Catherine

Apologies for getting a little carried away with the last comment, just a bit annoyed (not with the other commentors, but with the app, however briefly books were available on it [though books purchased through the app before the catalogue was pulled are still available to people in their edited form]). I was simply trying to present (yet another I suppose) author's take. I know I'm not a librarian, but one thing all of us here have in common regardless on our take on the Clean Reader is a love for literature. Keep being the lovely gatekeepers you folks are :)

Posted : Jun 02, 2015 07:06

Catherine

Firstly, it's illegal to alter the books. If you want to exercise your "freedom to not read such words" then you'll simply have to read a different book. If you buy a physical copy, mark it up as you shall, the paper it's printed on is now yours after all. But altering the words of ebooks and distributing/selling them to people is all kinds of copyright infringement. Also, if you buy a printed copy you've only bought the paper it's printed on (you can't legally post scans of it online for instance), but when you "buy" an ebook you're only licensing it (and licenses have terms). I understand the backlash given that the app creators were illegally changing books and then selling them (with a slightly increased price in exchange for their service). Most writers would rather have you not read their books at all than read a book they didn't write. In some cases a lot of context can be lost. Suppose a character who rarely/never swears drops an f bomb? Instantly you recognize that this is out of character for them and something is CLEARLY wrong. And in the case of racial slurs being altered, much of the illustration of the bullying or oppression the character faces is lost. As a novelist, I can say that I personally (and a great many others in my profession) carefully pick every word that goes into a book. Every word you read had a reason for being picked over a different word that means something similar. I cannot convey the amount of information/emotion/ambiance that writers may be trying to get across in a single sentence. These writers weren't so much angry that the swear words were being nixed, but that ANY of the words were being altered. Change the word 'snarl' to 'growl' or 'run' to 'sprint' in their book and they would have just as big a cow. They don't care if you hate their story or never read it, they just want to know that if you do read the book it's the one they wrote. As for comparing it to the censoring of songs on the radio and movies/series on television, it's not the same thing at all. Companies own the rights to those works, if they want to filter some of their content so it can be put on the air then let them (and they almost certainly will whether it alters the film for the worse or not, profit supersedes art with studios [not to say good art has never come from them, but if it does it's only because they hired people who cared about the story to make the film/episodes]). And while I have no problem with "clean" entertainment and love it, I can honestly say that there have been some movies that I've seen both the original cut and the censored for television version and found that the alterations really took away from the scene. It's in no way a stretch to say the same could happen in the case of censored books. And personally I'd much rather be offended by a message or the way it was delivered than not be offended and miss the point of a scene or story. I'd rather live in ignorance of a story than get a version of it that doesn't communicate, in part or in full, what the author intended. And I'm sorry, but one's right to avoid swearing does not supersede an author's right to present the story they spent months/years of their lives creating as they wish it to be presented. Their creation, their copyrighted material, their call. They had no obligation to share it with anyone to begin with. And let's be honest, if given the choice most of us would prefer a person never hear what we care about or even know we exist then for them to get a misquoted version of the things we say or a purposeful misrepresentation of us. Virtually everyone would rather be ignored or disagreed with than misrepresented. Altering books may not seem as big as that, but it feels pretty dang significant when you put hundreds of hours into not only making something but making it the way you truly want it to be (easily 80% of the time spent putting a book together is invested in writing and rewriting something until it feels right). I'd much rather have someone not buy my book or for me to refund their money than to have the content altered. Or how's about this. Give a speech in front of an audience or even just have a chat with someone and the whole time have someone standing next to you who interrupts you and says, "No, that's not the word you meant. Suppose you offend this chap you're talking to? THIS is the word you want." Or they say, "No! You're eyes should look like this. You should wear an expression like this. No, this is the body language you should use." See if you wouldn't get incredibly annoyed. And imagine they also received finacial compensation for it! It's not an exaggerated comparison of what happens to books with their curse words altered. Because writers sometimes use swearing to make a statement about the character or set a tone. They only wrote the scene the way they did because all options were available to them, but if for some reason people HAD to read it without the swearing the author would most likely rewrite the whole passage so they could find a different way to more or less communicate what they were going for (and even then they'd be disgruntled, because it'd be like using Splenda instead of sugar or artificial bacon bits instead of real bacon, it's similar but THEY for one can tell the difference).

Posted : Jun 02, 2015 06:50

KarenTMo

I do not agree with the backlash. The app presents options for individual readers. It supports freedom of choice. It puts important books in the hands of more people. I especially like how Pam put the argument. Just wondering: it seems all these readers/writers who want the freedom to use certain words appear to be denying others the freedom to not read such words. As for the objection that such as app will lead to even more "abuses," isn't that a bit like the flawed "gateway drug" argument? MHO

Posted : Apr 13, 2015 08:10

Jennifer Ott

As an author, I don't understand how this isn't copyright infringement. This app is not just censoring books, it is rewriting them. If I hold a copyright to a work of literature, it should be illegal for some other party to use it or change it any manner.

Posted : Mar 29, 2015 07:17

Pam

I understand the issue of censorship, but to me it looks like the parental controls on TV as another person said. I notice that we aren't allowed to use profanity in this column. I myself don't want to read the vulgar and profane words when I am reading a book. Yes, I know what "normal" conversation is like. I can't even go to the grocery store without hearing it. But I don't like it. We don't allow it in our classrooms. I also think there is a lot of gratuitous profanity in the books. I don't expect a grown man to say darn instead of damn when he hits himself with a hammer, but I also don't expect to read , oh, ____,oh____, I hit my _____ self with a ______ ________ ______ hammer. And, as a librarian, I would like to be able to offer some great books that have a lot of profanity and vulgarity without having the book be challenged.

Posted : Mar 27, 2015 09:53

Beverley Graham

As a person that's not prone to swearing, I have to admit I was a little taken aback by the amount of swearing in several books that I have recently read. However, these are "realistic" books, so it wouldn't be authentic to have the characters saying "darn" instead of damn. In this case, I see this app as a parental control setting that you have on your TV. Personally, I would never use this app as it is an insult to the author's work. If swear words need to be blurred/replaced in an e-book perhaps the kid shouldn't be reading it!

Posted : Mar 27, 2015 06:31

Claudette Brown

Thank goodness for the backlash! I am a school librarian at the elementary level, and I am appalled at the concept altogether. If children are upset by language in a book, or what happens more often in my experience, they question it, what a terrific opportunity for a meaningful conversation! If it's too upsetting, then perhaps the child is not ready for the book. Don't punish the book, and stop insulting children! They're pretty smart. They know what's real, and they know whats appropriate in the real world.

Posted : Mar 27, 2015 03:40