The sanitisation of literary fiction appears to be well under way, affecting writers from Roald Dahl to Agatha Christie, and genres from children’s stories to spy fiction. Edits by “sensitivity readers” are undertaken to prevent modern readers from feeling upset or outraged, apparently, or having their mental health compromised through exposure to the unexpurgated language, attitudes and opinions of previous generations.
The Hollywood actor (and author) Tom Hanks joined the debate this week, telling Radio 4 that he would boycott books that had been “abridged due to modern sensitivities”.
“Let me decide what I am offended by and not offended by,” he said firmly. Hanks isn’t alone. The actress Whoopi Goldberg was angered by reports earlier this year that Ian Fleming’s spy novels were being edited to remove racist content. “Just put a disclaimer on it – this book was written at this time,” she advised.
The fear of giving offence is affecting some libraries, too, which are allowing it to decide what they lend, although New York Public Library has managed to sidestep this with a “banned books” reading list.
But who is considering the impact on people’s brains if they are denied exposure to challenging texts? Ones which may well outrage their sensibilities, but will also get them thinking. We all know physical activities are good for our bodies, but cognitive exercise is also crucial for our brains and their long-term functionality.