[yamtaddle]

> So this was a publicity stunt by the publisher?

It was done so poorly that this thought had already crossed my mind. A bunch of the changes were obviously unnecessary by any standard, and they didn't even pay attention to things like meter when editing poems.

I'm not even necessarily against this (we do this to kids' literature all the time and basically always have—as longs as the originals can still be had, not a big deal) but this was so lazy and awful that it's hard to believe they were serious—this was straight-up an illiterate editing effort.

[esja]

It was a real initiative using a real company which specialises in this. They just aren't very good at preserving the intent of the author and the nuance of the text. Which is exactly what we should expect of any censor.

https://www.inclusiveminds.com/

[cld8483]

> Which is exactly what we should expect of any censor.

Exactly. If they weren't artless hacks they'd write their own books instead of butchering others.