The CBB :: View topic - Are paperback cuts ever a good thing?

through

#1: Are paperback cuts ever a good thing? Author: Miriam, Location: Jerusalem, Israel

Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:50 pm
—
Just wondering what anyone else thinks about this.In most cases I think the cuts are a pity, and we lose depth of knowledge of the stroy and characters because of them. Just occasionally, however, I read a transcript and come across some incident that was cut out my Armada paberbacks, and I'm glad it wasn't there.

WARNING:
THIS MAY INCLUDE SPOILERS FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE ONLY READ THE PAPERBACKS.

One example that springs to mind is the chapter that was cut out of Ruey, about the lacrosse match. I know nothing about lacrosse, and it is arguable that someone who does would have found this chapter interesting, (if only to correct the errors EBD probably made), but when I read the transcript I was bored by that chapter. I really felt it was handled much better in the paperback where there were a couple of references to it in order to preserve continuity and then the book carried on with it's main plots. I imagine the majority of readers didn't know too much about lacrosse either, so maybe that was why it was cut?

Another example that I really hated when I first read the transcript of 'Coming of Age' was the time when some of the staff go down th Lake Thun, and Nancy Wilmot (I think) enters the wrong cubicle to get dressed after swimming and accidently pulls of some womans wig. That this is presented as a humourous incident just seems to me the worst example of bad taste across thae entier series. For something to be funny in the CS does not normally require embarssing someone else (as opposed to Mallory Towers, where humour is normally dependent on embarassing Mamzelle), and this just seems to me a really horrible example of luaghing at someone elses misfortune. I don't know if I would have found it funny as a child, but on reading it for the first time as an adult, I'm only glad that I didn't come across it younger.

What does anyone else think? Are there times when cuts are justified? Or are there any that weren't made that maybe would have been a good idea? (Given that her editor seemed to have been asleep on the job most of the time anyway.)

#2: Author: Katherine, Location: London, UK

Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:33 pm
—
Hmmm. I will generally rant against cuts but you are right about the lacrosse match. I was rather bored. As I also was by the contant talk of 'lax' all through the book. Wouldn't go for a complete cut but I think I could have handled some editing.

Another candidate for cuts might be the plays. I have to say my heart sinks when I realise it goes on for the whole chapter. However, to cut them out in their entirity would be wrong as they are an important part of the spirit of the school; they could just be a bit shorter.

I think it's an interesting question. Generally we all fall upon any cut bits and devour them and I love to read some of the bits that EBD undoubtably wrote, or at least thought about writing, that never made it into the HBs. Might flesh out some of those storyline/characters that just seem to peter out. However, we do have a tendency to regard whatever was in the HB as canon and not to be interfered with and it's easy to forget that there would have been all sorts of bits changed by her or her editor. Indeed the job of the editor is to change things. In some ways there is no definitve version, just the version that got published. in the same way that there is no definitive year for the Triplet's last term or the gap between Sybil and Josette (or <insert EBDisms ad nauseum>).

Please never cut a lovely Jo/Jack at home scene, I love those. Having said that. I've just been reading Kenya and the chapter where Joey hears on the radio about Jo Scott's parents going missing has a great long bit about Jo and Jack's radio and how they came to own it and how she gives radio parties. It's there to set up the story and to explain why they might be able to keep it from Jo for a bit, but it's a prime candidate for some editing!

ETA: Oh dear, just noted after all that, that I'm 'Learning to play Lacrosse'!

Last edited by Katherine on Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:25 pm; edited 1 time in total

#3: Author: dorian, Location: Dublin

Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:28 pm
—
I've only once come across a cut of an abridged book that I thought was justified, and that wasn't in a CS book. It was in "The Lost Prince" by Frances Hodgson Burnett - the Puffin edition loses a chapter full of very twee vaguely Eastern mysticism which, when I read it in the Project Gutenberg transcript, had me reaching for a sick-bag.

Admittedly, I don't have all that many unabridged CS books (less than a dozen), and several of them I have never seen the pb version of, so don't know what was cut. But in the ones where I have both versions, I much prefer the uncut versions (Jo of comes screaming to mind, as does Exile).

#4: Author: Alex, Location: Cambs, UK

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:10 am
—
Perhaps bits like the lacrosse (I haven't read the hardback) should have been edited out in the first place? We have no way of knowing to what extent EBDs work was edited before original publication. Some of the cutting is terrible thought, as if they just said this chapter is too long and then randomly removed 2 pages.

#5: Author: jennifer, Location: Taiwan

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:03 am
—
Given a choice I would keep the small, incidental mentions of minor characters, the historical context and original language and vocabulary, which is what is often edited out. I find editing those changes the flavour of the story - Lavender and Gay are prime examples, where the story isn't cut at all, but a lot of little details, like references to girls getting bombed out, are cut in the paperbacks.

The parts I wish they would have cut in the first place are the detailed descriptions of sports events (tennis, lacrosse), the detailed descriptions of the Christmas plays (including carols) and pantomimes, and the bits of history textbooks that are airlifted whole into the half term expeditions vaguely disguised as spontaneous conversations. How many thirteen year olds recite history lessons verbatim, and listen enthralled while others do so, during a bus ride to a weekend away? Rolling Eyes

I skip those parts on rereading.

I also like the periodic references to old girls and minor characters, as they give continuity over the series, although I can see why those would be edited out of an individual book.

I can also see why modern editors would change racist/non PC statements for a young audience, but I personally prefer that those be left in, warts and all, partially because they *are* startling to modern ears. It is interesting to notice just what is seen as innappropriate for modern audiences, though - mistresses smoking and the occasional use of phrases such as 'working like a nigger' are edited, while references to a villager being a 'regular peasant, slow, stupid and awkward' are left intact.

#6: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:33 am
—
One thing I found alarming was when I was reading the transcript of 'Theodora'.

When Jo was talking to Rosalie Dene about her in the rose garden, Jo was so rude about poor Ted's looks, especially her face, I felt that it was in really bad taste. And I also felt that it was two-faced of Jo to do it.

#7: Author: Joan the Dwarf, Location: Er, where am I?

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:19 pm
—

jennifer wrote:

and the bits of history textbooks that are airlifted whole into the half term expeditions vaguely disguised as spontaneous conversations. How many thirteen year olds recite history lessons verbatim, and listen enthralled while others do so, during a bus ride to a weekend away? Rolling Eyes

I skip those parts on rereading.

I really like those bits! I've always loved history as stories, and family holidays tended to be a bit like those bus journies when I was young. I would've loved it happening on a school trip as well!
(Mind you, I also learned a lot of my maths on family walks, so maybe I'm just a bit odd...)

#8: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:01 pm
—

jennifer wrote:

I skip those parts on rereading.

Er, I did

! I still do stuff like that on holiday sometimes - people probably go home and tell everyone about this weirdo they met whilst they were away Embarassed

#9: Author: Rachel, Location: West Coast of Scotland

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:37 pm
—

Joan the Dwarf wrote:

(Mind you, I also learned a lot of my maths on family walks, so maybe I'm just a bit odd...)

Heh heh heh - I taught my children algebra on a sandy beacj in Guernsey. The sand was crying out to be written on and algebra just happened to be the topic of conversation at the time.

#10: Author: patmac, Location: Yorkshire England

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:10 pm
—
I'm with the last few - I love history and my kids caught it from me. They are doing the same with their kids on holidays as well.

Generally though, some of the sports details and the plays etc., do come over as padding, though I think it's often that they don't relate to the main plot or are just plot devices to introduce a calamity.

#11: Author: Hannah-Lou, Location: Glasgow

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:58 pm
—
The only bit I can think of that it was a good idea to cut was the chapter in Highland Twins where something mysterious that never gets explained happens to Rosalie Dene. Also, it wouldn't be a bad idea to cut out Professor Richardson's special box that they found and couldn't open, since that doesn't get explained either (Jo and Co in Tyrol).

It's usually the really little bits that get cut that bother me, rather than the whole chapters. There was a lovely bit in Princess about Madge climbing trees that was cut, and there's a bit in one of the other Tyrol ones (probably Head Girl or Exploits) about how Madge was busy in the kitchen when the visitors arrived making toffee because she knows it's Jo's favourite. These are the bits that add to the background and atmosphere rather than the story, and I'm always sorry when they're cut.

#12: Author: Squirrel, Location: St-Andrews or Dunfermline

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:02 pm
—
I think it depends on my mood. The only thing I sometimes skip are the plays, but even with them there are times I read right though. I think I'd rather not have any cuts thanks - if I want to skip something I can do so, if I don't want to it's a bit of a pity if the scene is removed from the book.

#13: Author: JoS, Location: South Africa

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:04 pm
—
I'm in favour of minor cuts in respect of racism, smoking etc. But hate it when whole chapters/major parts are cut. One of the cuts which I can never understand is the chapter in three go where Gillian Linton meets Clem's godfather. That's lovely. In fact, one of the reasons why I buy hardbacks is to read the edited portions.

On plays - I too tend to skip these. But I like the sports' matches.

#14: Author: Dreaming Marianne, Location: Second star to the right

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:57 pm
—
I'm definitely in favour of well, fine tuning, Christmas plays. They just seem pretty biscuit cutter with Jo taking centre stage again (and again and again)

#15: Author: Sarah_K, Location: St Albans

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:14 pm
—
I find now I'm reading the uncut versions that the smoking really throws me out of the story because it's so unlikely in a modern children's story so I guess I'm glad they cut those bits or I may never have got quite so into the books.

Mostly though I prefer things to be left in, even the plays which I quite like Laughing

#16: Author: catherine, Location: Newcastle upon Tyne

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:37 pm
—

jennifer wrote:

The parts I wish they would have cut in the first place are the detailed descriptions of sports events (tennis, lacrosse), the detailed descriptions of the Christmas plays (including carols) and pantomimes, and the bits of history textbooks that are airlifted whole into the half term expeditions vaguely disguised as spontaneous conversations. How many thirteen year olds recite history lessons verbatim, and listen enthralled while others do so, during a bus ride to a weekend away? Rolling Eyes

I didn't mind the sport mentions but I do agree that the plays and expeditions could have done with some editing. It was nice to learn about some history but there are parts where there's too much for my liking.

#17: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:06 pm
—
It's not that the expeditions are history, I like History, it's that they are so often guidebook history, and not personalised.

#18: Author: macyrose, Location: Great White North (Canada)

Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:21 pm
—
One kind of cut I feel is justified is the removal of the racist language - since these are not "classics" or marketed as historical fiction I can't imagine a modern publisher keeping them in, and one stupid cut that I could never understand was the removal of the Stuffer and Maria incident since it was referred to in later paperbacks but the actual incident itself was cut. Rolling Eyes

One thing I'm wondering is why the cuts were made in the first place. Was it for length, or to make them more appealing to a modern audience, or both, or something else entirely?

#19: Author: Mia, Location: London

Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:25 pm
—
Was anyone else muchly disappointed to eventually get their hands on unabridged version and discover that the following weren't actually cuts but never actually happened at all... ?

1) Tom's big secret (in letter to Joey IIRC)
2) Who was sitting behind Miss Annersley during the play in Excitements that made her gasp with recognition.
3) Prof Richardson's box

I'm sure there's more...

#20: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:10 pm
—
Yes to all 3 of those things!

I was also expecting to find:

1. A description of Elisaveta's visit to Tyrol before her wedding.
2. A description of the wedding itself.
3. A lot more info about how/why/when Biddy ended up in Australia.
4. A lot more about Ted Humphries'/Signor (forgotten first name!) di
Bersetti's accident and Robin/Bette's reactions.
5. What happened to Rolf Maynard.

Rolling Eyes

#21: Author: macyrose, Location: Great White North (Canada)

Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:24 pm
—
Yes, dropped plot thread are extremely annoying. One more I can think of was in Challenge where it said:

Quote:

Finding the other girl so friendly, Evelyn began to plume herself on the fact that Jane must have been greatly struck with her from the first. She was by no means lacking in self-esteem, and natural gratitude for the other girl’s kindness and was to grow rapidly into an assumption that Jane belonged to her – and that was to cause trouble.

but that wasn't followed through.

And on another tack, no description of Jo's wedding and she's the most important character in the series! Even Madge's maid Marie's wedding gets a whole chapter in Head Girl.

#22: Author: Tara, Location: Malvern, Worcestershire

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:24 am
—

Macyrose wrote:

dropped plot threads are extremely annoying.

They absolutely are. But what a ferile field for drabbles! Wink

#23: Author: jennifer, Location: Taiwan

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 7:32 am
—
It's in the Swiss books where I really notice the history lessons, and it's generally in the places where it becomes stilted, or the action stops completely for half a chapter of digression. Actually, the first two cases of this are the chocolate factory in Changes (I think) and the sections dealing with the bird sanctuary. They're fine to read once, but on rereading I get the feeeling that EBD had just been reading about birds, or chocolate, and dumped it in to the story regardless.

I wonder if the Swiss sections are less spontaneous because she hadn't been there, unlike the Tyrol, where the descriptions are much more engaging.

There are one or two places where she *repeats* detailed descriptions of the *same* play from one book to the next - now that's just lazy. She definitely does that with one of the pantomimes, too.

#24: Author: Caroline, Location: Manchester

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 9:51 am
—
I completely agree about the Swiss tourist sections - although considering EBD hadn't been there, and she was writing from guide books, I don't think she does too bad a job. They might not be the most exciting passages, but I find I can visualise where the girls are going and what they are seeing quite well...

Regarding the chocolate factory trip, it's my understanding that EBD had actually done the tour - isn't the book dedicated to the friends she went on the Cadbury's tour with?

#25: Author: Chair, Location: Rochester, Kent

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:40 am
—
I'm sorry to not be of any help, but I've just had a look through my Armada pb of 'Changes'. I can't find a dedication in there. Confused

#26: Author: JoS, Location: South Africa

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:23 pm
—
In the GGB edition, Changes is dedicated to Madge Halliwell "with whom I shared the trip the Seniors took, with love from Elinor"

#27: Author: Dawn, Location: Leeds, West Yorks

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:52 pm
—
Having been to Cadbury World, I really enjoy the contrasts between EBD/CS trip and the trip today. Although I think EBD gets her timings a little confuzzled - they have to be up so early to get there - then it's a long tour, I wonder what time they would have really got back Rolling Eyes

#28: Author: Clare, Location: Liverpool

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:57 pm
—
I'm going to Cadbury's WOrld next Saturday so I'm going to have to find my copy of Changes.

Although I don't like the 'guide book' half terms in the Swiss books, the information did come in handy when we did a family day-trip to see a glacier a copule of years ago when we stayed in North Italy.

#29: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 1:38 pm
—
I quite like the glacier description in New Mistress - apart from ML's (I think) moralising. I think it's one of EBD's better Swiss expeditions, and wonder if she'd seen a glacier herself on her Austrian holiday. She's usually very good at describing places she'd actually been to.

Its poor Biddy who usually gets landed with the undigested chunks of guide books and history books. Even on first reading as a child/teenager, I used to skim those bits.

#30: Author: Dawn, Location: Leeds, West Yorks

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:08 pm
—

Clare wrote:

I'm going to Cadbury's WOrld next Saturday so I'm going to have to find my copy of Changes.

Although I don't like the 'guide book' half terms in the Swiss books, the information did come in handy when we did a family day-trip to see a glacier a copule of years ago when we stayed in North Italy.

There's a museumy bit (The Cadbury Collection) and in there as well as lots of info about the Cadbury family, there is a promotional film that they made in the 50s - which I found absolutely fascinating. It's on a continual loop and part of it was made round the factory. Also boards with information on about the working and social conditions at the factory

Andy had to drag me away in the end Rolling Eyes

The Quaker theatre production that Matty and Chris were in last summer was all about the Cadbury family and their dream of setting up a factory where the workers would have decent living conditions - it was very doom and gloom with lots of children dying - but fascinating to watch

#31: Author: Tamzin, Location: Edinburgh

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:45 am
—
I actually really enjoyed the chocolate factory visit in "Changes" although my pigletish tendencies may be something to do with that! I was so jealous of them being able to help themselves to sweets and biscuits at the end. The guide apologised because pre-rationing the "tourees" only got a box of chocs for free but I though being able to make your own selection from the plates on offer would have been lovely!

Do you get free chocs at the modern day equivalent of these tours?

#32: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:56 am
—

Tamzin wrote:

Do you get free chocs at the modern day equivalent of these tours?

Yes

#33: Author: Rosie, Location: Land of Three-Quarters Sky

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:05 am
—
You get DOUBLE if it's your birthday.

One of the best birthdays I've ever had. Possibly bar the year we built a six-foot igloo in Scotland...

#34: Author: Squirrel, Location: St-Andrews or Dunfermline

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:14 pm
—

Rosie wrote:

You get DOUBLE if it's your birthday.

Hmmmm - do you think they'd open specially for me on my b-day?

#35: Author: Clare, Location: Liverpool

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:33 pm
—

Rosie wrote:

You get DOUBLE if it's your birthday.

Can I lie? Or say it's my Valentine off my OH?

#36: Author: Rosie, Location: Land of Three-Quarters Sky

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:31 pm
—
Well I'll admit that they never actually asked for ID, but it was a Scout and Guide trip (*waves to Fran*) so perhaps they thought that was proof enough (and obviously had never met my Venture Scouts...)!

#37: Author: Loryat,

Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:41 pm
—

Mia wrote:

Was anyone else muchly disappointed to eventually get their hands on unabridged version and discover that the following weren't actually cuts but never actually happened at all... ?

1) Tom's big secret (in letter to Joey IIRC)
2) Who was sitting behind Miss Annersley during the play in Excitements that made her gasp with recognition.
3) Prof Richardson's box

I'm sure there's more...

One thing I always wanted explained was what it is Jem says to Joey (in Exile when they are hiding in the cave) that leaves her looking 'slightly startled' or something...

#38: Author: Mia, Location: London

Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 4:20 pm
—

Loryat wrote:

One thing I always wanted explained was what it is Jem says to Joey (in Exile when they are hiding in the cave) that leaves her looking 'slightly startled' or something...

I want a CS/Supernatural crossover like now! *g*

Seriously, I think that he said he loved her or something, because it could have been the last time he saw her and Jo was startled because normally they were undemonstrative. People have suggested he told her about Madge's pregnancy, but considering how Jo always worried over Madge, I don't think this would have been very fair to give Jo extra anxiety.

Please someone write this crossover

#39: Author: brie, Location: Glasgow

Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 4:43 pm
—
why dont u write it Mia? Very Happy

#40: Author: Loryat,

Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 6:06 pm
—

Mia wrote:

Seriously, I think that he said he loved her or something, because it could have been the last time he saw her and Jo was startled because normally they were undemonstrative. People have suggested he told her about Madge's pregnancy, but considering how Jo always worried over Madge, I don't think this would have been very fair to give Jo extra anxiety.

Yeah I always thought that was probably it (aww). But I would have liked it explained!

#41: Author: Mia, Location: London

Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 8:35 pm
—

brie wrote:

why dont u write it Mia? Very Happy

I'd love to but I've no time! And I so shouldn't be on here. LJ just ate 35 minutes of my evening Sad

Loryat - you're so right, it would have been such a lovely scene (but then EBD didn't like sentimentality!)

#42: Author: Hannah-Lou, Location: Glasgow

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:20 pm
—
I'm sure someone has written it already. I remember reading something about it, but can't remember who wrote it.

#43: Author: Katherine, Location: London, UK

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:30 pm
—
Was having a little amble round the archives yesterday.

http://www.the-cbb.co.uk/archive/files/sa_murmured_words_070906.htm

#44: Author: Hannah-Lou, Location: Glasgow

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:33 pm
—
Very Happy

That's the one! Thanks Katherine! (And Ally!)

The CBB -> Anything Else

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT + 1 Hour

Page 1 of 1