heard the story of Octopussy is about a lesbian that Bond manages to convince to sleep with him.

Wonder what they do about that.

That's Goldfinger

I get leaving out some of that stuff when you make a new movie.

Rewriting the books is pretty stupid though.

specialkid8 posted...

Has anyone under the age of 70 ever read a James Bond book? This just seems like a waste of paper.

i have. in all honesty most of them are not great and you are generally fine to just watch the movies instead which deviate massively from the source material but generally in actual fun ways

the exception would be diamonds are forever, which instead of having anything to do with blofeld at all, has a main villain who is an italian mobster obsessed with cowboys that tries to kill james bond by running him over with a giant red dead redemption style steam train

Peak clownworld. People complaining about this shit don't seem like the target demographic for a womanizer, male power fantasy.

FortuneCookie posted...

Ian Fleming wrote that all Black people were susceptible to voodoo superstitions and that homosexuality was caused by blurred gender roles stemming from granting women the right to vote.

Yeah, pretty fucked up.

It does look like the edits are focused solely on the racism.

Yeah....the Bond novels have a bunch of stuff thay is absolutely sickening. I can understand the desire to give audiences a version of Goldfinger where Oddjob doesnt eat live cats and where Bond himself doesnt call Koreans lower than apes.

Though I would still prefer that the original texts remain available in addition to the "clean" versions. As horribly bigoted as Fleming was and as egregiously as that manifested in his novels, I dont think we gain anything by trying to sanitize the past.

specialkid8 posted...

Has anyone under the age of 70 ever read a James Bond book? This just seems like a waste of paper.

Ive read several. The obvious one in question when i read the topic title is Dr. No. There's a lot of stereotypes of black people and a really racist take on how the black characters speak that in the time of printing probably seemed not offensive at all to a white writer.

And, breaking news, people can read books published well before they're born. Wild, i know.

gildedwings posted...

I'll just read it in Japanese.

Okay that gave me a good laugh.

honestly, i believe in preserving the original works regardless of what views were had. They are a great window into the time period and authors beliefs. But I won't pretend that I care, i haven't read the bond books or even watched the movies. I think I've seen Skyfall and thats about it lol

and i'm one of the minotirities that fleming apparently hates lol you learn somethin every day

Kim_Seong-a posted...

Yeah....the Bond novels have a bunch of stuff thay is absolutely sickening. I can understand the desire to give audiences a version of Goldfinger where Oddjob doesnt eat live cats and where Bond himself doesnt call Koreans lower than apes.

Though I would still prefer that the original texts remain available in addition to the "clean" versions. As horribly bigoted as Fleming was and as egregiously as that manifested in his novels, I dont think we gain anything by trying to sanitize the past.

Pretty much.

Akagami_Shanks posted...

honestly, i believe in preserving the original works regardless of what views were had. They are a great window into the time period and authors beliefs.

Agreed.

Ray Bradbury (author of Fahrenheit 451) said something similar. Im going to try to find his quote on that.

I wonder if this is just a means to extend the copyrights again, using "woke" as an excuse.

censorship is cool

https://www.cato.org/blog/censoring-ray-bradbury

Only six months ago, I discovered that, over the years, some cubby-hole editors at Ballantine Books, fearful of contaminating the young, had, bit by bit, censored some 75 separate sections from the novel.

Students, reading the novel which, after all, deals with the censorship and book-burning in the future, wrote to tell me of this exquisite irony. Judy-Lynn Del Rey, one of the new Ballantine editors, is having the entire book reset and republished this summer with all the damns and hells back in place.

Instead of seducing women Bond now respects them for getting their degree while being a single mother

Yeah there's some real ugliness in some of the old books. One of the chapters in Live and Let Die is actually called (N-word) Heaven. There's plenty of terrible stereotyping and of course the sexism as well that even goes past being an acceptable character flaw of an antihero. It's very off-putting when you read them even though many are pretty good pulp novels.

Still, I don't agree with censoring them or at least am conflicted about it. Leave the cleaning up to the movies or any future adaptations. Then again if it can get some new readers for the books then it's not all bad.

Punished_Blinx posted...

"After feedback we have decided to print both the original and altered versions."

I guess this is the way to market old ass books now

I'm not taking chances. I just ordered a copy of the only Ian Fleming 007 novel that I do not currently own.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


They're like a sensitivity mob, except they have chosen not to fight Chris and Meg Griffin.

FortuneCookie posted...

Ian Fleming wrote that all Black people were susceptible to voodoo superstitions and that homosexuality was caused by blurred gender roles stemming from granting women the right to vote.

Yeah, pretty fucked up.

Ian Flemming approved of the idea of making changes, at least to Live and Let Die, when he was still alive. And that was like 50+ years ago

I don't understand the outrage over this kind of thing. The original versions will still exist, it's not like they're rounding them up and burning them. You can go to your local library right now and get the OG uncut version with all that delicious racism and misogyny.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

They'll replace all the references to racism and prejudice with characters just simply misunderstanding each other and going out for cake at the end while everyone claps

FigureOfSpeech posted...

Ian Flemming approved of the idea of making changes, at least to Live and Let Die, when he was still alive. And that was like 50+ years ago

Damn. My 2004 copy of Live and Let Die is already altered.

>_>

specialkid8 posted...

Has anyone under the age of 70 ever read a James Bond book? This just seems like a waste of paper.

Yes, I've read Casino Royale and Live and Let Die. First one is a great book. Like Tarzan of the Apes, the ending is amazing/not what you'd expect after decades of watered down "company" versions being presented to the public.
Second was also pretty interesting, Mr. Big was a cool villain.

BurmesePenguin posted...

I heard the story of Octopussy is about a lesbian that Bond manages to convince to sleep with him.

Wonder what they do about that.

You heard wrong

specialkid8 posted...

Has anyone under the age of 70 ever read a James Bond book? This just seems like a waste of paper.

They are quite good, aside from the shit they are talking about in this news story

Really tempted to hit up second hand bookstores and start buying up classics.