The New York Times has a story about a publishing company that “aims to make challenging adult literary classics accessible to very young readers.” How? By editing out material deemed inappropriate:
Now your six-year-old can read “To Kill a Mockingbird” (minus the rape charges, Ku Klux Klan rallies & racial slurs) https://t.co/oXDj2xtnrg
— NYT Business (@nytimesbusiness) December 24, 2016
So in other words:
To [REDACTED] a [REDACTED]bird https://t.co/pOoFZLaWeY
— NeoN: Automataster (@neontaster) December 24, 2016
Ugh. Political correctness run amok.
Wouldn’t it be a better idea for them to just read the actual story uncut once they’re old enough to process it? https://t.co/yIyHHRmDA4
— Ben Howe (@BenHowe) December 24, 2016
Or you could wait a few years and actually expose them to the real ugliness of history and brutishness of life on Earth? You pick. https://t.co/g3GEpnbA0E
— Byron Tau (@ByronTau) December 24, 2016
https://twitter.com/Daddy_Warpig/status/812738717534154752
There are outstanding kids' books that encourage a love of reading.
This is ruining classics so parents can be smug jerks.— Maegen Blue (@SoundsFunMom) December 24, 2016
The idea behind these books is absurd, btw. They're not "reading Hemingway" in any meaningful sense. @nytimesbusiness
— The Holy Goat (@trueholygoat) December 24, 2016
So it's a story about a little girl whose daddy is a lawyer in which nothing happens?
— (((Charlie Martin))) (@chasrmartin) December 24, 2016
https://twitter.com/KevinNR/status/812705283214610432
https://twitter.com/furryofuranus/status/812722479743369216
https://twitter.com/thot_crime/status/812740123309666304
So…it defeats the purpose of the classic story.
BRAVO POLITICAL CORRECTNESS BRAVO! https://t.co/6ro6B6b6rf
— Autovolt (@AutovoltSupreme) December 24, 2016