Ian Fleming's 007 Books censored - My thoughts

[@227060]

I honestly, truly, deeply believe censorship like this is utterly evil.There is no excuse. 1984 *specifically* warned people NEVER to do this.

[@Craig_N]

If people can't look at something and realize its a "product of it's time" then they aren't smart enough to entitle them to complain.

[@mania4270]

Even at the time his books received criticism for their racist depictions of other cultures. It's not that ppl get offended, it's more so cringey. That's what a lot of you guys miss, most of that shit takes you out of the book because it's so cringe

[@georgemckenna462]

@@mania4270 Using words like "cringey" says it all. You're obviously not ready for young adult reading, let alone adult reading about a brutal bygone era and the people who had to live in it. Stick to pablum that would be given the seal of approval by your piers. Then gradually work your way up through young reader books, say Nancy Drew Mysteries, then maybe Goose Bumps. In time you will have developed a little intestinal fortitude. Before to long you'll be ready to take a real look at a world where people had to communicate without cell phones or live through video games, actually face to face!!! Yikes!!! Sorry, maybe I was going a little too fast there...

[@mania4270]

@@georgemckenna462 I hope you aren't implying that Bond books that are found in children's libraries are for adults lol. And dude chill, why rant? You clearly have some built in rage. Also it's funny how you talk about communicating with out cell phones and yet here you are communicating with using a cell phone. Lay off the crack buddy.

[@LongTail8443]

Agree, It's not about Old vs New. Oh gosh, why we have so many morons.

[@ryanjenkins6899]

@@mania4270what takes me out of the book is when its not the actual book that was written. I can’t imagine the kind of self righteous person who would think it’s their place to say what words should and shouldnt be allowed in a book.

[@ben8447]

I think they should release the originals as they were and then they should release "The Snowflake Collection" when people offended by their own shadow can read the books without any threat to their sensibilities.

[@frankb821]

I don't think too many of these folks gravitated to Bond in the first place

[@treystephens6166]

I can’t believe this hasn’t happened sooner.

[@julianblake3140]

I wonder what these ‘sensitivity readers’ would make of Shakespeare- eg Othello, Merchant of Venice etc

[@KasumiRINA]

@@julianblake3140 Othello is not called N-word, at all. He IS called... black... one time I think? The play isn't racist at all, and the only character who teases Othello for not being white is the main villain. Also there are MANY modern updates to Shakespeare because original is not in modern English and hard to read. Both him and Fleming used the word "gay" to mean "fun", which isn't censored or anything, just confusing for modern reader... because language changes. But yeah keep getting offended. Changing the books (apart from I guess chapter titles), is dumb BTW, but films did it way worse... Can't really be triggered by books changing a few words where movie completely changed several lesbians to be straight just not to offend your heterosexual male gentle feelings. DX

[@julianblake3140]

@@KasumiRINA I know Othello is not a racist play but some of the characters other than Iago use unpleasant racial slurs eg Desdemona’s father the Venetian senators etc. FYI am not a heterosexual.

[@robertharvey2604]

Completely agree that they should just release the books with disclaimers/forwards expressing their thoughts and concerns.

[@DoctorQuackenbush]

I don't think that there should be disclaimers. Have you ever watched a movie or TV show and realized that you didn't like it? What did you do? Did you lobby station, the theatre, or the producer to include a disclaimer or just turn it off?

[@Alabenson]

I definitely agree with this. I'm actually familiar with the books and they had stuff in them that was a little iffy even by the standards of when they were written, but you have a forward giving fair warning and let people make their own judgements as to whether they can handle it. What you don't do is try to sanitize the past for the sake of a bunch of overly sensitive snowflakes.

[@alexlocatelli2876]

Exactly, once the book's been edited, what's the point of even putting the disclaimer. 😂

[@ColonelSkrammel]

Very well argumented & insightful look on this whole topic. It is so sad to see that we're now on this slippery slope down censorship lane, where the mantra is "Let's just edit or delete what offends us" instead of putting on a disclaimer on things like this "Hey this XYZ thing was a product of it's time & times have changed, soo here is this disclaimer. Consumer discretion is advised"

[@neiltaylor6645]

If you are going to be offended then DO NOT READ THEM

[@Raul-nv7rr]

Exactly! 👤

[@remybien3277]

The next Bond villain should be a dude in their moms basement telling everybody on the internet how offended they are about everything in life

[@CaminoAir]

🤣

[@treystephens6166]

I don’t see this world getting better anytime soon ..

[@thejamesbondshow9754]

@@treystephens6166 take a stand against the woke madness and never back down, only then things will change.

[@KasumiRINA]

So, a typical KZbin commentator like you? Or someone who makes videos about being offended like this one?

[@treystephens6166]

@@KasumiRINA James Bond OO7 is never offended ‼️

[@jamiemitchell6883]

I agree with what you said. I do not believe in editing work without the authors okay. The text is the text, for better or worse. For me, it is not just a Bond thing, but just another small part of editing history. History is meant to be scrutinised and evaluated not taken away by those who deem it so.

[@thepenultimateninja5797]

The type of people they are pandering to aren't buying Fleming's books anyway.

[@mohammedashian8094]

Exactly same as bud light same as Gillette the people that they pandered never even bought or will buy the product and they’ll just end up losing a lot of money

[@shettrick]

Well researched, fair, and thought-out response

[@ravingrays248]

Reminds when they removed bond smoking in the films after it was discovered that smoking caused lung cancer, so they upped the sexuality this was during the Moore era, so after aids broke out, there was a big concern over bonds sexual activity so when Dalton became bond they toned down the sex & reintroduced bond smoking again trade one dangerous activity for another go figure.

[@KasumiRINA]

Dalton Bond was closest to novels in spirit though: USSR is big bad, the gory shark attack, the... "Corrector". They aged so well! Now Craig films are the best. Less movie gadgets, more introspection, some hand-to-hand fighting and women-actually-being-people thing that early movies forgot.

[@tcaudiobooks737]

@@KasumiRINA Pussy Galore and Tracy would like a word.

[@noahdanielg]

Looks forward to the next Bond story where she dissavows her toxic masculinity and celebrates her stunning and brave transition!

[@coolbell1]

People are MENTAL. the fact a Dutch guy has to talk sense in his non native language says it all

[@PhillipBicknell]

"History is written by the victor." So now you know who won!

[@grahameroberts8109]

A group should start amending the BIBLE!

[@CordlessCinema]

Last year I purchased the 2012 Thomas & Mercer edition of Fleming’s Bond works, beautiful looking pieces. Those seem to be pretty much the original text, if Chapter 5 of Live and Let Die is any indication. But I also have some of the 1965 paperbacks, those seem to be a little less offensive, again see Chapter 5. Point is I suppose that this isn’t the first time that the books have been abridged in order to be more palatable for certain readers, but I think it is pretty stupid how up in arms people get over works that reflect a certain period in history in some way. It’s not like we’re saying “hell yeah this is how it ought to be”, I mean most of us understand that these views are pretty outdated. But there’s no good in trying to erase it and pretend that it was never prevalent in wider society.

[@neiltaylor6645]

Funny how it was the Fleming publications who wanted to do this just in case they offended anyone first the books next the films 🙈 Ian is going to spin in his grave

[@KasumiRINA]

FIRST the books, THEN the films? Ian was already spinning alive when they picked a balding Scottish body builder for his suave spy with blue eyes... Movies completely censored Live and Let Die and Goldfinger, I mean, originals have Felix teaching bond on using N-word and then getting mutilated by sharks, and the other has most female characters being lesbians, before movies censored everything... let's not even start how they replaced USSR as the big villain in... half of them, with SPECTRE.

[@Fozzymandeus]

Live and Let Die is now four pages long.

[@Smokie_666]

I agree 100% and people should understand that changing the words or phrasing in a literary piece does not and cannot change how people thought and spoke at the time of it's publishing. I am and will be against censorship in any fashion. If people don't like what something says they have the freedom to read something else.

[@ethan_benfield]

looney tunes did a disclaimer without censoring anything, and everyrone was fine with that.

[@Kikefriki]

If there's one thing highly sensitive and easily offended people should read, it's the adventures of a cold, ruthless killer who has sex with everything that moves and drinks alcohol like it's water.

[@DutchBondFan]

😂

[@treystephens6166]

I wish I could be like James Bond OO7.

[@toddgermain3858]

I think you are right about a disclaimer being sufficient and if they were really serious they could even get academics/Bond fans with an understanding of race and gender studies to write a forwards discussing each book's context and what it reflects about the period generally, the culture of clandestine services during the Cold War, the author himself, and even Bond as a character set in that era. Partially censoring the work just seems like they missed the point entirely and wanted an easy fix.

[@KasumiRINA]

The thing is, Live and Let Die is absolutely on point with racial attitudes at the time. It's great... Goldfinger, however, is horrible in how comically racist Bond is to Koreans, and his take on lesbians, which can't be fixed by changing terms around BTW. So they decided to change the thing that was already filled with anti-racism message (also Diamonds are Forever has surprisingly sensitive take on a sexual assault victim) but decided to keep the WTF was about "curing lesbianics by being a dick" in Goldfinger.

[@henrykujawa4427]

My best friend, a longtime comic-book reader, once asked me, "Would you ever update your stories to the modern day?" I was flabbergasted. I could only reply by asking him... "WHY??????????" When I see people complain that something is "dated", I know I'm dealing with idiots. EVERYTHING is "dated", because everything is created during a certain point in time. To complain about it is to exhibit a total LACK of interest in history. When I saw the title of this video, I thought, "Wouldn't they have to eliminate the ENTIRE novel "Live And Let Die"?" 🤣Until quite recently, it was the only novel I ever read TWICE! That should tell anyone how much I enjoyed it. I've been reading recently about how many of Jules Verne's novels would up mutilated for generations due to REALLY BAD English translations. They would change names, cut things out, and even ADD whole passages that Verne never wrote in the first place. Apparently, it's only in the last 30 years that "better", more "faithful" translations have been available. I wonder how much I was missing? But there's also a rather infamous bit of "political correctness" censorship. I read Verne's "20,000 Leagues Under The Sea" in the late 80s, and was shocked to find there was NO explanation for who Captain Nemo was anywhere in the book. He was left a complete cipher. Much-later, I found out why. When Verne wrote the novel, he had Nemo on a crusade against the Russian Navy. It was revealed that Nemo was actually "Count Andre Dakkar", a POLISH Prince who'd been betrayed by the Russians in a real-life incident in history. To me, this is the sort of thing that should inspire people to read up on history and expand their knowledge, as, I'm sure, Verne would have wanted. However, at the time, France was allies with Russia, and Verne's editor felt it might hurt sales in Russia. In frustration, Verne REMOVED all references from the book. Years later, while writing a book inspired by "Robinson Crusoe"-- "The Mysterious Island"-- Verne's editor got on his nerves again, saying it was too dull, and needed spicing up. So Verne went back and added an aging, dying Captain Nemo to the end of the story, revealing that he was an Indian Prince who'd been involved in an uprising against the British. The French hated the British, so that was "OKAY"! Finding out only this year that this was added very late in the writing, "explained" why the dates mentioned in the 2 books totally-conflict with each other. If you go by the dates, it appears BOTH novels take place at the same time, and the "sequel" actually begins years before the earlier book even starts. I don't know if the original, unedited text still exists or not, but, if it does, someone should do a new edition of "20,000 Leagues" with Verne's ORIGINAL text restored intact. (Readers could then just ignore the "sequel", since when he began writing that, it wasn't meant to have any connection with the earlier book.) Crazy enough, someone in Hollywood must have known about this, because the 1927-1929 MGM epic, "THE MYSTERIOUS ISLAND" (which has absolutely nothing to do with the book of that name!) serves as a "prequel" to "20,000 Leagues", and involves a fictional eastern-European country, "Hetvia", which starts out as a monarchy, but is then taken over by a gang of MURDEROUS CRIMINALS, while "Count Dakkar" simply wants to work on scientific exploration from his island base, where everyone is treated as equals. That movie effectively works as a thinly-disguised allegory for Czarist Russia, the 1918 Democratic Revolution, and the 1918 Bolshevik Revolution 2 WEEKS later that prevented the country from becoming a democracy. I'm re-reading a whole set of stories I wrote back in the 1990s, in anticipation of re-writing them from "full script" to "short story/novel" format. There are COUNTLESS cultural references in them to things and events from 1992, they really are a "time capsule", and I would NEVER consider changing any of them, since, the stories take place IN 1992. It would be idiotic to "update" them, since the present day is very different from how it was back then.

[@hydro1096]

I love how almost EVERYONE in the Bond KZbin community has said that editing the novels is a bad idea

[@spenser9908]

Except for Calvin's weak response.

[@hydro1096]

@@spenser9908 I forgot about that

[@racheljackson4428]

@@spenser9908 please respect other people's opinions.

[@magicmagicman]

By all means put a warning at the start of the book but i disagree with censorship in literature.

[@spotlightonthestars]

Thoroughly agree with you here! It's like going to a work of art, say like van Gogh, and then being like "well that offends me" and painting over it, it's not yours to do with as you wish, you are ruining a work of art! Classic books, such as the Bond series, should not have to adapt for us but rather we should, (when reading it), adapt to the books, you can not just pick and choose which bits you like and remove bits you don't, you have to take it as a whole. And if you don't like it, well then, don't read it!

[@fabiobaumberger97]

Dear DutchBondFan, I agree with your point about the disclaimer. I sometimes read one of Fleming's books in class (Thunderball or Live and Let Die), and we always have lively discussions about the racist and sexist portayals in the book. Most students believe that a disclaimer would be enought and that erasing such parts would not help anybody. The books reflect the thougts and opinions of a certain group of people of a certain era. I believe history is here to discuss it - not to sweep things under the carpet. If you just delete it, no-one will learn anything from it. By the way, I'll show your video when discussing Live and Let Die in some weeks ;-)

[@DutchBondFan]

Go for it! Man I wish we would discuss Bond books in class back when I studied! - Mind blowing to think this could be running in a classroom!

[@fabiobaumberger97]

@@DutchBondFan Your videos are great, I really enjoy the movie recaps and the "special" ones about Easter Eggs and the likes!

[@racheljackson4428]

@@DutchBondFan i'l try and find the OG James bond books as that IS what people are doing now in terms of censoring books.

[@babacalouche]

i dream to find something ( a book, a movie, a song , anything ) where the artist put a disclaimer stating that " if you're offended by this, then eat shit and die because i absolutely don't care " ...i'll buy this something immediately while listening to the screams of all the twatters...

[@lewisgoss5868]

Big fan of Ian Fleming's Novels here. I think that the fundamental plot of both Live and Let Die and You Only Live Twice are both troubling from a modern perspective on race. The Spy Who Loved Me reflects antiquated ideas about gender and sex, and Diamonds are Forever has it's gay assassins. It is hard to find a Bond outing from Fleming without something that might raise a concern. So read them or don't, the choice is in the hands of the reader.

[@thejamesbondshow9754]

Being antiquated doesn't make it wrong. Sexuality today is disgusting, half naked gay men parading down streets in choker chains and ass chaps is embraced by the lefty loons but Fleming stating gays suffer from a "stubborn disability" is homophobic or wrong is bad!! Fleming was 100% correct, one just needs to listen to guys speak about when they started to believe they were gay and you'll soon see Fleming got it right. These young people today need a Bible and Christian/religious education but instead their bombarded with filth and depravity.

[@KasumiRINA]

Diamonds are Forever has a really well-written, careful take on loving a sexual assault victim. Bond is uncomfortable about knowing Tiffany Case's backstory from third party (his briefing), and doesn't know how to mention-or ignore it-and _waits_ for her to confide, and just lets her talk, and says that he knows that... without judging, just accepts her with all the trauma (she has survivor's guilt). He's not pushy at all, though 007 did got jealous for no reason, and actually _apologizes and admits he was wrong._ Really, a man who waits, cares about girl's feelings, and _ADMITS HIS MISTAKES_ in a JAMES BOND story? The next book she dumps him for some soldier from USA, and he _says its his own fault_ for being married to a job. They do end in good terms, and James jokes that "mixed" marriages (wasn't planning to leave her) between English and Americans don't work. Later in Goldfinger he cures lesbianics by being manly. WHAT. Honestly, I didn't find much objectionable stuff in early books. Hell, Bond's respecting women much more than in the movies, goes FURIOUS about a wife-beater, and _doesn't make the first move_ on Dr. No girl to not be predatory. He doesn't even slut-shame Honey from wanting to become a call-girl, nor he has anything against her life-long ambition being a nose job (lets woman have agency over her own body), though Bond tries to explain to her it might not the most practical career choice and helps her set herself up in the big city via his connections. Kinda respectful... then the next book comes. I _probably_ missed the gay assassins part in Diamonds since it treats women like humans... Goldfinger though, it's like a different author wrote it... did a gay Korean woman piss in Ian Fleming's coffee? xD It's HORRIBLE. Though the most offensive thing there is calling karate a branch of judo lmao.

[@henrykujawa4427]

@@KasumiRINA THANK YOU so much for this post. I recall very much liking "Diamonds" when I read it-- in the early 70s-- never minding that it was clearly a "minor" story. I thought Tiffany was terrific. There's about 5 minutes in the movie where we first see Jill St. John where I thought she captured her personality perfectly. THEN, the rest of the movie jumps right off a cliff, and she's a MORON for the rest of the film. So many who I bet NEVER read the books insist Bond was "violent & sexist & humorless". But when EON started their series, they deliberately set out to create their own new and different version of Bond that had very little to do with the books. Connery's Bond was a SEXUAL PREDATOR. I think of how hilarious it was when he had sex with Miss Taro-- while checking his watch, since he had already called the cops and wanted to make sure he had time before they arrived. I was stunned the other week to see a scene JUST like this in the film "THE LONE WOLF IN LONDON" with Gerald Mohr-- 15 years EARLIER. And Mohr's whole attitude & persona in that reminds me of Connery, except for the accent. As for Honey, in the book SHE was chasing HIM-- but he kept pushing her off, as he had a dangersous job to do. This was the complete reverse of the movie. What really cracks me up... in the books, Honey was my favorite Bond girl. Ursula Andress, who I've found VERY attarctive in several other movies (like WHAT'S NEW PUSSYCAT), "did nothing" for me in DR. NO. But-- my favorite Bond movie girl was one most dismiss-- "Bibi Dahl" in FYEO. How did it take me decades to realize that Bibi's personality was the closest the films ever got to the "Honey" of the books? That whole film was a love letter to Fleming, after the 70s had completely ignored his work. "Yes, well, you get your clothes on, and I'll buy you an ice cream." A good friend of mine told me he saw the movie with a friend of his nick-named "Crazy Charlie". When Roger Moore uttered that line, Charlie yelled out in the theatre... "OH MAN!!! HE'S NOT GONNA F*** HER!!!!" (That's still one of the funniest stories I've ever heard.)

[@Eeyesablous]

I mean, no one would introduce changes to such works, like Mona Lisa, Van Gogh's Starry Night, and others? So why should they mess with Fleming's books? Seriously ppl nowadays have a serious problem distancing themselves from this. Tbh, I think it would be great if Bond fans could gather up and try to make a petition to stop this.

[@DutchBondFan]

I think there is one actually!

[@Eeyesablous]

@@DutchBondFan also me watchingthe first secs of the video: _TotallynotmewonderinghowtogetmonetotgetallthebooksIhavenotreadbeforethenewoneswillbereleased_

[@les4767]

The woke know no limits. Give 'em time and they WILL attempt to change the Mona Lisa, Van Gogh's Starry Night and others after they run out of even remotely offensive material to complain about.

[@domino341]

@@DutchBondFan Can you direct me to it please?

[@KasumiRINA]

@@les4767 you're the only ones getting offended and doing some WEIRD white knighting for Mona Lisa... ffs, what's up with pretending someone wants to attack her? Miles Bron is FICTIONAL. xD

[@kalamar2]

just finished reading "Live and let die" as these news were breaking, it was hilarious. keeping a piece of art as a product of his time is priceless, it forcely contains in-for-ma-tion in silent eloquence, and the mistakes on Fleming's language should be seen as a VALUE. completely agree, being offended feels like a priviledge nowadays, and i see the same arrogancy in the sensitive people as in the publishers, who treat Fleming as if he was a screenwritter, a kind of William Holden in Sunset Boulevard. the Netflix Syndrome. many people talks prophetically about the novel "1984", but it's Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" what comes to my mind when i look at the present and future we are choosing. congrats for the channel, i can play your reviews as easily as i watch a Bond title. saludos de Zamora, España.

[@SjoerdBSUFC]

Very clear and well spoken post on what is a difficult topics. I would agree with removing/changing the N word (as was done for instance for Agatha Christie's "ten little n'ers" which has been changes a couple of times) and adding a disclaimer about outdated cultural depictions is fine. Other than that, I agree with you that any more changes are censoring and destroying the author's work, just like it was proposed for Roald Dahl's books. They have come back on that for Roald Dahl so who knows, might come back on it for Bond as well...

[@mahalaps3]

Those censoring and editing classic books are the same ones calling parents bigots for demanding sexualuzed books to be removed from SCHOOL libraries. 🙃

[@thecinematicguy]

Well thoughtout and great video! I laughed out during your intro when you showed footage from Dr No showing the ‘danger!’ Sign. Well put 😂 I cannot help but be frustrated that the censorship seems to be focused and not universal. Apparently this censorship had no problem with the non-pc descriptions of Japanese people and culture (You Only Live Twice) or Oddjob (Goldfinger) being more animal than human at times with some racist / ethnic slurs…

[@henrykujawa4427]

It's "okay" to make fun of Oddjob. At least in the movie, actor Harold Sakata was a pro wrestler ("Tosh Togo"). There's a NIGHT COURT about pro wrestling, where the always-obnoxious Dan Fielding says, "Hey, you don't usually see something like that without a YOKE attached." When the wrestler (played by Lou Ferrigno) looks at him annoyed, Dan says, "I JOKE. Ask anybody."

[@KasumiRINA]

@@henrykujawa4427 Oh the movie censored EVERYTHING. The book Goldfinger, Bond is comparing _all_ Koreans to apes, _unfavorably,_ and Erno Goldfinger (the villain) streotypes them as cruellest, most ruthless people in the world. It's the style of racism Japan used in WW2, which he praises (though again, this is the villain's words). Same book has Bond voice his (Fleming points out it's 007's thoughts just in case) take on lesbians being result of _giving votes to women_ and later "cures" one, and not even by being caring or something, but simply by acting macho... then sends her to prison. Oddjob's not a pro-wrestler either, but... wait for this stupidity: Goldfinger said, 'Have you ever heard of Karate? No? Well that man is one of the three in the world who have achieved the Black Belt in Karate. Karate is a branch of judo...' I don't think this can be really fixed. It's _just stupid._ In fact, Goldfinger's racism is so bad, it crosses the line twice at how horribly ignorant he is on everything Asian and it makes it funny when you laugh at the racist, and not with him. But again, this is mostly the villain speaking. Bond IS racist to Oddjob and other Koreans in general, though for the latter, he obviously insults him to provoke. The original books don't have 007 being racist to black people, and even includes a passage where Leiter schools him on not using the N-word, probably has to do with Ian Fleming living in Jamaica and it would be rather torturous doing that while indulging in racism. But to Asians? Boi: "Bond intended to stay alive on his own terms. Those terms included putting Oddjob and any other Korean firmly in his place, which, in Bond's estimation, was rather _lower than apes in the mammalian hierarchy."_ SO yeah you can't really anti-Asian bigotry from some later books without completely changing most of them. Which the movies DID. Same with making everyone straight, though that wasn't the best way to deal with Cement Mixers and Tilly.

[@tcaudiobooks737]

@@KasumiRINA Fun fact: James Bond is not a very nice man. In fact he kills people. Is being a bit mean to Asians worse than killing people?

[@torkelsvenson6411]

I say change it as much as you want as long as the original versions are still available. Books are released in different editions all the time.

[@1AstralKing]

You’re living in 1984 - and it’s so much worse.

[@andrewchapman4267]

I think you have it spot on here. I have the collection of Bond books published about 15-20 years ago and they already contain a foreword by another author or journalist each time, which among other thing such as aspects of the plots and characters, addresses issues with Fleming's portrayal of non-white people, homosexuality etc. This to me is the better way to deal with it. That being said, as long as the original versions are freely available, that is the most important thing. If people want those they will buy them and ignore the censored versions.

[@juxta_]

I am so glad that I have been able find my Bond books in second hand bookstores. I wonder what they will plan to sensor next 🙄

[@workaholica]

Totally on your page. Some day, they'll redact Goethe because depicting a poodle as the devil is deemed too offensive.

[@ebardog2048]

The latest Spanish edition of "Live and Let Die" (editorial Roca, 2023) has changed fifth chapter title, which is now "Seventh Avenue", but at least it maintains the now censored dialogue between the couple from Harlem.

[@CaminoAir]

How about removing the character of Bond entirely from the novels, given he says and thinks offensive and discriminatory things at times. I believe this will eliminate the root cause of the problem and we could all then enjoy the Fleming novels with peace of mind. Seriously though, in one hundred years from now will the 25 existing Bond movies be only available in re-edited versions to suit contemporary audience opinions? Will the Fleming novels be revised regularly over the coming decades? Most YT Bond reviewers I've watched in the last few days have been in agreement that a simple disclaimer (just as you yourself pointed out) stating the books are of their time would have been adequate.

[@ahatt96]

Having read the Bond books over the last few years, with plans to reread them again this year, I can agree that there is plenty of parts which are dated and make me cringe when reading them (Live and Let Die in fact was the book which cemented my dislike for people trying to write how an accent sounds like instead of just saying what the accent is), but bringing in sensitivity readers just makes me roll my eyes because it's a gamble on what they will find offensive. While I can easily understand people being uncomfortable with the various use of slurs and not wanting to read the books for that reason, I find the announcement of changes to be a scummy marketing trick to draw interest in the books. I also think it is no coincidence that they announced this not long after the Roald Dahl backlash and panic buying of the original book copies. It just seems like a way to drum up controversy and sell more books to people who wouldn't be interested otherwise and that upsets me because while I do enjoy book Bond and would like to see more interest in it, I don't want that interest to come from culture war nonsense, but rather from a genuine interest in the Bond character and his origins. On a more minor note, I do find that the attitudes expressed help characterize book Bond as someone who has many faults and is influenced by his time as most people are. It's one of those things that will be very hard to work around and it just seems like a lot of work for what will likely be little reward. I really like your take on the author being the one who should approve changes. When they say that they are changes Ian would have wanted, it just comes off as scummy because he has been dead for so long and despite Bond being well known to the general public, Ian himself had somewhat faded into the background so most people won't even be aware of his thoughts so unless he had written some notes on changes he'd want to the text, unlikely because nobody had cared for this long, this claim is just putting words into a dead man's mouth. All that said, thank you for your take. I've seen so many videos popping up sensationalizing the situation, but this one takes an actual look into the issue without all the bombast, something which has sadly become a rarity over the years.

[@qomz8791]

the removal of descriptive words will now give way to generations who will be unable to read or write properly.

[@Micahtron2000]

I think this is being done in anticipation of the next round of Bond movies to be made. Live and Let Die is the second novel and got the most edits from what I hear.

[@frankb821]

God I hope not, but you're probably right

[@tcaudiobooks737]

"James Bond was always a trans woman of colour, it said so in Ian Fleming's novels".

[@jimmyviaductophilelawley5587]

I haven't read Live and Let Die in a while but I mostly recall the N-word as being "Negro" for the most part?

[@DutchBondFan]

That's right

[@jimmyviaductophilelawley5587]

@@DutchBondFan Well look on the bright side...the value of all PROPER James Bond Books can only shoot up in value 🤣🤣

[@shettrick]

Well, as noted by DutchBondFan, Chapter 5 has the far more offensive N-word as the title of the Chapter

[@JOSH-lw2jv]

Here's an idea of future video: *The Infamous Early TV Cuts of 007* where some of the early Bond films - instead of getting an Extended TV Cut with deleted scenes added back in - not only had scenes removed for censorship purposes, but some of the films were re-edited in non-sensical fashion. Here's 3 examples: *Goldfinger* started the opening title sequence immediately after Bond successfully blew up the heroin lab. *You Only Live Twice* starts in outer space, then cuts to Bond "dead" in bed, opening credits & song, and then; BOOM, cuts right back in outer space! Plus, after Bond gets gunned down, it suddenly jump cuts to his funeral. *OHMSS* has been re-edited as a two-parter, but Part One began with 007 escaping from Piz Gloria and later rescued by Tracy with the film being told in flashback. A voice narration (NOT by George Lazenby himself!) was added as well.

[@sonjaisaacs1200]

I don't approve of racism, homophobia or bigotry in any form but I also don't approve of censorship in any form! This stuff is BS!

[@paulwillard9687]

Orwell warned of this censorship

[@yesdollyhadbraces7442]

Will they come after the movies next?

[@FlorisYoung]

Let's pray that won't happen

[@Cheesegrater09]

I got my first bond book Octopussy and the living daylights before this hope they don’t change this because they think pussy is offensive to women what bond book should I get next?

[@spaceodds1985]

Hey Dutch… Fleming publications should take a leaf out of a song from your country’s famous band… NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO Honestly the disclaimer should be enough, and people should learn the history about the time period when these books were written. Rewriting an authors words… a dead authors words mind you, is censorship and one sided censorship at that. Doesn’t matter what side of the political spectrum you are, rewriting and erasing history is wrong not to mention it prolongs the bitterness, resentment and anger that is human nature,and is the first step towards totalitarianism, a movement that doesn’t work for anyone (just look at Russia now) I’m sorry, but having a parent who was born to a totalitarian dictatorship that promoted so called proletarianism and for said parent and child witness this form of censorship is maddening and tragic.

[@DutchBondFan]

2Unlimited! Haha 😂 And yeah lots of fans seem to be on the same page her luckily! Important to all band together 💪🏻

[@IanSparrow]

Very educated opinion.

[@nicholaswalker2494]

Well said how many times is the “N”word used in rap songs,these people have to get a life.

[@DutchBondFan]

And in rap they often even use the more offensive variant of the word at that...

[@randelbrooks]

plumbing was honest and right in everything he wrote, and that’s why we like these books, no apologies. And it’s some point in the future all the original ratings are going to be perfectly normal again anyway. Political correctness is not going to last forever and the people who push it are not going to last forever either.

[@sirpizo555]

I'm a few books in and was going to get the reissued 2023 collection...Glad I watched this before doing so! Guess I'll find secondhand copies to complete my 2012 issue set

[@jameslong3509]

I’m curious about one thing because of languages. When Live and Let Die is shown in The Netherlands, is there a translation for the word “honkey” in Dutch? Or does it stay with that word because there’s no equivalent ? Bond is called that three times in Harlem because he’s caucasian (“White face in Harlem”) and it’s a black town. “Honkey” is the equivalent of the “n” word! It’s not because your Dutch (though ironic it’s in Harlem) but because of the dubbing and translations when shown in non-Anglosphere territories

[@DutchBondFan]

I don't remember that word being in the book! And I read it not to long ago!

[@KasumiRINA]

Wait you're offended at them swapping around some N-words but not by movies completely rewriting entire stories, censoring adult content and changing USSR to some random mythical enemy to appease Soviets? Or for covering up breasts of the girl in Dr. No? Or by actually ALREADY censoring Live and Let Die to no end? I'd like to see which scenes they changed BTW, because removing Bond being chastised by Leiter for using N-word won't make it less racist, though am not sure if that's what's changed. BTW, Bond is not racist to black people otherwise than not knowing one word that became taboo since last time he was in US, however, he is EXTREMELY racist to Koreans in Goldfinger, and (author points "Bond thought so") absolutely horrible to lesbians (there's two in the book, which movie OF COURSE censored, why not take issue with movies being censored?)... If they kept 007 being a prick there but just changed some titles from N-word drive to a more acceptable word, it's much ado about nothing. Really. Relax. They can't really butcher Fleming any more than the movies already did.

[@DutchBondFan]

3:22

[@davider6884]

I don't know enough about the novels to share a long opinion on this. I'm also honestly not really interested in them too... But long story short, I am pissed too... However, it is just normal that time moves. We are not 70 years ago. A LOT of stuff was different back then from today's world... Ranging from politics to certain forms of racism or sexism to financial stuff and so on... A lot of which has changed for the better today. But tampering with a deceased author's work is plain insulting... Even if some stuff that he wrote 70 years ago might be offensive today. A disclaimer should be fine. And if that disclaimer still doesn't help the people who are sensitive, maybe just put the book down. And if all sensitive stuff gets removed, we can't teach our future kids what the world once looked like, or at least it will be much harder. It might not be long before professionals are hired to edit out sexist or racist scenes from old movies. Which, granted, does have an advantage in a certain way for the people who are sensitive to it. But tampering with a movie, a book or a game or anything by changing its content should never be done by anybody without approval of the creator. Essentially, they're using Fleming's death here to tamper with HIS art all while being completely unbothered by doing so. And that I honestly think should be punishable by law...

[@QuorkEx]

Why ban or burn books when you can rewrite them? I doubt that things will stop here. Eventually, the novel live and let die will be about 10 pages long. I must admit, I am very disappointed with Lucy and Kate Fleming.

[@mikejacoby4311]

I find it shameful that someone would edit another person's work. That opens up a giant can of worms as well. Where will it end? Are they going to go back and change everything that came out 50+ years ago? Are they going to edit the Bond films as well? If someone is offended by the themes or language from that era, there's a simple solution: just don't watch, read, listen, etc.

[@BadSodaProductions]

I’m really glad I went out of my way to get the whole 2008 Penguin run when I did

[@mushypeeze3545]

They should just ignore the wokians and the bemoners and stop trying to change history. Who gives a sh*t if someone gets offended?

[@sonjakrohn4303]

Well said! One hundred percent agree with you. So glad I have an old set of all the books. They’ll be ‘sensitivity reading’ Shakespeare next! Hold on to your Complete Works - heaven knows how they will desecrate that!

[@FlorisYoung]

I agree with you, I think they’re just altering history. And i agree that these books can’t be released today. But editing books from 70 years ago is like changing paintings from Rembrandt because that was painted in a time when slaves were still common.

[@moffjendob6796]

I mean, the Dahl books are for kids. They should keep the originals, too. But Fleming's... not for kids. :P Older children, perhaps, but not the elementary school library. And so they should be left intact with disclaimers, as others have noted. After all, the books are products of their times.

[@mohammedashian8094]

He literally said in an interview that they were meant for and I quote “warm blooded heterosexual adults.” And that they’re not meant for school boys

[@anonymanynomsen6034]

This is absolutely preposterous. I think it's hugely disrespectful to the original author and intent of the books. Who are these "sensitivity readers" to decide what the rest of us should or shouldn't read? They don't have the right to play God with words that were written over 70 years ago. I for one will never buy such a "tampered-with" book, ever... On that note, does anyone know how to buy the older James Bond books? Not necessarily the originals, but those that have been released decades ago?

[@HowardWeber]

Howard Weber says > All I can say is am I glad I grew up in the 1950`s and 1960`s. I`m 71 now and I think the world has gone fucking nuts.

[@agentøøasmr]

Agreed!! Would these same sensors go through all the rated R movies, take out all the offensive language and content, and make the movies more acceptable for a larger audience? No. So why this?

[@DutchBondFan]

Lets hope that stays that way with the movies...

[@isaacixtupe8983]

I hope I can find these books without edits

[@treadstone1970]

Nothing at all wrong with Live and Let Die chapter 5. Was of its time.

[@spencerkindra8822]

The disclaimer is the absolute maximum the publishing companies should do. We're not changing Ian Fleming's writing to make the people who are offended by everything happy.

[@hotkeyafl]

Changing the books is the lamest cowardly thing they could do. At least some of us have the old copies to keep forever.

[@MrPeterpat]

A previous video on this topic said this is the publishers' new way of promoting their books. A bit like Search Engine Optimisation for books. And I do think that people that would feel offended with the original books aren't going to sit and read the new books anyway.

[@SpookyDollhouse]

It's not actually about "protecting children" or "changing societal attitudes" but people who essentially want to control what art we can and cannot engage with. If the language in a book bothers you then you put down the book. The fact there's people who do not question content watchers and roll right along with it is terrifying.

[@thatdude5353]

I can understand warning and in some cases censored/replacing certain words but at some point it just needs to be acknowledged that the book was a product or it’s time. It’s going to get to the point where films(like the godfather) with use of slurs or other offensive language will be censored and removed.

[@samuelsrozentals5663]

Great video! I 100% agree!

[@huupper]

Hi DBF, could you do a video on Max Otto von Stierlitz, the Soviet equilevant to Bond? Would be fascinating.

[@ianscorey5293]

Wokeness at its very best!!!!! They never rewrote Uncle Tom’s Cabin!!!! Fortunately I’ve got all the original first edition Fleming books with original dust covers!!!! I won’t be getting the twink out and changing the sentences!!! Totally support your opinion!!!! Well done cousie Bro!!!! Regards Ian 👨‍🎤🇳🇿

[@CRITTERBUSTERS]

Excellent video and you’re absolutely right, perseveration of Authenticity is what it’s all about. The disclaimer in the beginning of the novel would’ve been enough.

[@jamesgiallo2740]

I absolutely agree. People must accept art for what it is. Thank you for expressing your thoughts in a mainstream service.

[@emerybayblues]

How can people learn from history if we are erasing it?

[@mjhbuckeye]

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the term censor and censorship. Those are governmental actions removing content. Nobody is compelling the copyright holders to make alterations in a Fleming text, rather it is a rather crass, but voluntary commercial decision to make the books more marketable for present and future generations of readers. Much as one would be of the opinion that the only one who could make alterations is the author himself, that is not the way copyright law works. True, I find the explanation that this is what Ian would have wanted is complete hooey, but the actual reason is very practical. There is no obligation legal or otherwise once a book has been published that it remains in print, especially if its content of stylings makes it no longer commercially viable. As far as I can discern, none of the alterations have changed the plotting of any of the stories so what of removing some objectional characterizations which reflect poorly upon the both the author and his fictional characters when he puts such words in their mouths? I'm old enough to remember the outrage when the Revised Standard translation of the Bible started to replace the King James version in churches. Folks thought Jesus Christ was being altered as if the Gospel authors in the first century AD wrote in English circa 1600. Everybody should just relax. The literary Bond is still there, and the stories have not been changed.

[@ravingrays248]

God, why couldn't I have been born 90 years earlier so I could enjoy things in their originality and been long dead before the era of stupid cry babies began!

[@DutchBondFan]

Well, there's quite some other rough stuff that would happen in between 😝

[@ravingrays248]

I understand I'm a historian.

[@LicencetoWho]

That would mean however not getting to watch DutchBondFan... which would be a true crime👀

[@terenzo50]

I'm offended by how easily some people are offended. There's a publication date on every book. Learn some history before reading. All our ancestors were lunatics by today's standards, but censorship teaches nothing.

[@torkelsvenson6411]

And I must say it's interesting how they chose to replace some particular words but the part where he "cures" a lesbian by forcing himself on her was allowed to remain in.

[@spenser9908]

In the same way that movie novelisations have the "Junior novel" version, do the same for Bond and call it the "Snowflake version" and watch as they never leave the shelves.

[@georgemckenna462]

Don't buy books from crooks, or those who vandalize others work. I never thought it would happen, but this latest bunch of misguided nincompoop hipsters has made my old dog-eared stack of Ian Fleming books even more valuable. You'll see me haunting the used book stores for genuine originals. I shall be glad to one day give my treasures to my grandkids when they are old and wise enough to appreciate them.

[@samdryden7944]

This is a VERY slippery slope, and you are right to ask where does it end, and where is a line drawn. If we edit the past, how will we remember it, and be able to correctly judge it? Racism was such an integral part of society - Agatha Christie's work has quite a few derogatory terms in it (and most people give her a pass as "just a product of her times" which I don't wholly endorse). Disney are not editing their films - they are putting a disclaimer (and in a couple of cases, I can't even figure out what is offensive). That is the correct approach. I was shocked when I read the unedited Adventures of Tom Sawyer. If all I had was an edited text, how would I know Twain was so casual with the N word? Also, it's impossible to be 100% unoffensive, unless you reduce the text down to a kindergarten level. There's always going to be someone somewhere offended no matter what you write.

[@thejamesbondshow9754]

Ahhhhh Krazy Kajeevie was right again. Who said 3 years ago this would happen to the books!! Krazy Kajeevie did.... I'm making a video on this too..This is the trojan horse, wokeness, which I warned about years ago, to target Bond and anything male fantasy. Good to see you show some emotion and ticker here Jeroen, unlike your last video re EON should they sell the film rights, where you failed to really give your opinion. Good job here. Krazy

[@greatwuta]

Ian Fleming Publications are a complete joke and I hope they go broke

[@Trenegeut87]

what they have done is literally a crime

[@RedemptionDenied666]

This will keep happening to everything.

[@zoebrugg7594]

Are all the new 007 books censored? Which books can I get that aren't cancered.

[@Taiko206]

This is such a fool's errand in my opinion. What good is it to try and censor those books if so many prints of the original are out there and still read by people ? The only way they would succeed is if they track down every last copy, every last audio version and destroy it ! Because the way it is now, if they get rid of those "sensitivity readers" all there is to be done is just go back to the original versions of the books and that's that. Would be insane to try that anyway because if they even tried to track them down there's no way in Hell that the owners would just hand them over, especially not on the flimsy excuse of such books being "controversial" in some way. I can imagine that in a couple of years this whole thing blows over and people can enjoy the stories of Roald Dahl , Ian Fleming and who knows which other authors they gave this treatment, back to how they should be.

[@robertroberto2487]

Disclaim Censored To Sensitive Readers Reacting To Being Freaked Out Insecure Neurotic Emotional For The Bloody Readers.

[@kurtpalosaari4685]

Censorship of any kind is a damn shame.

[@tashrif46]

5:32 its almost people cannot grasp what Ian Fleming wanted and who was his target audience. Like James Bond was never ever meant for kids or other demographic. From the words of the author himself, they are meant for straight men. If you want thriller series books for other demographics, then make a new character. Its almost people are lazy and they are creatively bankrupt, so they just want ride the success of other franchises by throwing ideologies that does not fit that world at all.

[@Vanessinha91Pucca]

Offended by a 70 year old book? Just don't read it. What's next, no more meat Hamburgers so it wont offend Vegans?

[@Eeyesablous]

Come to think of it, it's fine if there is an "altered version" of the book, which would be sold alongside the original one. However, this should not mean that non-sensitive readers should be forced to read their version, only because they think it is offensive. Both versions of the book could be produced so both groups can enjoy it instead of imposing their standards on the rest.

[@dtuk22]

Just Don't but the product. Its the only way to make a difference. Only then when profits don't materialize things will change.

[@dtuk22]

*buy the product.