“It seems a little excessive to find the politically correct censors at work on the delicious tales – beloved by children of all ages – from the mischievous pen of Roald Dahl” writes “The Gadfly” columnist ROBERT MACKLIN. 

IN a world where Hitler’s “Mein Kampf”, Mao’s “Little Red Book” and even poor old Karl Marx’s “Das Kapital” are available – unexpurgated – with a couple of strokes of the computer keys, it seems a little excessive to find the politically correct censors at work on the delicious tales – beloved by children of all ages – from the mischievous pen of Roald Dahl.

Or to put it another way: Can we please stop this bloody madness!

And, as it happens, our family has a very personal stake in the issue.

The publisher, Puffin Books, a division of the massive conglomerate Penguin Random House – with the permission of Dahl’s money-hungry estate – decided to make his stories “more inclusive and accessible”. 

Thus, in new editions of “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory”, Augustus Gloop is no longer “enormously fat” but just “enormous”. In “Witches”, a supernatural female is no longer “a cashier in a supermarket or typing letters for a businessman” but “a top scientist or running a business”. 

The terrible tractors in “The Fabulous Mr Fox” are no longer “black” but “murderous brutal-looking monsters”. This one really struck home. 

At a time when Australia is engaged in a great movement to proudly enjoin our first “black” countrymen within our great multicultural nation, how dare they suggest it’s a slur to be censored.

Little wonder that some of my fellow authors who are published by Penguin Random have sent very sharp protests to their company hierarchy.

But for our own Canberra children of Grade 3 Red Hill Primary School in 1986 it goes even deeper.

That was the year they had Mrs Wendy Macklin as teacher and each day after recess she would read them – with suitably dramatic “voices” – Roald Dahl’s “Witches”. 

They were entranced, especially, she says, by the oft’ appearances of the scary Witch herself. In fact, she claims to this day that Anjelica Huston channelled her in Huston’s stunning performance in the 1990 movie!

“The kids absolutely loved it,” she says. “And when we finished it, they each wrote a letter to Roald Dahl which I sent off to him with a note of thanks”.

She didn’t really expect a reply, but the writing was good practice for the class.

However, to hers and the children’s astonishment, a month later, he actually replied; and she’s kept the letter in its envelope from Gipsy House, Great Missenden, Buckinghamshire among her treasures:

“Hello gorgeous Wendy,” he wrote “and all the clever children in Grade 3. Thank you so much for sending your lovely letters”.

Dear children, far across the sea

How good of you to write to me.

I love to read the things you say,

When you are miles and miles away.

Young people, and I think I’m right,

Are nicer when they’re out of sight.

He signed it, in crayon, “With love from ROALD DAHL”.

Now, no one is suggesting that Dahl is some perfect exemplar of correctness in the many and varied ethical challenges of our imperfect world where multitudinous religious, racist and nationalistic prejudices bedevil us all. As Salman Rushdie noted: “Roald Dahl was no angel, but this is absurd censorship”.

It is indeed. But more than that, it is a wicked attack on a writer’s hard-won artistry, his gift to posterity, and to the delight of generations of children yet to come.

How dare they.

robert@tobertmacklin.com