Recently I was listening to the podcast of director Kevin Smith and buddy Scott Mosier, and something they touched on rehashed old frustrations of my own. They mentioned the deletion of original material from the published Diary of Anne Frank, most notably the parts where Anne writes about her own private parts. She also had plenty of negative things to say about her parents during the hardship they all endured whilst in hiding. To be clear, I have no particular interest in the nether parts of any 15 year old girl, nor the bickering that such a girl might have with her parents from time to time, but when those topics and those instances are part of a larger picture, as in the case of Anne Frank, I can't but wonder as to why an editor would choose to withhold them. They are part of the tale, another lens through which we can focus on the trials and tribulations of a girl caught in a terrible circumstance who decided to chronicle her ordeal. Some may argue that, especially in America where the Diary is required reading in many schools, the inclusion of sexually explicit material would be inappropriate for kids. I see it as not only appropriate, but also one more opportunity for learning. Deal with the sensitive topics with honesty and in a contextual manner instead of just tearing those pages out of the book!
Another book that suffers from time to time at the hands of those who seek to change it's original form is the Bible. Translations which utilize "inclusive" language do so at the cost of saying things that simply are not there. Think of the Bible what you will, and interpret it how you like, but for Christ's sake, let Jesus keep his wiener! Inclusive language aims to sever that most august of appendages by turning Scripture into some sexless glob of gender-neutrality. I'm not arguing that it's always best to use masculine language when able (like "man" when referring to all of humankind), but in the case of Scripture, the original texts (or, as original as are available) do use almost exclusively masculine designations. That being the case, I want to read Scripture accordingly - ACCURATELY. At any rate, I don't see a problem with terms like "mankind" or "humanity"; they certainly sound better than "peoplekind" and "hupeopleity".
While I'm on a semi-religious rant, what's the point in using the more politically sensitive date notations B.C.E. and C.E. (Before the Common Era and Common Era, respectively) in place of the universally understood B.C. and A.D.? Both sets reckon time from the birth of Christ, so what's the difference? If we're going to throw out B.C. and A.D. because of the religious link, we'd better be ready to throw out nearly the whole calendar as well. Most days of the week, as well as months of the year are named after various gods - Wednesday from Wodin's Day (Odin), Thursday from Thor's Day (Thor), January from Janus's month (Janus), and on and on. It irks me to see something change for no reason other than "that sound too religious, we don't want to offend anyone". I don't worship or honor Odin or Thor, but I'm happy to accept a day of the week named after them, it doesn't detract from me one iota.
A few years ago I was taking classes at the local community college, and I got a handout from the English department when I signed up for an English Comp course. This handout was general outlines of expectations that the English department had for students as well as some guidelines for the correct manner of writing college-level papers. One of the things that sticks in my mind to this day is the admonition against using the word "lady" in reference to a female. I couldn't (and still can't) imagine how or why "lady" has apparently become a term of contempt instead of a mark of distinction that it once was. Any word can be utilized in a disparaging manner, and "lady" is no exception, but why single it out? Why not object to "gentleman", as "ladies and gentleman" are the usual pair. Can't a lady just be a lady? I can think of a plethora of worse things to call a woman - anything from a "broad" to the dreaded C word. I think I'll stick with lady and save myself a couple swift kicks to the groin.
"for Christ's sake, let Jesus keep his wiener!"
ReplyDeleteahahahahahahahahah seriously I almost spit coffee at the screen. I agree on the editing for political correctness, religious pretense and bullshit inappropriateness. I don't understand why they don't just say "This is what it was like then, this is how they spoke, this was the context and this is how it evolved" I think our society just has a thing about being ashamed of bits of history so instead of using it as a learning point we strive to cover it up and omit it.