[mandmandam]

Are you a creator? A writer, or an artist, or a director? ... Are you a very good one?

Because to the best of my knowledge, no world-class author or director has ever said "Feel free to change my words, images, and choices after I die, however you see fit to make the most money or appease the current narrative".

... And if a creator ever did say that, it would be the exception that proves the rule.

[janmarsal]

What? How about living ones? Like George Lucas and Steven Spielberg. At least Spielberg says he regrets his decision but when it comes to George Lucas and the original Star Wars, there's plenty of people who were very angry at him when you could only get a DVD of the original trilogy that was filled with modern CGI effects and prequel actors that weren't there in the original release. At one point the only way to watch those original edits at home was to get an old VHS set at the flea market.

Whether I'm a creator myself or not has nothing to do with this, and whether the edits are made by the authors themselves or by other people without consent of the now dead author is not really my point here. Both annoy me but of course the latter is even more annoying. I just want an easy access to the unedited works thank you very much.

[mandmandam]

You said "I don't mind the alternative moralist edits".

I do mind, and my point is that basically every creative would also mind having their work subjected to "alternative moralist edits", especially without their consent and/or after their death.

That's not the same thing as George Lucas adding random CG crap; false equivalence.

If I understand what you're saying, it's that as long as the original is available it's fine, if annoying, for publishers to re-edit and profit from bastardized, censored, altered versions of creators work.

That's why I ask if you're a creator - because no creator, ever, anywhere, at any time, has expressed a preference - or even a tolerance - for having their work fucked with like this.

[janmarsal]

Well, to me those moralist edits are like those reader's digest books with shortened edits of novels. I really don't mind their existence, as long as they're labeled as special edits for a niche market rather than an attempt to replace the original.

[mandmandam]

... But it's not like that.

That's not what Spielberg is talking about at all. These rewritings and revision are quite different; in scope, in manner, in presentation and in purpose.

What happened to Dahl, or the 1984 audiobook, etc, are nothing like a Reader's Digest regurgitation.