Won’t somebody think of the shareholders!

Theres also the point that Dahl himself reedited some of his works after initial publications to correct his own potentially offensive missteps. The oompa loompas were originally African pygmies for example. Its interesting to think what he would think if he were alive. Of course he’s not so we cant ask him.

There are subtleties here. His words aren’t sacred. If he’d included a few words that we now consider really offensive slurs but weren’t at the time, I think most people would be okay with publishers removing them. Its really the specifics that seem overreaching and somewhat arbitrary.

Its also the issue of passing off these changes however slight as his work. Publish a totally new reimagined version if you want recontextualize, adapt, etc. but call it something new.

Read Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language.”Its about how euphemistic language is used subtly to change historical narratives.

I don’t think this is exactly whats happening in publishing. Thats more capitalism run amok, the invisible hand of the market distorting art to sell children’s books. But still choice of words with specific connotations that have the same basic meaning can be used in subversive ways.