I think we have to start worrying about censorship for King’s books…

[CyberGhostface]

The current ebook of Carrie (which has the new Atwood introduction) has changed “of fighting with desperate decorum to keep the n****** out of Kleen Korners” to “of fighting with desperate decorum to keep the Kleen Corners white”.

I know this is a small change but it still sets a worrying precedent. If you weren’t aware there was a whole fiasco over the publisher editing Roald Dahl’s books in the UK.

[St. Troy]

Not a good thing. Even trigger warnings are preferable to changes to an author’s work.

Did they call attention to the change, or just sneak it in?

[CyberGhostface]

Just snuck it in, someone posted about it on the SK subreddit.

[St. Troy]

Pitiful.

People forget that unsavory anachronisms/terms tell us about the character, the author, the times etc.; you can’t “clean up” without killing part of the work.

[ur2ndbiggestfan]

On a side note, Meteor House did this with Philip Jose Farmer's JESUS ON MARS, although it was mentioned in the forward, which I didn't read until after I'd read the novel (for the 2nd time, the 1st time being the unexpurgated version). I sent them an e-mail complaining about it, trying to be nice but still showing my dislike of this practice, receiving no acknowledgement of receipt or reply.

[St. Troy]

It could be that the number of readers who will complain about such changes will always be outnumbered by those offended by the original text.

[Ben Mears]

I recently completed a 50th anniversary re-reading of Carrie and remember coming across that sentence and wondering when politically correct busy bodies would make the change. The same ugly word has been used ad nauseam in rap songs for years with no consequences other than explicit labels. Maybe when employed as a lyric it is considered nuanced and thus justifying inclusion...or not but that is a lazy example. More recently Percival Everett has liberally used the word in The Trees (2021) and his 2024 bestseller James. Removing it from Carrie is just silly. Altering the past in the guise of political correctness is disingenuous and hypocritical.

[CyberGhostface]

I think the context of a black author using the word in a reimagining of Huckleberry Finn or a novel connected to a real life lynching of a black teenager is a bit different. And to be fair no one was stopping King from using it in his most recent books, this was hopefully a one off.

[Honvie]

Humans enjoy coining terms and 'descriptive' words about themselves throughout history and then self censoring what they think is right or wrong depending on their agenda while championing 'free' speech.

[DoctorZaius]

What would interest me is a response from King himself.

[ur2ndbiggestfan]

They also did it to Farmer again, who can not defend himself.
I e-mailed the owner of the official Farmer site about it but received no reply.

[ratchet41]

i'm not surprised by any of this i really fucking hate censorship & they changed things with the bond books, Agatha Christie even though a lot of her books were released before any of us were even born here. & Dr. Sues as well. my apologies for spelling his name wrong. i'm 45 years old i think i can hand the N word in anything i read. now look up the Original Title for And than there were none/Ten Little Indians & that i get why it was changed that makes sense

[CyberGhostface]

What would interest me is a response from King himself.

It’s possible he doesn’t even know about it yet. When new editions of R.L. Stine’s books were being edited he had no idea it was going on for years.

[RichardX]

What would interest me is a response from King himself.

As a legal matter, it doesn't seem like they could change the language absent some express contractual authority to do so or the approval of the author. It's a copyrighted work under King's name. With that said, it wouldn't surprise me if King agreed to the change. King is not exactly known to stand against cancel culture on behalf of others. So I doubt he would do it here.

[CyberGhostface]

King is not exactly known to stand against cancel culture on behalf of others. So I doubt he would do it here.

It’s been the opposite from what I’ve seen. I think your issue is he’s chosen to disagree with those people that you support.

[RichardX]

King is not exactly known to stand against cancel culture on behalf of others. So I doubt he would do it here.

It’s been the opposite from what I’ve seen. I think your issue is he’s chosen to disagree with those people that you support.

There have been several woke efforts to revise offensive language in various works of literature. The Republicans are the ones who adamantly oppose such historical revision. King is on board with woke efforts to attack his fellow authors for expressing their points of view. He is not going to suddenly change direction even if he is opposed to these revisions in his book. For all anyone knows, he does not object or at least will not express any public objection because he doesn't want to offend the cancel culture mob. I agree with you and the conservative point of view on this issue that publishers should not be changing the content of books. Don't count on King to take that view, though.

[CyberGhostface]

King is on board with woke efforts to attack his fellow authors for expressing their points of view.

It's obvious you're referring to King signing a petition supporting trans people, which you took as him stabbing J.K. Rowling (who you clearly idolize and probably not because of her boy wizard books) in the back. You even called King a coward and a rat fink for it.

Funny thing is, King never attacked J.K. Rowling and he's still regularly praising her work on twitter. I think your issue is that he publicly supports trans people.

Also can you tell me what "woke" even means here?

[WeDealInLead]

It could be that King felt rotten about using the word so he rewrote the passage. He has rewritten entire books before. Yes, we are all able to read the books in their historical context, no, I don't agree with changing the original works but I also think people are allowed to change and follow their heart. One of the most iconic and genre defining bands called Bad Brains had a VERY homophobic song. They removed all the singing on the 2023 reissue and now it's an instrumental. That is their choice because they're not the same people they were 40 years ago. Is this not OK? Should they pander to "purists" or do what they think is right?

For the record, my views are more in line with Rowling's than King's but the truth matters. It is absolutely the conservatives who ban books, where have you been??? The year is 2024 and King's books are still being banned. Did you forget the Christian right banning Rowling's books because of sorcery (lol)?

I have no less than three versions of Ted Klein's "The Events at Poroth Farm" and Ellison's works have constantly been revised. Where's the outrage? Are some changes OK and some not? It's kind of sad that King dropping an obvious slur is the one that's the problematic one.

Lastly, I saw two more versions of Carrie at the local chain with the original text so I don't think this is a big deal we're making it out to be anyway.

[Lurker]

I don't know much about Republicans changing or not changing words in books. What is clear about 'em tho is that they don't want you to actually read the books. Ban Ban Ban.

[CyberGhostface]

It could be that King felt rotten about using the word so he rewrote the passage. He has rewritten entire books before.

I don't think that's the case as King was just using it with Holly, his second most recent book.


I have no less than three versions of Ted Klein's "The Events at Poroth Farm" and Ellison's works have constantly been revised. Where's the outrage? Are some changes OK and some not? It's kind of sad that King dropping an obvious slur is the one that's the problematic one.

I've never read Ted Klein but I was actually annoyed that King pulled a George Lucas with 'The Gunslinger' and I felt most of the changes were unnecessary at best and that was entirely his decision. If King did something like that to The Shining in such a fashion -- i.e. revealing that Danny is a Breaker or including cameos from the True Knot -- I would be very pissed.

I'm fine in cases like The Stand or Off Season by Jack Ketchum where the author is restoring content that the publisher made them cut out but 90% of the time I'm against any sort of George Lucas tinkering after the fact.

[WeDealInLead]

Same, I take changes on case to case basis.

I didn't know that about Holly. I read the book but I didn't notice it. That makes the change in Carrie more puzzling.

[CyberGhostface]

Fwiw I checked and I was wrong about it being said in Holly (although other racial slurs were used by the villains).

That being said King was using it pretty frequently with Brady in the Mercedes trilogy (Brady refers to Jerome as the "Ni**er lawnboy" at various points) and there's a bit in 'You Like it Darker' where the term "ni**erbabies" is used to refer to an old-time candy.

[St. Troy]

King is not exactly known to stand against cancel culture on behalf of others.

Yep; in fact, he wasn't even willing to stand against it on his own behalf: when upbraided by the industry for saying (tweeting about his Oscar nominations) "I would never consider diversity in matters of art. Only quality. It seems to me that to do otherwise would be wrong," his response was to backpedal like a motherfucker.

Still, I hold out hope that he places some value in the integrity of written works.

[St. Troy]

If King did something like that to The Shining in such a fashion -- i.e. revealing that Danny is a Breaker or including cameos from the True Knot -- I would be very pissed.

I'm fine in cases like The Stand or Off Season by Jack Ketchum where the author is restoring content that the publisher made them cut out but 90% of the time I'm against any sort of George Lucas tinkering after the fact.

+1 on all of this.

Although my preference is for such changes never to be made, when they are, I think it is unconscionable to publish them without clear markings as altered.

[CyberGhostface]

King is not exactly known to stand against cancel culture on behalf of others.

Yep; in fact, he wasn't even willing to stand against it on his own behalf: when upbraided by the industry for saying (tweeting about his Oscar nominations) "I would never consider diversity in matters of art. Only quality. It seems to me that to do otherwise would be wrong," his response was to backpedal like a motherfucker.

Still, I hold out hope that he places some value in the integrity of written works.

He stood by on his comments on Woody Allen getting his book deal canceled and he got more flack for that. Maybe he just reassessed his views. The industry didn’t upbraid him either, it was just one filmmaker who went after him no one else cared.

Edit: he even talked about it here

“What I said about the Oscars was taken the wrong way by people like Ava DuVernay. So I had to try to make clear exactly what I was talking about. What I was saying about Woody Allen, I never felt any urge to go correct or expand. I didn’t see any need, because the key thing about that was that the publisher accepted the manuscript. They had agreed to publish it. The reason they backed out was because there was negative publicity. I feel like it was cowardly.”

https://web.archive.org/web/20200428213028/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/27/magazine/stephen-king-interview.html

[St. Troy]

...no one else cared.

Were that true, King wouldn't have needed to publish his Washington Post op-ed, but he did (perhaps you'll now cite something stating that the WP op-ed never happened - maybe check HuffPo; they're good for this kind of thing).

[St. Troy]

Cool of King to stand by Woody Allen (and his own comments about such), but the logic he (King) uses is interesting...


“The reason they backed out was because there was negative publicity.”

...because it's pretty much the same thing King did with his own tweet.

The bottom line (as far as the idea to which I originally responded, that King wouldn't defend another re: cancel culture) is that, apparently, King will do so (even if not so much for himself), and that's great.

[CyberGhostface]

(perhaps you'll now cite something stating that the WP op-ed never happened - maybe check HuffPo; they're good for this kind of thing).

Is that a reference to something because it doesn’t make a lot of sense by itself.

King felt the need to clarify his views for the reasons he stated in the interview but it was a minor controversy at best. Ava was the only person of note making a stink about it. The industry certainly wasn’t up in arms against him as you claimed.

King himself said about the Woody Allen situation “I was in the stocks, and people threw electronic cabbages at me, and that went on for a while. Then they move on to something else.” There’s a furor and then it dies down.


...because it's pretty much the same thing King did with his own tweet.

That’s what you inferred but if that’s the case why not do the same exact thing with Woody Allen?

Edit: Oh I just remembered… King defended another author and didn’t back down. It was over American Dirt. It was about Mexican migrants and written by a non-Mexican author so it was accused of cultural appropriation. King wrote the following:

‘There was also a lot of controversy about “American Dirt,” the Jeanine Cummins book, which I loved and put a blurb on. There was a feeling that Jeanine Cummins had done what’s called cultural appropriation, which back in my day used to be called imagination. I felt that she had a right to do that, because if you go down that road, you can never have a man who writes a book like “Rose Madder” or “Gerald’s Game,” which are about a woman and her feelings. You have to step carefully, but it can be done. It should be done, because that’s the way we reach out to the other people.’

So the idea that King won’t stick up for authors when others are attacking them is baseless.

[WeDealInLead]

I don't understand any of that, I'm just here to say everyone should read T.E.D. Klein's "Events at Poroth Farm" and chase it with Karl Edward Wagner "Sticks." Both stories are available in a number of Best Of type anthologies.

Carry on.

[St. Troy]

...the idea that King won’t stick up for authors when others are attacking them is baseless.

True; you might have noticed that I accepted this as fact after you provided the Woody Allen example:


The bottom line (as far as the idea to which I originally responded, that King wouldn't defend another re: cancel culture) is that, apparently, King will do so (even if not so much for himself), and that's great.

I suppose his Oscar follies - which were also public record - may be harder to accept.

[RichardX]

It could be that King felt rotten about using the word so he rewrote the passage. He has rewritten entire books before. Yes, we are all able to read the books in their historical context, no, I don't agree with changing the original works but I also think people are allowed to change and follow their heart. One of the most iconic and genre defining bands called Bad Brains had a VERY homophobic song. They removed all the singing on the 2023 reissue and now it's an instrumental. That is their choice because they're not the same people they were 40 years ago. Is this not OK? Should they pander to "purists" or do what they think is right?

For the record, my views are more in line with Rowling's than King's but the truth matters. It is absolutely the conservatives who ban books, where have you been??? The year is 2024 and King's books are still being banned. Did you forget the Christian right banning Rowling's books because of sorcery (lol)?

I have no less than three versions of Ted Klein's "The Events at Poroth Farm" and Ellison's works have constantly been revised. Where's the outrage? Are some changes OK and some not? It's kind of sad that King dropping an obvious slur is the one that's the problematic one.

Lastly, I saw two more versions of Carrie at the local chain with the original text so I don't think this is a big deal we're making it out to be anyway.

Not a single book is banned in the US. You can buy any book ever written in human history. Conflating the concept of age-appropriate books for children in schools with "banning" of books such as took place in Nazi Germany is a false comparison. The rewriting of history is occurring entirely by the woke, cancel culture types who hate America. They are the ones rewriting books like Huckleberry Finn to remove any language deemed offensive. Republicans adamantly oppose these efforts. King actually self-imposed a ban on his book "Rage" in the face of woke concerns.

[Lurker]

Ever? Tell Henry Miller and his Tropic of Cancer that. Or DH Lawrence.

[RichardX]

Ever? Tell Henry Miller and his Tropic of Cancer that. Or DH Lawrence.

In what century? Are you suggesting that these books are currently banned?

[CyberGhostface]

King actually self-imposed a ban on his book "Rage" in the face of woke concerns.

“Woke concerns”? Can you elaborate on what made this “woke”?

[RichardX]

King actually self-imposed a ban on his book "Rage" in the face of woke concerns.

“Woke concerns”? Can you elaborate on what made this “woke”?

King is the classic collaborator. A weak willed individual who will say or do anything to protect his own cushy situation. He cancelled his own book. Perhaps the only one in the US that is "banned." He lives behind walled mansions with private security. Do you think he will still stick up for anyone else?

[CyberGhostface]

You going to answer what made his decision “woke” or not? While you’re at it, what does “woke” even mean here?

Btw I just gave an example of an author he stood up for just a few posts ago.

[WeDealInLead]

Ever? Tell Henry Miller and his Tropic of Cancer that. Or DH Lawrence.

In what century? Are you suggesting that these books are currently banned?

Are you not on the internet with an access to a search engine? Are your arms not sore from all the reaching you've been doing?

Age appropriate? Spare me. Charlotte's Web was banned in Kansas because it was blasphemous, whatever that means.

And to apply your logic... anyone can still buy the unedited Huck Finn for a couple of bucks so what's the big deal?

[RichardX]

Ever? Tell Henry Miller and his Tropic of Cancer that. Or DH Lawrence.

In what century? Are you suggesting that these books are currently banned?

Are you not on the internet with an access to a search engine? Are your arms not sore from all the reaching you've been doing?

Age appropriate? Spare me. Charlotte's Web was banned in Kansas because it was blasphemous, whatever that means.

And to apply your logic... anyone can still buy the unedited Huck Finn for a couple of bucks so what's the big deal?

You are claiming that it is not possible to buy Charlotte's Web in Kansas? LOL. Do they not have access to Amazon? Wow.

[WeDealInLead]

King actually self-imposed a ban on his book "Rage" in the face of woke concerns.

“Woke concerns”? Can you elaborate on what made this “woke”?

King is the classic collaborator. A weak willed individual who will say or do anything to protect his own cushy situation. He cancelled his own book. Perhaps the only one in the US that is "banned." He lives behind walled mansions with private security. Do you think he will still stick up for anyone else?

You mean other than the charities and benefit events he supports and people whose cheque he cuts?

[RichardX]

People of Kansas. I understand that Charlotte's Web has been "banned." Please seek solace here: https://www.amazon.com/Charlottes-Web-Trophy-Newbery-White/dp/0064400557/ref=sr_1_1?crid=TCLEX9I0050E&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.GYZvtYdCoVaugTD2B4SRFsKuusK8YqQ_B 9W-D93zWUciyd4qc-wqbGOWi9PeAgQcZXplZSGBFC3G5M22z_7nFNA_a83lqpojUpNA SZgZJLDbzJgEQgspWidWG3EuR-FEu0tTjHVEQkprzlT_81a8vjdsA4IaxQWIUL35rQZfGkJYQ1Ws zcleq-S462s8ZVB28WRxoUtRX7G-Tv_vT5Zy0zJ46_5Q0rk__79ozcb7xhc.sBMYMaZC_WdQbE8kBx W-T-Ws3LlW3Sdox2FgYUK5xIg&dib_tag=se&keywords=charlotte%27s+web+book&qid=1717383962&s=books&sprefix=charlott%2Cstripbooks%2C177&sr=1-1

[RichardX]

King actually self-imposed a ban on his book "Rage" in the face of woke concerns.

“Woke concerns”? Can you elaborate on what made this “woke”?

King is the classic collaborator. A weak willed individual who will say or do anything to protect his own cushy situation. He cancelled his own book. Perhaps the only one in the US that is "banned." He lives behind walled mansions with private security. Do you think he will still stick up for anyone else?

You mean other than the charities and benefit events he supports and people whose cheque he cuts?

Wait. Being rich allows King to get a pass on his conduct? Why didn't Trump think of that? LOL.

[Lurker]

Where did I read "has ever been banned"? I know I saw the word ever.

[WeDealInLead]

King actually self-imposed a ban on his book "Rage" in the face of woke concerns.

“Woke concerns”? Can you elaborate on what made this “woke”?

King is the classic collaborator. A weak willed individual who will say or do anything to protect his own cushy situation. He cancelled his own book. Perhaps the only one in the US that is "banned." He lives behind walled mansions with private security. Do you think he will still stick up for anyone else?

You mean other than the charities and benefit events he supports and people whose cheque he cuts?

Wait. Being rich allows King to get a pass on his conduct? Why didn't Trump think of that? LOL.

Huh?

[WeDealInLead]

People of Kansas. I understand that Charlotte's Web has been "banned." Please seek solace here: https://www.amazon.com/Charlottes-Web-Trophy-Newbery-White/dp/0064400557/ref=sr_1_1?crid=TCLEX9I0050E&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.GYZvtYdCoVaugTD2B4SRFsKuusK8YqQ_B 9W-D93zWUciyd4qc-wqbGOWi9PeAgQcZXplZSGBFC3G5M22z_7nFNA_a83lqpojUpNA SZgZJLDbzJgEQgspWidWG3EuR-FEu0tTjHVEQkprzlT_81a8vjdsA4IaxQWIUL35rQZfGkJYQ1Ws zcleq-S462s8ZVB28WRxoUtRX7G-Tv_vT5Zy0zJ46_5Q0rk__79ozcb7xhc.sBMYMaZC_WdQbE8kBx W-T-Ws3LlW3Sdox2FgYUK5xIg&dib_tag=se&keywords=charlotte%27s+web+book&qid=1717383962&s=books&sprefix=charlott%2Cstripbooks%2C177&sr=1-1

Oh, Amazon. Is that the world's biggest e-store that has Carrie with the N word still available? I heard about the place.

[CyberGhostface]

King actually self-imposed a ban on his book "Rage" in the face of woke concerns.

“Woke concerns”? Can you elaborate on what made this “woke”?

King is the classic collaborator. A weak willed individual who will say or do anything to protect his own cushy situation. He cancelled his own book. Perhaps the only one in the US that is "banned." He lives behind walled mansions with private security. Do you think he will still stick up for anyone else?

You mean other than the charities and benefit events he supports and people whose cheque he cuts?

Wait. Being rich allows King to get a pass on his conduct? Why didn't Trump think of that? LOL.

You’re throwing a tantrum because King allowed a book the average reader never even heard of to go out of print because it was linked to actual school shootouts. What conduct issues should he not get a pass for here?

[RichardX]

Where did I read "has ever been banned"? I know I saw the word ever.

LOL. Please name the books that are currently "banned" in the US.

[WeDealInLead]

Ever? Tell Henry Miller and his Tropic of Cancer that. Or DH Lawrence.

In what century? Are you suggesting that these books are currently banned?

Are you not on the internet with an access to a search engine? Are your arms not sore from all the reaching you've been doing?

Age appropriate? Spare me. Charlotte's Web was banned in Kansas because it was blasphemous, whatever that means.

And to apply your logic... anyone can still buy the unedited Huck Finn for a couple of bucks so what's the big deal?

You are claiming that it is not possible to buy Charlotte's Web in Kansas? LOL. Do they not have access to Amazon? Wow.

You know, you could've just said banning books is not a good thing.

This is where I realized you're not actually having a good faith argument. No one in this thread has actually said they're in favour of the change in Carrie.

[RichardX]

Ever? Tell Henry Miller and his Tropic of Cancer that. Or DH Lawrence.

In what century? Are you suggesting that these books are currently banned?

Are you not on the internet with an access to a search engine? Are your arms not sore from all the reaching you've been doing?

Age appropriate? Spare me. Charlotte's Web was banned in Kansas because it was blasphemous, whatever that means.

And to apply your logic... anyone can still buy the unedited Huck Finn for a couple of bucks so what's the big deal?

You are claiming that it is not possible to buy Charlotte's Web in Kansas? LOL. Do they not have access to Amazon? Wow.

You know, you could've just said banning books is not a good thing.

This is where I realized you're not actually having a good faith argument. No one in this thread has actually said they're in favour of the change in Carrie.

That's exactly what I did say while noting that it was the woke crowd that King supports who were supportive of such revisions. King is never going to publicly say that he opposes such changes because he is a coward who caters to this mob. At best, his lawyer will call the publisher and have it corrected. At worst, he supports such revisions.

[CyberGhostface]

King is never going to publicly say that he opposes such changes because he is a coward who caters to this mob.

That’s why he publicly supported American Dirt even when the “mob” was going after the author for cultural appropriation, right? You just want an excuse to hate King even when it’s inaccurate.

[RichardX]

King is never going to publicly say that he opposes such changes because he is a coward who caters to this mob.

That’s why he publicly supported American Dirt even when the “mob” was going after the author for cultural appropriation, right? You just want an excuse to hate King even when it’s inaccurate.

Where can I get a copy of "Rage"?

[CyberGhostface]

King is never going to publicly say that he opposes such changes because he is a coward who caters to this mob.

That’s why he publicly supported American Dirt even when the “mob” was going after the author for cultural appropriation, right? You just want an excuse to hate King even when it’s inaccurate.

Where can I get a copy of "Rage"?

So you’re resorting to deflecting because you were proven wrong about King sticking up for other authors?