So up it pops again, that old perennial problem of what should be on the
shelves. Should Tintin in the Congo be in the shops? Absolutely not, says
the Commission for Racial Equality. No problem, insist the publishers,
explaining that the book has a wrapper warning that the material inside may
be considered offensive.
Let’s face it, that wrapper won’t last through one reading. And children are
drawn to cartoon books as surely as birds to the plough. We adults know how
to keep our distance from this sort of stuff (after all, even Hergé
regretted this book, and apologised for it). But books for children are
different. Along with their principal purpose of offering enchantment, they
find themselves, whether they choose to or not, playing a larger role. They
bring a picture of the world to inexperienced readers.
So there are good reasons why the works of Enid Blyton had to be ruthlessly
edited before they could again sit comfortably on the bookshelves in our
supposedly non-sexist, non-racist, more inclusive classrooms. I defy anyone
whose kneejerk response is to mutter “political correctness” to read one of
the stories in the Jolly Story Book I treasured as a child. Matty tells her
doll Sambo: “I don’t like your black face.” He runs away and gets drenched
in a storm, during which all of the dye in him is washed away. “ ‘Oh!’
squealed the pixie in delight. ‘You aren’t black any more. You’ve got the
dearest, pinkest, kindest face!’ ” The doll returns to the nursery, and
general acclaim: “ ‘You are a brave doll! You deserved to be made white! No
wonder he’s happy – little pink Sambo!’ ” That’s school, some might say: of
course we won’t have Tintin in the Congo there. But otherwise, once a
book’s written, we should be mature enough to leave it be.
Not always. Over a dozen of my books for young children have just been
reprinted in lovely bright new editions, and I’ve been astonished at the
changes I wanted to make. My first thought was to leave them exactly as they
were written, some as far back as 30 years ago. After all, I have six adult
novels on the shelves, and wouldn’t dream of going at those with a red pen
just because times have changed.
But children read their favourite books over and over, and absorb the thinking
inside them through their skin. I’m not the only author to want children in
schools to carry on reading my books more than I want to stand by the
unthinking insensitivities that make them unwelcome. What was so wrong with
airbrushing the buffoon black prince out of the enchanting Dr Dolittle? Hugh
Lofting did not set out to write Mein Kampf. He’d more than likely have been
the first to offer to wield the knife to introduce all his other delightful
creations to a generation of new readers.
None of the rest of us yet knows which parts of our books will make future
readers shudder. (“They ate meat? Really? Meat from things they shot and
kept in pens?”) But we are here long enough to see one or two things that
already make us a shade uncomfortable, or distance the books unnecessarily
from the modern child. Writers for children routinely bring amounts of money
up to date in new editions. “I need two and sixpence for school,” does not
have much of a ring. Sometimes you have to step in to stop a copy editor
suggesting things like “4.567 metres away” when you’ve talked of a few yards
(I know why J. K. Rowling was so supportive of the Metric Martyrs). And it
can usually be done with grace. “A few steps away” is the obvious solution.
Child readers have as much of a sense of history as they need when, as in the
fairy tales, or stories set in Roman, Victorian and Edwardian times, the
period is downright obvious. Bring forward the story until the fashions and
speech patterns are no longer strange, and it’s a different story. Children
don’t scour the front of their books for publication dates and something
written in 1970 or 1980 may mean something very different now.
Take my own The Granny Project, first published in 1983. As Granny lies dying,
the children pass the time remembering the stray remarks she made to their
good friends Lavinia and George, the first black neighbours ever to move
into the street. “Do you remember how she told Lavinia she must have been
standing behind the door when God’s angels ironed all the hair out
straight?” “She told George he’d been baked too long in the oven!” “She used
to call them Piccaninnies!” By 1990, any Granny still letting drop this sort
of thing was not the amiable character I had in mind. This passage, already
removed from school editions, has now gone entirely. Is this political
correctness? Yes, if that means sensitivity to the world in which we now
live. A book given by an adult to a child includes a sort of imprimatur:
this is a reasonable way of looking at the world unless the author somehow
shows you that the behaviour is unacceptable. And so Celeste, in The Angel
of Nitshill Road, no longer stares at the bully’s quite appalling playground
behaviour and asks: “Poor boy. Is he mental?” She says instead: “Poor boy.
Is he touched with the feather of madness?” The book loses nothing, and
there is one fewer free-floating insult in the world directed at a
vulnerable group with whom the children who read my books now, through
inclusion, have more educational connections, and who may well be reading
the book themselves.
Sometimes the airbrushing is for other reasons. Let there not be an ugly rush
for all the early editions of Bill’s New Frock, in which Mrs Collins
peers at her exasperated, baffled pupil and infelicitously asks: “Bill, are
you feeling yourself?” To save the nation’s primary school
teachers from endless bursts of sniggering, we slid in one useful little
word: “Bill, are you feeling quite yourself?” Some changes are designed
merely to pull the novel back in line to what I had before. In the comedy
about the horrors of having a tempestuous teenager in the house, The Book of
the Banshee, the head teacher gathers the parents to stiffen their sinews
about the virtues of sticking together to face down their offspring’s
determined and perennial claims that “Everyone else is allowed to do it”.
“Nobody smokes. Nobody drinks. And nobody goes to the discotheque!” Has
anyone over 12 been to a discotheque lately? They’re afternoons with
lemonade in parish halls. So that’s been changed to “clubs and bars” simply
to keep the meaning.
What about style? An author’s way of writing does alter over the years. I’ve
become leaner and meaner with the words and wasn’t sorry to take a good few
“very”s and “quite”s out of my earlier books. And when I came across my
third “he looked for all the world as if . . . ” I not only excised it, but
vowed never to use this verbal affectation again.
How do you know when you have gone too far, cutting and slashing? One of the
things I’ve learnt from being edited by others over the years is that when
you take something out that you want back it is the first thing on your mind
when you wake in the morning. If you’ve forgotten it already, then you are
happy to let it go. Books are like children in that you can smarten them up
and cut their hair – even get their teeth fixed – and they’re the better for
it. Only when you find yourself tempted to shave off their limbs do you have
to worry.
The only hard choice was a curious one. I’m still not sure I made the right
decision. In Anneli the Art Hater, Mrs Pears explains how you can learn
about the past from paintings: what foods the people ate, the clothes they
wore, the ways they lived. “The Spanish princesses had real live dwarves for
pets.” I hesitated before taking that line out. I know that even in the
first edition, written in 1985, Anneli’s response is a shocked “That’s
terrible”. But I decided that if I were writing this book today for readers
this young, this isn’t an example I would choose. We do not use the word
“dwarves” now, apart from in fairy tales, very much cushioned
and distanced by time. We have increasing numbers of children in our schools
with a whole range of physical and mental disabilities. Why should I run the
risk of hurting any child’s feelings when there are plenty of other examples
Mrs Pears can pick to make her point? (And there’s no way I’m going to try
to work the phrase “persons of restricted growth” into a glancing reference
to an old painting.) Which is the real version? Who’s to say? The originals
are the ones I would save from a fire. I rather hope the newer versions are
the ones my readers would take with them to desert islands. But it has been
a cheering and instructive task. If it has shown me one thing clearly, it is
that in some ways my readers live in a far kinder and more sensitive world
than that of 30 years ago, when I began to write. I bet you if Hergé was
still alive he’d be the first to sign any petition to have Tintin in
the Congo removed from the shops and have it, as the CRE suggests, kept in
museums – where it now belongs.
— Anne Fine’s new editions for older children are published by Corgi. The
new editions for children aged 7-10 are published by Egmont. Her most recent
comedy is Ivan the Terrible, Egmont, £7.99
The old, old story: sanitising children's books is nothing new
Once upon a time, it was quite acceptable for adults to alter or censor
everything a child might read. The Bible, Shakespeare, the story of King
Arthur: all were regularly sanitised for children, leaving out awkward
references to incest, adultery, or whatever else was currently considered
unsuitable for infant ears.
Another easy option was simply to let texts drop altogether: you have to
search hard to find copies of Helen Bannerman’s Little Black Sambo
or Dr Heinrich Hoffman’s Shock-headed Peter on library shelves.
But these days, under the shadow of Nazi book-burning sprees, when children’s
books considered unsuitable were immolated alongside works by Marx and
Freud, there is less consensus.
Overprotecting children is now seen as perhaps worse than any dangers arising
from overexposure to adult truths.
Classics such as Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, with
its frequent references to “nigras”, are now seen as inviolable in that
taking out such references would make the book something that it was not. So
while it is still OK to continue to prettify certain nursery rhymes, fairy
tales and stories by Enid Blyton and Richmal Crompton of Just William
fame, it’s a different story when it comes to texts considered as great
documents for all time, not just their own.
NICHOLAS TUCKER, Author of The Rough Guide to Children’s Books
Ahh, just another way to try and control our society and mould us into the same person. If our parents weren't ever offended by Tin Tin books when we were younger, why should we be?
I think re-writing any book is pointless because then it will lose it's magic for what it was actually written for.
Why don't we just stop writing books altogether? In fact, let's burn all books, destory all TV's, stop making newspapers and practically stop any form of entertainment because someone is bound to be offended. And we wouldn't want to offend anyone now would we?
Seetal Udeshi, London,
This whole PC is getting completely insane.
You don't burn books and you don't ban books people!
How about rewriting the Bible, Quran and Tora? There is a lot of nasty stuff inside these as well.
Michal, London, UK
More PC fundamentalism. I would rather read an Enid Blyton racism intact than a doctored version passing itself off as the real thing. The first prods me to understand social mores in the times of these authors, the second cheats me.
As for the "children are impressionable" argument, the answer is parents rather than censorship.
david, Auckland,
Judging the past using attitudes from a different time distorts the way people were. You should have heard how my schoolmaster referred to anyone not from the UK. That's just how it was, let's be realistic.
David Vinter, Louth, Lincs., UK.
Yes, we all gain an uneasy, queasy feeling about book-banning, quite rightly. But we accept censorship in other art forms every day. I would not expose children in my care to violent or sexually explicit videos, video games or internet sites, or openly racist ones. I wouldn't let a six year old read adult horror novels either. But then, they wouldn't be interested. These old 'classics' are not very interesting to young children, it is generally parental encouragement, or personal choice and a sort of learned nostalgia as an older child (9+), that leads kids to Enid Blyton etc.
You'd have to be a strange parent to want to read this to small kids -how many copies did Borders actually sell before the media attention?
Helen, Glasgow,
Rewriting books for reasons of political correctness, comes, for me, into the same category as rewriting history to suit yourself. If a book offends you, put it down.
Tom Fallowfield, Braemar,
These books were written at a time when attitudes were different. Enid Blyton suffered a similar fate. If those who are offended - and it is a matter sometimes of those who want to be offended can easily be offended - then do not buy the books or videos or whatever.
The Politically Correct lot are just playing on peoples fears and inventing barriers where often none exist. Jobs for the Boys! Everyone in the UK has at some time in the past be joked about - whether Scot, Northerner, Londoner, Welsh. We just laughed it off.
John Charlesworth, Sleaford , UK
I don't see black people burning these books in the streets. The problem with the PC fascists is that they never consult people to discover if they are offended, they simply make wild assumptions often to the amusment and bewilderment of those they claim to represent.
I believe their motivation is more about attacking members of their own race who don't agree with them 100% and whom they thus consider to be demons through a perverted process of generalisation, than about defending minorities, who, lets face it, are more than capable of defending themselves.
I wonder if there is any psychological evidence to show that the PC loons have deep-seated parental issues and through a process of displacement (or, scapegoating) are more comfortable attacking the race and culture of their parents than their parents? Why, for example, are they not up in arms about Saudi schools in London using books which label Christains pigs and Jews monkeys (news item last year) ?
Eugene, Liverpool, England
-"We do not use the word “dwarves†now, apart from in fairy tales, very much cushioned and distanced by time."
If I remember my Tolkein correctly, the correct term is "dwarfs", "dwarves" being the variant plural which Tolkein used to distinguish his fantasy race from those of fairy tales!
But that aside, who's this "we" who don't use that term now? Dwarf means short, so it's the correct English term for a short person. (Just like "handicapped" is the correct term for those the PC would term "disabled" - the latter a term as inaccurate as it is insulting. And no, 'handicapped' does *not* come from "cap in hand" - go check a dictionary next time before peddling PC myths!) And the very fact you couldn't find a useable alternative should have told you it was the right word!
Phil, Sevenoaks,
Once upon a time there was a Commission for Racial Equality although it didn’t actually believe in racial equality because in a land where 92% of the people where white and half were male the CRE was almost entirely female and non white. The different types of non white staff at the CRE didn’t actually like each other very much and there much animosity between black and Asian colleagues although the CRE was very very careful to stop anyone knowing about this and took lessons from the BBC.
One day someone complained that an old book portrayed black people in a bad way or stereotyped them. The CRE who had nothing to do that day/week/month decided it was wrong to stereotype people and decided that those silly, drunken, work shy, racist British imperialists who were responsible for everything that was wrong in the whole wide world needed their silly noses rubbing in it again and campaigned to ban a few more books knowing that apart from a few nasty xenophobic racists( i.e. anyone who did not agree with them 110% and wrote to the Times to register mild dissent) the silly, by now cowardly British would do as they were told. One day even the British got fed up with being told how nasty they were and how to live their lives in their own country –and nobody lived happily ever after. The End
Tom Sedman, Worcs, Worcs
The Bible and Koran have done more harm than any single obsolete racist kids book ever could.
Ben, York,
Perhaps we should start rewriting the history books as well , as I'm sure there's plenty of offensive material in there somewhere ...
Benzo, Nr Chelmsford,
i think its disgusting that books should be rewritten in this day and age due to their content. as a 17 year old, i feel that people should enjoy these stories as they were in their original days of publishing. they are offensive to those only who are looking for a perfect world. and what is a perfect world? i may be young, but i am not naive.
jack adams, bromley, england
We are told that the CRE "had" to take action after a complaint from a single whinger.
Rather than take this staement simply, on trust, it would be very useful to know the identity of that - so easily offended - individual, so that we may avoid them in future!
Mike Bibby, St Albans, England -not EU
I find the CRE's views odd & offensive, it singles out an archaic childrens book for condemnation & chastises the shop for selling it.
Today I wandered round a similar chain bookstore and found copies of 'The Bible', 'The Koran', Das Kapital & Mein Kampf for sale. Books that it can be argued have provoked the deaths of millions over the last 2000 years. Why does the CRE not mention these or are they too sensitive or obvious.
Still, I'm sure there are many more on their list for the bonfire....
BoneRat, Cardiff, Wales, UK
I find the argument that TinTin is racist ridiculous.
Any censorship will be a disaster. If the book in question,Tin Tin in Congo, was drawn nowadays would be a different case but it was drawn many decades ago in different times.
I cannot believe someone in Europe is actually talking about censorship, as another comment expressed, it will not stop there, merchant of Venice next, Candide & what about the Divine Comedy...censorship is simply backwards.
sherif, Cairo , Egypt
Children learn to read- adults read to learn. A child's reading practice is going to be the same whether he's reading an orginal racist book or the censored one- why not err on the side of caution for the vulnerable child's well being? Do adults and scholars deserve to have access to these original, racist versions? Absolutely- just sell such books well away from the children's section, ideally with a bland jacket to obscure the colorful illustrations. We can and should censor any offensive texts that will sold for children so long as the originals remain available for adults with scholarly interests.
Chuckles McGee, Durham, NC
I do not wish to read obscenity. I do not wish to have lefties editing all our books to reflect their own views either. I'd like to be asked in either case. Surely that reflects the view of everyone, except this handful of bigots?
Roger Pearse, Ipswich, Suffolk
What a dangerous woman Anne Fine is. I shall certainly not be buying any of HER books for my classroom from now on if this is the kind of Stalinist rewriting of our literature she's supporting. China and Russia - please note - are 2 countries that have done this type of thing. It looks like we may be going down the same road. I ANYone awake in this country or is everyone stupified by shopping and reality TV?
Lily, Oxford, UK
For God's sake, they are childrens books from years ago, I am incredibly ANTI racist but surprise surprise, I read those books and watched Tin Tin on television, it did not affect me in the slightest - I totally agree with George Dunn.
These are the same people that complained about the Teletubbies and wanting them banned because they might have caused children to have miraculously gained speech impediments.
Grow up and put your efforts into complaining about something that really does need sorting out - not a piece of history that, until now, has been accepted and ignored - you people really wind me up.
Tricia Batley, Boston, Lincs, UK
I am a white Anglo-Belgian living in Antwerp and yes the city does have a problem in that one third of the population regularly votes for the xenophobic Vlaams Belang. Having said that no one in my own family who regularly read Tintin ever became racist as a result. And look on the bright side: two-thirds of the population don't vote for the extreme right. The Jewish and Indian communities are well established in the diamond sector and well respected. And personally I have never witnessed one racial incident in all the years I have lived here. The Vlaams Belang are rabble rousers who attract all sorts of disgruntled voters, not just the racist. They dislike the monarchy just as much as they hate Moslem immigrants.
Marie-Louise, Brussels, Belgium
This is censorship pure and simple - the fact that those responsible consider themselves to be motivated by the purest of pure objectives and principles is irrelevant. Those that engage in censorship usually do.
Besides the underlying assumption here is that an elite knows what is best - that we are too stupid to distinguish between social views that are apropriate and those that are inappropriate. Further, this elite regards themselves as entitled to redraft the work of others - again presumably because the former are superior beings.
This whole business reeks of elitism, arrogance and authoritarianism. God knows where this will stop. can I suggest to those responsible...back off!!!
Hugh, London,
I don't think it should be banned, it is, whether we like it or not, a part of our history and however unpalatable it may be for some people, we can't deny it and we shouldn't censor it.
But I would most certainly question the intelligence and the motive of any parent who buys such books for their children.
Kim, London,
Eh? Struwwelpeter censored? Presumably for the 'inky boys' story, which despite appearing to have racist overtones has a very clear anti-racism message.
I have a copy at home anyway, and my 5yo daughter loves the book.
andrew, London, UK
This issue shouldn't be about political correctness - it's about treating other people decently, irrespective of who they are or where they are from!
As a black British male adult, I am frreely able to work out the difference between genuine racism in a book or drawing, and a racial stereotype that exists from the past when such matters were freely utilised. However, for children, I see why certain racial stereotypes in older books, could be seen as being contentious and inappropriate.
Books like "Tintin In The Congo", "The Three Golliwogs", or "Little Black Sambo" were written in a time where stereotyping was deemed acceptable. But in 21st Century Britain, where we are stuggling on a daily basis to deal with tolerance and intolerance, I don't feel these books are appropriate for young children to enjoy, because they don't yet know how to put such material into any kind of context. That is why these titles are dangerous and need restricting from the easily impressionable!
Jon Dracup, Walsall, West Midlands, UK
Anne Fine's attitude reflects the belief that the censor is an enlightened person, and all the rest of us are hyper-suggestible idiots. My experience is the exact opposite. As a writer, I have been censored on several occasions, and I have always decided that the censor was an irresponsible idiot. They cut things on the most arbitrary whims.
Once you start censoring, where do you stop? Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice" is notoriously anti-semitic. In Tolkien's Lord of the Rings most of the characters smoke!
If reading about Gilbert Golly is going to make a child racist, they will become racist anyway. The first uncensored conversation they hear in a playground or pub will turn them into mindless bigots.
Better: leave all books as the authors wrote them, and tell children "This is what people believed in those days." You are teaching children history, and that beliefs can change.
Keiran Proffer, London, England
Last summer I told the story of Little Black Sambo to my friend's 4 year old (french/english) grandson as we sat at supper playing at being tigers. He was totally enthralled, his eyes shining with excitement. When I returned home I asked our local bookstore if it was possible to buy the book- I knew it was non-PC! Yes they said ,we do not stock it but can order it to be printed. I blanched at the possible cost ,but no, it would be £5.99. When it arrived 2 weeks later it had illustrations uncoloured but the story as told. Little Black Sambo was still the hero who bested the tigers - in fact ended up eating THEM . Why is he not PC - had his name been an Indian one (after all he WAS Indian) there would be no problem!
The best joke is ,though, that the reprint is by The Dodo Press!
Moly Betteridge, Southampton, UK
The lawyer Mr Enright who spotted the offending Tintin volume might have spent his time better in writing a children's book of his own that conformed to his own standards. And Nicholas Tucker makes a strange assertion: 'children read their favourite books over and over, and absorb the thinking inside them through their skin'. No more nor less so than adults. What one 'absorbs' from Tintin is that 60 years ago the world was a very different place. Did Mr Enright, or Mr Tucker, read the book and think it applied accurately to modern society in anwy way? No. So why assume anyone else would draw that conclusion?
Phil Jeffcott, London, UK
Has anyone from the CRE ever considered that, what they are attempting to accomplish, is to eradicate chunks of history that they, the minority population, of Great Britain do not agree with. I accept that Social History in any society moves on, and what was considered socially acceptable 60 years ago, is now totally out of “fashion†But the eradication of these items from our Social History is neither desirable or acceptable. A minority group cannot dictate to the majority what historical records need to be discarded from a society’s past.
All cultures around the world has history that, as a nation, they are not proud of, but to only remember the items that one feels good about, and to discard the embarrassing items is not doing any service to the society of 100 years hence. Gaping gaps in sociological development will create a false impression.
Michael Nye, Colnbrook, Slough, UK
I agree if you start picking apart books wriiten in another time where will it end? Taking anything that you don't want children to do prehaps running away from home, or Kim wandering the world with a priest. The swallows and the amazons would never have met as they wouldn't have been allowed to leave the garden by themselves...
Adb, rathcooney,
Changing or banning of any previous penned book, should never be allowed as it is the rewriting of history.
There is no difference between Mark Twain and Enid Blyton, they were both writing at a time in which this was the attitude.
We can only progress by having the example of the past, available to use to avoid repeating of the past.
Does one rewrite the Bible and Koran, or the accounts of the people who were there as witness to ethnic cleansing, genocide, e.t.c.
Johnson, Sheffield, England
These books showing black people looking like monkeys should CLEARLY be removed and/or updated. The outcry of 'Oh it was perfectly acceptable in my day'...holds no sway in my book, it may have been acceptable for white children of the day, but NOT as I see it lampooning my heritage. These images only reinforce the ways that my ancesters were referred to and treated hundreds of years ago as slaves: we were stupid and lazy but then also savage animals who couldnt be trusted. Those stereotypes are still held today: in the reactions of police when dealing with black youth, youdont have to be a genius to see the way black people who died in custody have been treated, some many excessive force. As I see it, the longer that black children are faced with these images in national newspapers, the longer it will take for our black to flourish without embarrassment and being judged.
MARY SHELTON, BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND
I very much agree with Anne Fine's comments; we live in a dynamic, changing world where some once common phrases are now viewed (whether you like it or not) as derogatory. For the sake of replacing one word with another word or phrase we lose nothing of the original meaning (eg. “Poor boy. Is he mental?†changes to “Poor boy. Is he touched with the feather of madness?â€, which if anything is more poetic).
Carl, Aylesbury, UK
Well i have to say this story is not new. We all new the racist content of tin-tin books. Last time was over 15 years ago in my country (Spain). so this is not new at all. I also heard it has rather a lot of nazi propaganda, etc.... Not a nice picture, though. I do not think it should be ban at all. It was a way of thinking that has changed in some people fortunately. That will breath the free speach. Herve was racist, so what. it will not make the rest racist one as well just by reading it. you read it and you are agree or not....
MARIO, London, UK
This book says far more about the pre-WWII Belgians than about any unrecognisable African.
Leave it alone.
It is a valuable educational resource in the discussion of xenophobia in schools.
Brian Vallance, LEFKIMMI, Greece
Congratulations to Anne Fine on her well-written article. She is absolutely right to say that we should rewrite our books to reflect changing times. Whether we are black, white, Jew or Muslim, we can all choose to laugh at ourselves - it is a different matter when others choose to mock us. We know it is ludicrous to portray an African person as depicted in the Tintin cartoon, and any person of reasonable intelligence will acknowledge that such a caricature does not in reality exist. But how does the black African feel about such an insulting portrayal. Does he/she find it as amusing? I have a book given to me as a child in the fifties. It is called "Jolly Families" by the Zoo Man of the BBC (David Seth-Smith) and illustrated by Water Trier. It has a section on a number of families - "Eskimos" ,"Negroes", "Red Indians", "Monkeys", "Giraffes"
etc. I quote: "Native villages swarm with little naked black woolly-haired children .." The illustration has to be seen to be believed.
PJ WEBSTER, Crockenhill, Kent, UK
Tintin books and similar absoulutely they should neither be chnaged or banned. It's high time this ridiculous PC nonsense was put to bed - it;s no more offensive that sending up a British upper class accent or anyhting else for that matter.
It would not be so bad if the application of these dotty principals was even handed which they most certainly are not
p race, Pulborough, West Sussex
Reminds me of when I lived in South Africa and the book Black Beauty was banned in public libraries! Someone had to remind the censors that it was about a horse. What right to the CRE have to censor what we might read? No right at all, I'd say.
Ian , Bristol,
No book EVER, EVER should be changed or revised, any more than a work of art should be "clothed" to cover nudity. They have tried for years in the US to censor Mark Twain, and thank God they haven't succeeded. These are works from a different time; people need to get over PC madness: the madness CONTRIBUTES to discrimination, not prevents it.
I may not like photos or literature that I find degrading, but it's out there and it's legal. And I don't have to look at it. It's a CHOICE. These people need to grow up, deal with life as it is, and stop their attention seeking.
Bethany Pheneger, Dickinson, Texas
Instead of banning books written many years ago and reflecting times as they were, we should get rid of the politically correct brigade and the idiotic racial equality shower who are steadily destroying this country.
C J Wales, Shawbury, England
I am a white foreigner living in belgium and i totally agree there is a racist portrait in this book. Furthermore i belive there is still high Xenophobia in Belgium, germany and suprisingly France. Allied to lack of Empathy (common trait these sociaties, as not change because its cultural) and with a less democrat politcal regime, a Holocaust could be repeted unfortunatly. In conclusion the hopeness, EU integration and globalization we ear everybody talking about nowadays is only about commerce!
Antonio, Antwerp, Belgium
Tintin books and similar absoulutely they should neither be chnaged or banned. It's high time this ridiculous PC nonsense was put to bed - it;s no more offensive that sending up a British upper class accent or anyhting else for that matter.
It would not be so bad if the application of these dotty principals was even handed which they most certainly are not
p race, Pulborough, West Sussex
Right, make TinTin gay, give him a Czech illegal immigrant boyfriend on benefits, the two of them can then commit various credir card frauds, deal in drugs and have black gang member friends with grills and guns. Oh no, I'm sure someone would still feel left out and complain. What a sad world we live in today.
Mike Jones, Farnborough, Hampshire
Well, if they ban books that are offensive to African people then they must ban books that are offensive to Arab people (Salman Rushdie's)...Right?
Stanzler, NY, USA
Good debate! You don't need my half cocked views as well. (That could be offensive to some I suppose.)
However I'm a writer of humour for children and what strikes (offensive) me as I write is that I must protect (offensive) children (offensive in the year 2100) from the prurience of adults (outrageously offensive for ever). I write I suppose from a spiritual point of view (not religious) and as I put the ideas on paper I find it quite easy to judge for myself (offensive) what could be gratuitously offensive and I know (offensive in 2200) there is no need nor any place for it.
I do write maybe offensive stuff - children love it - but against groups (offensive) that can defend or excuse themselves (oops) or notions and prejudices that cannot and should not be defended. (Outrageous!)
For example dinosaurs were not very bright. That's very offensive. And I don't care.
gordon mann, mexico , mexico
Cannot we simply say that if an original author wishes to make cultural updates, there is currently nothing to prevent them from doing so. And if a bookshop, school or library does not wish to stock a title, they are not yet compelled to do so. Nor, ultimately, is anyone, child or adult, forced to read them. Armies of racial-equality apparatchiks, on the public payroll, eagerly scanning printed works of dead authors for cultural violations instill far greater terror to those with any sense of history..
Chris Watts, Brighton, East Sussex
Tintin au Congo was written a longtime ago, and I started to read the adventures of Tintin in the mid fifites (Original french version). I read Tintin au Congo and Tintin en Amerique and then all the others that I still have and I never got any racist ideas out ot such reading I just loved Tintin's adventures without any other ill thoughts..
Maybe it is no longer of actuality for children to see these two Cartoons as they were written and drawn!
Today's world is different and maybe a little too sensitive as to what word is the correct one used to describe objects. feelings etc...
Adults have sufficient intelligence to realise that these cartoons were drawn and written at a different time were people had different ideas.
And I don't see why these cartoons should be denied to adult society.
jaypee, Aylesbury, United Kingdom
British society is defined by tolerance, social justice and equality, and can be justifiably proud of these values. British children today are not born with a copy of Tintin and the Congo in their bosom and told to form their worldview around it, they grow up with all the influences of this modern, tolerant Britain.
These values influence a child as they grow up, and help place texts like Tintin and the Congo in their rightful context. Tintin and the Congo provides material against which to define our own views but isn't going to have a massive influence on little Timmy's social perspectives into later life when placed against the panoplie of more tolerant influences provided by modern Britain.
Lets have a little trust in our children, see that they will be able to place this in context, and stop all talk of running scared. If we as a society are confident in our values and our culture then we can rebut this 'racist claptrap' without rewriting it.
Kristian Carter, Leeds,
Yesterday i listened to a CRE spokesperson say on SKY 'in his opinion is was racist' - yet i would be more impressed if he had said that the commission had received a substantial number of complaints on the book. I would hate to think the commission had decided it was racist without letting those who should be offended have a say. Interpretation is a double edged sword and trying to predict other peoples views or opinions is always tricky. Did Hergé intend to offend ... has anyone asked a child how they view the book .... Clearly this book has now received massive publicity and no doubt sales will be boosted ... has the CRE inadvertently created a mountain out of a mole hill?
Niall O'Hea, Manchester, UK
Banning these books is stupid, Ok don’t stock them in schools but books should be viewed within the historical context of when they written. Where will this re-writing of books people find offensive end, perhaps we can write out bits of history we don’t like oh sorry Hitler already tried this, and there’s many who would like to remove him from history. Books should be preserved not destroyed, one day they will be historical documents, proof of what people thought and laughed at are we to wipe out their memory as well.
Robert Miles, Southend, UK
No books should never be banned or rewritten. Its up to parents and teachers to guide children in their learning and set the books into an historical context. You can in fact learn an awful lot about race and the changing attitudes towards race relations by reading these books. We live in a world full of control freaks.
Tony, Taunton, England
Tintin books and similar absoulutely they should neither be chnaged or banned. It's high time this ridiculous PC nonsense was put to bed - it;s no more offensive that sending up a British upper class accent or anyhting else for that matter.
It would not be so bad if the application of these dotty principals was even handed which they most certainly are not
p race, Pulborough, West Sussex
Ah, brave new world.
deb, kenosha, wi
There is a difference between children intelligently discussing the thoughts and opinions of the past, and absorbing those same ideas because they are expressed by fictional characters that they love.
Do we really want children to uncritically take on board the beliefs and prejudices of the world half a century ago ? Or do we want to move on ?
Dismissing current thinking as 'PC' seems a little odd - is there a time or place in history when there hasn't been an idea of what is correct, and what isn't ?
Anne Bligh, Devon, UK
Tintin books and similar absoulutely they should neither be chnaged or banned. It's high time this ridiculous PC nonsense was put to bed - it;s no more offensive that sending up a British upper class accent or anyhting else for that matter.
It would not be so bad if the application of these dotty principals was even handed which they most certainly are not
p race, Pulborough, West Sussex
"Touched with the feather of madness"??! That is possibly one of the worst lines of prose I have ever read. The author should hang their head in shame at having written such flowery sludge.
Emily, London, UK
It just shows the high level of Racial Harmony in this country, that the Commision for Racial Equality, which observes and comments on all race related controversies in the country , has nothing better to do than critisize a comic book.
And despite how embarrasing it may be, there were in the colonial era, numerous examples of Europeans Deified by indegenous peoples.
Theodore Chabo, Colchester, U.K
It's over 60 years since I enjoyed reading the Just William books, and obviously one forgets a great deal. But I'm having a difficult time thinking of anything that would offend our thought police and the Commission for Racial Equality. Please enlighten me.
Asmodeus, London, UK
Yes, I say we make a great big pile of all suspect books, staring with the Bible and burn them. Then, we shall salute with extended arms and sing some loud song about destroying all ideas that are not kosher.
Eugene, Heidelberg, germany
The Stalinist airbrushing of history by the CRE is very dangerous.
I am a white, university-educated male. I am a jazz lover. Most of my heroes are black. I also loved TinTin as a child. I still do. I can never remember watching, or reading, a TinTin cartoon and having even the remotest negative thought about "black" people.
92% of the population of this country is white. Yet, I switched on the BBC news last night. Another story on education. The first pupil interviewed, yet again, was of asian origin. The next story was on the baggage debacle at Heathrow. The first person interviewed? You guessed it. Asian origin.
The CRE should have the courage of their convictions. Impound "Huckleberry Finn", or do a committee rewrite of it so it is "fit" for young people in 21st Britain. And "Of Mice and MIne". And the rest of our heritage. Let nothing ever appear in the public domain which could be construed as "negative" towards "black" people.
Where will all of this nonsense end?
George Dunn, London,
No! Do not airbrush the past just to appease the PC brigade, and the CRE - that is the Communist/Fascist way. Let children see what life was like, and they can then make up their own minds.
Tony Knifton, LIVERPOOL, UK