Thanks to Cathy, Elle and Sarah for contributing with their recent library borrows!
While shelving in the large print area at the library I noticed something I’d never seen before: a “Dyslexic Edition” of a novel. I opened it up and saw that it has large type, but various other features: the font is a sans serif, in medium to dark blue, and there are lots of short sections rather than lengthy paragraphs. Instead of passages being in italics, they appear in bold face. The overall effect is fewer words on a page and maximized readability. We shelve these with large print, but there are plans to pull them out for a future display on disability awareness. There are also some children’s series geared towards dyslexic and reluctant readers, as well as the “Quick Reads” books put out by the Reading Agency for adult readers who may struggle with literacy.
This isn’t library-specific, but most of you will have heard about the new UK expurgated versions of Roald Dahl children’s books commissioned from the consultancy Inclusive Minds by his literary estate. Dahl’s work still flies off the shelves at my library. What’s more, it’s inspired countless other writers with his particular brand of snarky/edgy humour. Apparently the specific changes made are to, in hundreds of places, replace words like “fat,” “stupid” and “ugly.” In general, I’m leery of censorship, preferring that parents speak to their children about the appropriate use of words or, if that can’t be guaranteed, adding an introduction or afterword. (The unaltered “classic” Dahl collection will still be sold, too.)
Yet I am sympathetic in this case because I know how hurtful some stereotypes can be. For instance, we have Jen Campbell to thank for this addition to The Witches (who are portrayed as bald and wearing wigs): “There are plenty of other reasons why women might wear wigs and there is certainly nothing wrong with that.” She has various genetic conditions including alopecia and has long been opposed to casual associations of disfigurement with evil in popular culture.
What’s your take?
And my own library reading since last month:
READ
- The New Life by Tom Crewe
- Once Upon a Tome by Oliver Darkshire
- How to Be Sad by Helen Russell
- Lucy by the Sea by Elizabeth Strout
- City of Friends by Joanna Trollope
- Crying in H Mart by Michelle Zauner
Plus a load of picture books about winter and snow; I reviewed them here.
CURRENTLY READING
- A Fortunate Man by John Berger
- The Things We Do to Our Friends by Heather Darwent
- Martha Quest by Doris Lessing
- Nightwalking: Four Journeys into Britain after Dark by John Lewis-Stempel
- His Only Wife by Peace Adzo Medie
- Manorism by Yomi Sode
I also have the rest of the Folio Prize poetry shortlist out on loan to read soon. A lot of the other books pictured in this post have already gone back unread. I never consider that a problem, though, as it still helps libraries retain funding, and authors get royalties!
What have you been reading or reviewing from the library recently?
Share a link to your own post in the comments. Feel free to use the above image. The hashtag is #LoveYourLibrary.
Bookish Beck = Rebecca Foster. American transplant to England. Freelance proofreader and book reviewer.
Bookish Beck 
Yes, in general I’m against book censorship: It seems one small step along the line towards burning books. It’s a difficult one though. We’d talk about Roald Dahl’s almost caricaturish characters, but not all families do. Looking at Dahl’s books in school would undoubtedly help, because they always go down well with children, so reading them would be an easy win for teachers. But I imagine many already do. On another note – I don’t think dyslexic books have reached our library yet. Yes, you’re right about returning library books unread being OK. One of our staff always says take out 10 every week regardless of whether you have the to read them! And I always take out books I’m not sure about. Easier to take the time at home to decide for sure.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I wonder if schools in particular will rush to get the ‘improved’ editions. It will be interesting to see which libraries decide to carry in future.
I do feel a little silly lugging so many heavy books home only to decide after skimming the first few pages that I don’t want to read them after all, but I never have the time to give them a proper look through while I’m at the library. I’m sure it’s good exercise carrying them home and back 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes! Good for you, and good for the library and the author. What’s not to like?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was chatting about the Roald Dahl thing with a friend a couple days ago! My take is a bit different: I’m uncomfortable with editing the novels in this way because I think children are perfectly capable of navigating them as they are, and I also worry that these kind of cosmetic edits present a more ‘appropriate’ version of the book while not tackling deeper-rooted issues with the text, giving a kind of false reassurance to parents and children alike. (For example, I remember an edition of Enid Blyton’s Faraway Tree series back when I was a kid that changed the names of the children from Fanny and Dick to Franny and Rick, but did nothing to tackle the horrible gender roles in those books). Thinking back to when I was a child, I used to get really angry at the sexism in Blyton, but I think that was good for me – I understood that things were different back then and this didn’t reflect reality today, and it made me realise that sexism was a real thing that I needed to fight. I don’t think we need to present a sanitised version of the world to children old enough to read chapter books.
However, having said that, I do despair at the amount of anger these ‘culture war’ issues cause, because ultimately it doesn’t matter that much! The Telegraph etc screaming censorship is just stupid.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Found it! Sorry about that — it will have been D*ck that got the comment sent to Trash!
I see what you mean: it shows that people don’t trust children (or their parents). A sad state of affairs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ha, will be more careful in future!
LikeLike
I must get my hands on A Fortunate Man. I managed to work out from a blogger’s review a while ago that it was about my family doctor
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh my goodness! What a coincidence. I’m reading it to compare with Polly Morland’s recent A Fortunate Woman, about the female GP there now. My copy is from the University of Reading library.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the link Rebecca, hopefully I can take part more regularly this year,
LikeLiked by 1 person
That would be great! You’re always welcome.
LikeLiked by 1 person
How interesting – I’ve never seen the dyslexic editions of books either. I’m glad they’re out there.
I’m conflicted about the Dahl books. I remember loving them and my son loved them as well, despite the nastiness of some of the characters. I think when there is something like fatphobia, or words disparaging Native Americans as in the Laura Ingalls Wilder books, it’s an opportunity to discuss these issues with your child and talk about how times have changed since the publication of the books. Then again, if a parent doesn’t take that time, it could be problematic. As long as both editions are available I guess it doesn’t matter too much?
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s a tricky one. I wondered about adding an introduction, afterword or footnotes, but I guess you can’t guarantee that kids will read those, and they seem like interfering (then again, not as much as changing the actual language).
I saw a play a couple of weeks ago that had a disclaimer about the use of outdated language re: mental health — e.g. joking references to “loonies.” Must be they didn’t want any offended complaints, but I thought if you go to see something comic that’s set in the 1970s and 1990s, wouldn’t you expect that kind of language? Or maybe not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’d never heard of dyslexic editions. Wow, thank you. This makes me wonder if there are certain aspects, like the text color, that could be adopted by publishers for mainstream audiences.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It had never occurred to me that changing the font color could help people with reading disabilities. But I think different colors are also used for people with visual impairment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not in favour of censorship, and as for Wokeness …. don’t get me started. I’m not in favour of that, either.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fair enough, though ‘woke’, like ‘politically correct’ before it, is bandied about in unhelpful ways to dismiss many well-meaning initiatives.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I used to send a lot of books by the publisher Barrington Stoke to children, which are specifically designed to be dyslexia-friendly. Very pleased to hear there are adult editions! Re. Dahl–it bothers me less than it appears to bother others. I loved his work as a child, but I do think his reliance on words like “fat” and “stupid” is both lazy and mean. My principal issue with the Dahl rewrites is that they seem to have been done so clumsily (see: the Witches excerpt you quote above. When I read this, and other examples, in a newspaper article, I genuinely couldn’t determine whether it was a parody article; all the examples seemed so precisely calculated to enrage one half of the culture wars with their unsubtlety.)
LikeLiked by 2 people
I remember enjoying Dahl’s works and feeling like they vindicate children who sense they are under the control of cruel adults. But no doubt he could have used more creative and tactful language. I agree the passage I quoted is well meant but cringe-worthy!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I got a bit defensive around the Dahl stuff because I know I’m known as a progressive editor who thrusts singular they and replacements for technical networking terms at my clients (with notes and explanations and kindness, of course), and I worried people would think I was thus pro-censorship. I never liked him myself as I found him cruel and frightening. But I don’t think there should be censorship to change the original – I believe in a foreword or even asterisks and a note at the bottom of the page, and of course talking things through with readers, though that won’t always happen. The best solution is for these books to become less popular and fade away because better and more diverse authors are encouraged to flourish, I think.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There’s a big difference between suggesting tactful changes and censorship! I agree footnotes would have been one less intrusive way of doing it. He shows no sign of diminishing in popularity from my experience shelving in the children’s section of the library…
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is, but I think people feel I’m uncompromisingly right-on and rigid (which upsets me: one friend was visibly uncomfortable telling me she was enrolling her child in private school, like I was going to lecture her about privilege!). Interesting to hear – I think I had too much frightening going on on my life as a child to bear to read about scary stuff. Anyway, there are lots of good new books coming out and long may that continue.
LikeLike
I wrote a long comment on this but it seems to have been eaten!
LikeLike
Mine too. Maybe Rebecca needs to approve the comments?
LikeLiked by 1 person
But that one showed up right away! I’ll try again!
LikeLike
Mine did have some dodgy words in it (referring to the names of Blyton characters!!) so maybe it’s that? 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Darn, sorry! I set it up so I have to approve any comments with links in, so I’ve just approved Sarah’s below. I’ll check the Spam folder now, as I did also make it so comments with certain words in go straight there.
LikeLike
I’ve taken full advantage of my library card recently:
https://marketgardenreader.wordpress.com/2023/02/17/the-lure-of-the-library-3
Our library has a special shelf with dyslexic books. My daughter’s ex-boyfriend is dyslexic and the special font really did help. It also differentiates between the way the letters like b and p and d and q are printed because dyslexic brains often confuse them by turning them upside down.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Brilliant, I’ll add your link in — thank you!
I didn’t look closely enough at the Dyslexic Edition to see how those particular letters were printed. I wonder if the sans serif font helps with that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have a vague idea that the font used in Dutch dyslexic books uses some letters with and some letters without serif. Or should that be ‘avec serif’ and ‘sans serif’. 🤔
LikeLike
How do we work towards a kinder, more caring society, or is it a pie-in-the-sky ideal? Will bowdlerising children’s books and possibly rendering them a tad bland achieve the joint aims of respecting sensitivities and reducing the prevalence of judgemental or prejudicial words? Or, as some might argue, will bullies always bully and therefore seek or invent new ways of teasing, insulting, and taunting their peers?
There may be better ways to go than censoring or even banning texts seen as offensive. Education is one, with as you suggest parents, guardians, teachers and others initiating conversations while retaining the texts; another is offering a wider range of quality texts for young readers than certain chains (like W H Smith) stock, to outcompete the likes of Dahl, Walliams, Blyton and others which are routinely – and seemingly almost exclusively – available, shelves and shelves of them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You raise an interesting point. I’m sure bookshops and libraries would say they stock so many of those books because that’s what people want to get for their children. But is it the demand driving the displays, or vice versa?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think it’s likely to be sheer laziness, a lack of interest in or love of children’s books, choices based purely on unimaginative commerciality – “it sells, so what’s the problem?” – and a pile-’em-high approach.
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] #LoveYourLibrary […]
LikeLike
The Dahl issue is complicated, but I tend to think we need to leave the original alone and just move forward. In 50 years, people might look back on today’s books and find them offensive – our use of language is always changing.
The Dahl books at our library are still popular, too. And my own kids loved them. There’s still a lot in there that’s good. Not to mention fun!
All your picture books make me smile. As I was making up a children’s poetry book list for work last week, I kept seeing ones I hadn’t seen before (ones our branch didn’t have), so I put a bunch on request. They’ll come, I’ll flip through them, then send them back. 🙂
This month I wrote about a bunch of audiobooks from the library: https://consumedbyink.ca/2023/03/01/what-ive-been-listening-to-an-enthusiasm-for-measuring-an-enthusiasm-for-endorphins-our-quest-for-a-soul-mate-how-to-breathe-amazing-life-stories-and-the-terrifying-beauty-of-nature/
LikeLiked by 1 person
That seems like a sensible attitude to take.
Anyone looking at my library account history would assume I have kids!
Thanks for your contribution! That’s great that you can access so many audiobooks through your library. Are they on CD, or downloads?
LikeLiked by 1 person
All the ones I listen to are downloads. I can’t just sit and listen – I have to be doing something else at the same time.
LikeLike