Didn't Harry Potter et al get wasted on butter beer?
Who killed The Famous Five? Page 2
I wonder if they've edited out the tongue sandwiches, when I read the books I was a bit freaked out by that concept.
Quote: sootyj @ August 21 2012, 11:03 AM BSTDidn't Harry Potter et al get wasted on butter beer?
Ha yes. I think is also non alcoholic, but a definite precedent for the word 'beer' being okay in a kid's book.
Bloody ridiculous.
Quote: KC82 @ August 21 2012, 11:05 AM BSTI wonder if they've edited out the tongue sandwiches, when I read the books I was a bit freaked out by that concept.
Bleh. Still totally gross.
Quote: KC82 @ August 21 2012, 11:05 AM BSTI wonder if they've edited out the tongue sandwiches, when I read the books I was a bit freaked out by that concept.
But...that was what people ate in those days. I have no idea if they've edited it out, but it will be a shame if they have. My nan and grandad used to have it and so did my dad. He'd often go to the butchers and bring back all sorts of innards...brains, tongues etc. He just loved it. He was one of those guys who would store whelks in the fridge so it stank us all out every time we opened it. In those days, they ate loads of stuff we wouldn't bother with now.
I've never read a Famous Five. Although I did read No Boats on Bannamere, which I'd imagine is pretty similar.
Oh absolutely, I don't think it should be edited out as it's a reflection of the time (my gran still has it), I just remember being horrified and baffled as to why they'd choose tongue over a nice bit of cheese and pickle 
I was more of a Faraway Tree fan though
Quote: Joyce @ August 21 2012, 10:19 AM BSTTry cutting off the internet so they can't watch gang beatings on YouTube or connect via FB and post half-naked, pouty pictures of themselves.
You know there are other things on the internet other than gang bangs and naked pictures.
Quote: Joyce @ August 21 2012, 10:19 AM BSTAnyway...I just had to say this. Sorry if I've offended any beer-swigging, dope-smoking, half-naked, pouty 8 year olds.
It does seem you're taking the worst, most negative stereotype of teenagers and branding it for all of them. And don't get me wrong I hate the current generation with all my heart, but you can't take the worst and assume for all.
I had a line in EE once when Dot says that she and Pauline were going to have a lovely bit of tongue for lunch but it got cut for some reason. A scribe mate of mine nicked it though and it turned up in a later ep in someone else's mouth!
Quote: Monster Scum Bag @ August 21 2012, 11:28 AM BSTYou know there are other things on the internet other than gang bangs and naked pictures.
It does seem you're taking the worst, most negative stereotype of teenagers and branding it for all of them. And don't get me wrong I hate the current generation with all my heart, but you can't take the worst and assume for all.
I don't assume it for all...my own children and a lot of children I know are very well rounded and benefit from good parenting. However, I do see a lot of other children doing what I described and know that many children, when left on their own on the internet, will want to explore more than their parents might allow.
I am making the point that, what with the obvious lack of respect and motivation that is apparent these days, editing a series of Enid Blyton books isn't going to even scratch the surface.
My own kids watch and read stuff that's a little too old for them than the likes of Mary Whitehouse would have allowed. My objection is purely that stripping a set of children's books of anything remotely 'naughty' will not stop kids being kids.
I'm not making an assumption, I'm making an observation.
Lovin this, found an old 'Bobbesy Twins' anyone remember them?
Yes, I am nostalgic for the old fashioned Enid Blyton, I thought Noddy was perfect! my son loved those stories.
There was an element of 'feminism' as George was a very feisty girl.
I used to be partial to tongue, now never touch it, like brisket and ruddy haslet!
Quote: Harridan @ August 21 2012, 10:27 AM BSTI don't mind when they edit classic children's stories to remove racist terms
I think you're on very dangerous ground if you go back and alter works of literature in order to satisfy a current political agenda. It's akin to Muslims smashing up ancient tombs and mosques because they conflict with their beliefs.
Yes, let's do a re-make of the Dambusters, celebrating the British capacity to create weapons and the needless deaths of thousands of German civilians but don't call the dog the 'N' word, people will find that offensive.
I haven't seen the new Famous Five books, how are they doing on the old enforced diversity front - are any of them transgendered, gay, black, Islamic or handicapped - and if not, why not?
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ August 21 2012, 12:26 PM BSTI think you're on very dangerous ground if you go back and alter works of literature in order to satisfy a current political agenda.
Very true.
I seem to remember Ms. Blyton had a healthy mistrust of those honest gypsy folk.
So...so far, we're rewriting the Bible and the Dambusters. Not bad for a morning's work.
But...I know what Harridan means. There are some words that we might have used as kids that are now used more for ridicule and abuse than they were back then. As nice as it would be for us all to go back to those times when we all just slagged each other off as we pleased, we can't and children's reading books can't really be seen to be encouraging this. It's just the way it is now.
With epic works...of course, when dealing with specific issues that centred on racism and international wars etc, there's no sense in changing anything. It just would make the purpose of the piece totally pointless.