concede that this is probably fair enough...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ace-names.html
concede that this is probably fair enough...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ace-names.html
Can't help but think that the byline image reflects the writer's sheer excitement about being able to get that word into a published piece so many times. Quite disturbing otherwiseQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Happy Kānuka!Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Attachment 388
It's true enough that times and mores change and we adjust accordingly; one just wonders how far your story is from this story. Not very far at all, I'd suggest. A slippery slope?Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...age-harper-lee
Yeah. He even gets a few 'Darkies' in at the end as well. :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
Funny corruption of my post there, randomly adding "388" at the end, making it look like I was saying "Happy Kanuka! 388 today"Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
I would argue that the book exists in a clear historical context and thus can be read in that context. The place names, on the other hand, exist in the modern day and - in the context of modern mores - are clearly no longer appropriate or fit for purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
How old is he claiming to be, out of interest?Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
I might argue that words are not offensive in isolation, they only become offensive when used offensively; furthermore these place names, whilst existing in the modern day, also have a clear historical context and tell us something of the mores of the settlers who named them, just as the book tells us of the mores of the US south in the 30s.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
I might argue that, but I probably can't be ársed.
:nod: Exactly but who can't love a line like thisQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
while the Bible received complaints against its “religious viewpoint”.
Born in 76Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Yes. And those facts about the early settlers still exist. We are still able to draw those conclusions. No-one is attempting to delete these place names from history, merely to make the town names themselves less offensive to modern sensibilities and thus more user-friendly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Besides, it's no different to what we did to Gropecünt Lane.
Renamed it Pennsylvannia Avenue?Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
He really is taking the pďss, Jonathan :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
Reminds me of my favourite ever clipQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRcaPNwjOYM
Would be great if they changed it to NwordheadQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
:hehe: Awkward.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brentwood
The mores of the settlers? Haha. The mores is they were a bunch of fvckheads, one step ahead of the law in their old countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Thank you Edward Gibbon.Quote:
Originally Posted by eastgermanautos
I have a pal, as I probably mentioned here before, who has done a graphic novel of DAFOTRE. :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
:clap: How have I never heard that before? :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Brentwood
The settlers in New Zealand were all dour, dull-as-fückery scotchers. This is why the place is so cock-achingly dull today.Quote:
Originally Posted by eastgermanautos
A linked piece from there refers to an instance where parents were required to give permission for their child to read Farenheit 451. :yikes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...s-for-children
They'll be burning books within 12 months, trust me. (That doesn't mean they'll also burn people. That's patent nonsense.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
You mean pagan nonsenseQuote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
LOL! You have to admire the sheer lack of awareness that has to go into something like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
This is a cyclical thing. We Americans are an incredibly ignorant bunch. I can remember reading a sanitized version of the Canterbury Tales when I was a kid. But they would change things to eliminate, not just the sexy bits, but the poetry. It's like, poetry bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Everyone is, in a way. Just by circumstances usually. Even though she loves him to bits, as does everyone else, of course, until I took her to see the Sweeney Todd movie, my wife had never actually heard Johnnie Depp's voice. She's foreign, see, and all the movies and television they import is dubbed and translated and therefore naturally re-interpreted.Quote:
Originally Posted by eastgermanautos
Profound really, and rather sad.
Exactly. Look at the language Flashman uses in GMF's novels. He's simply being historically accurate. His description of early Singapore, for example, (in the one about the White Raja and the South Sea pirates), gave me a better feel than anything in my OU course. (Though admittedly we didn't actually study the place until c.1900 coroner's reports.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
But anyone reading his books knows that he has complete respect for the natives (gained from his time as a teenage soldier in Burma explained in his autobiog on the subject, Quartered Safe Out Here.)
I'd hate for those to be banned. Anyone taking offence at Flashman's racist language has completely missed the point of the books, both in GMF's view of the non-white races and in his quest for creating a historically accurate feeling of the period.
How on earth would we be able to study history if every primary source that contained racist (or otherwise offensive to modern tastes) language was censored or banned? Surely these yank kids need to know how badly their fellow septics were treated just because of their skin colour, what they were fighting for, what happened after the civil war to keep them down, why they still needed a civil rights movement a century after the war and why we still have things like BLM (for all their faults) nowadays?
I'm afraid I never agree with censoring history. Goes against my core beliefs.
Actually, in NZ they weren't.Quote:
Originally Posted by eastgermanautos
Studied this and read lots of primary sources, diaries and letters explaining why they were going, the voyage, and the lives they made out there of all different social classes as well as the adverts and publicity of the company running the show.
So I'm sorry, but that is completely untrue.
{I have no love of NZ, never been there, only ever had one mate from there or whatever. It's not like me banging on about India. It's just what I studied.}