On censorship

[JordyVerrill]

No, they wouldn't because he wouldn't agree to it with already published books and would not change future works just to accommodate if he felt by doing so he was compromising his being authentic to his writing.

Well, yeah, you're right. Stephen King wouldn't, but if there was a new author or an author who doesn't have a lot of pull who had just signed a publishing deal and their publisher came to them and said they wanted to release a clean version of their book, they'd probably go along with it.

And I'm not talking about a few voices here or there asking for clean versions, I'm talking about a major up swell of people looking for clean versions... the kind of which will never happen so this is all hypothetical anyway.

[fushingfeef]

As a parent I sometimes will hear a a song that my kids like musically but the lyrics contain words or notions that I don't want to hear my kids repeating. I'm not against buying them a cleaned-up version of the song if one is available. I don't consider this to be censorship. I sometimes will tell my kids that they're not hearing the original version of the song--I'll tell them it's the kid-friendly version, and the reasons why I don't want them to hear the original until they're older.

[Moderator]

Well, yeah, you're right. Stephen King wouldn't, but if there was a new author or an author who doesn't have a lot of pull who had just signed a publishing deal and their publisher came to them and said they wanted to release a clean version of their book, they'd probably go along with it.

And I'm not talking about a few voices here or there asking for clean versions, I'm talking about a major up swell of people looking for clean versions... the kind of which will never happen so this is all hypothetical anyway.

You're right, a first-time writer might be willing to edit (many have!) their material if that was the condition for publishing.

As for your other scenario--possibly, but I think there's too much precedent for protection of first amendment rights to have that happen not to mention that I don't see the majority of our society, for better or worse, going in that direction. There are publishing houses that cater to genre specific audiences and if there was a market for more sanitized versions of books, I suspect that would be an area that publishing companies would be happy to accommodate. Different strokes for different folks kind of thing and enough folks with tastes that aren't offended by profanity to keep publishing books that contain it as well.

[Amphiaraus]

...a first-time writer might be willing to edit (many have!) their material if that was the condition for publishing.

Editorial emendations are rarely - very rarely - acts of censorship. By definition, censorship is the arbitrary suppression of material that is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by some controlling body or authority. Of course self-censorship exists too, and it's very likely a first-time writer will err on the side of caution (if only to avoid breaking the law or collapsing into poor taste)... which makes one wonder how Bret Easton Ellis managed to get his stuff out into the real world.

[PatInTheHat]

“Never use a big word when a little filthy one will do.”...Johnny Carson

[JordyVerrill]

You're right, a first-time writer might be willing to edit (many have!) their material if that was the condition for publishing.

As for your other scenario--possibly, but I think there's too much precedent for protection of first amendment rights to have that happen not to mention that I don't see the majority of our society, for better or worse, going in that direction. There are publishing houses that cater to genre specific audiences and if there was a market for more sanitized versions of books, I suspect that would be an area that publishing companies would be happy to accommodate. Different strokes for different folks kind of thing and enough folks with tastes that aren't offended by profanity to keep publishing books that contain it as well.

Well, it wouldn't really be a first amendment issue since it wouldn't be the government forcing the publisher to censor the book, it would be the publisher saying "Wow, we have 2 million people saying they'll buy the book if we take out all the curse words. Let's take them out". Again, that is extremely unlikely to heppen, but if it did, most not too well established authors would most likely be happy to go along with it so they could sell 2 million books.

[blunthead]

I don't think the person who made that thread was asking for the government to come in and ban Under The Dome, just asking if there was a clean version of it available, and asking for Stephen King to stop using profanity. That's not censorship, that's trying to get market forces to react to what you, as a consumer, want. If enough people started asking for clean versions of Stephen King books, the market would react and they would be made available.

Asking, expecting, demanding someone stop using profanity is censorship. The idea of some things being dubbed over, as in movies, doesn't bother me, as long as the originals remain available, even if I myself don't care for them. We must remain a free people. I'm assuming we all know what is profane, though, thus making an a$$ out of u and me. The dangerous powers always define these terms according to their own belief systems and not for the purpose of protecting anyone or anything except their power. The Nazis banned all kind of beautiful art because it didn't fit their idea of art. Jews could not conceivably create art in their self-limiting, perverse view. What resulted was banality, not art. I choose "profanity" over perversity and banality.

[Shasta]

Btw, are you familiar with http://jenniferarmintrout.blogspot.c...s-of-grey.html ? You might appreciate her efforts.

I can't to the "This site contains adult content" part and quickly clicked off. I can't handle anymore!!!

See. I can self-censor.

[Shasta]

I choose "profanity" over perversity and banality.

Yes. Absolutely, yes.

[atomicinchworm]

LOL. She is a romance author. To be fair, most of the "adult content" is curse words. I promise I wouldn't link to a porn site without a warning.