alanajoy on Nostr: How can we learn from the past if we rewrite it? It would be as though no progress ...
How can we learn from the past if we rewrite it? It would be as though no progress was ever made. Not to say there isn’t progress left to make, there’s so much, too much! But the record of our wins and losses, the lessons depicted in them, the strategies passed on through generations disappear. We are moved back to start.
What respect do we show historically brilliant artists the respect they earned it life by modifying the intent in their death? Augustus Gloop WAS fat. That was the point. The archetype was gluttony. It is an adjective. I’m insulted a slur is being protected on what the author did NOT intend it to be, but one of countless ways his gluttony caused him trouble. What should be censored here? What is so scandalous? Gluttony does lead to becoming overweight. This is not opinion, it’s fact: Relevant to the character development Roald Dahl put forth and a significant catalyst in the lessons he imparts on the reader through the story. Fat is now charged to… enormous? Help me understand how that’s better? Better enough to justify rewriting the work of this renowned author.
Oompa Loompah’s were described as “tiny”, “titchy” or “no higher than my knee,”… now it will just say “small”. Oompa Loompas were ORANGE. They are a made up thing. How bland is this clever writing now?
I’m furious over this, I predict it becoming normalized and that scares me. I will be ranting about this for a while I can tell so just a heads up.
Anyway, mood:
Published at
2023-02-20 08:48:39Event JSON
{
"id": "47f6ed3fd51617e63ece576b1051871755a595682f257f2cb181a36f90d897fc",
"pubkey": "a9b9525992a486aa16b3c1d3f9d3604bca08f3c15b712d70711b9aecd8c3dc44",
"created_at": 1676882919,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [],
"content": "How can we learn from the past if we rewrite it? It would be as though no progress was ever made. Not to say there isn’t progress left to make, there’s so much, too much! But the record of our wins and losses, the lessons depicted in them, the strategies passed on through generations disappear. We are moved back to start. \n\nWhat respect do we show historically brilliant artists the respect they earned it life by modifying the intent in their death? Augustus Gloop WAS fat. That was the point. The archetype was gluttony. It is an adjective. I’m insulted a slur is being protected on what the author did NOT intend it to be, but one of countless ways his gluttony caused him trouble. What should be censored here? What is so scandalous? Gluttony does lead to becoming overweight. This is not opinion, it’s fact: Relevant to the character development Roald Dahl put forth and a significant catalyst in the lessons he imparts on the reader through the story. Fat is now charged to… enormous? Help me understand how that’s better? Better enough to justify rewriting the work of this renowned author. \n\nOompa Loompah’s were described as “tiny”, “titchy” or “no higher than my knee,”… now it will just say “small”. Oompa Loompas were ORANGE. They are a made up thing. How bland is this clever writing now?\n\nI’m furious over this, I predict it becoming normalized and that scares me. I will be ranting about this for a while I can tell so just a heads up. \n\nAnyway, mood: \nhttps://alanajoy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/E742F5F8-9551-4E49-B10A-FDEA5FFA53B0-scaled.jpeg",
"sig": "5c2c5167faa905eadbc6a0a6cf99527ba4b7759c303ddd4651404a7918a46699915ad81f741f07d3e8b5d1bd8963519e785821989045f3b29f530f97ba7aab12"
}
