Agatha Christie: Now the publishers’ sensitivity readers are pouncing on Miss Marple

cultural Agatha Christie

Miss Marple and the censorship

Stand: 28.03.2023 | Reading time: 2 minutes

A table and a machine, that’s all Agatha Christie needed to write

Quelle: Popperfoto/Getty Images

You can listen to our WELT podcasts here

In order to display embedded content, your revocable consent to the transmission and processing of personal data is required, since the providers of the embedded content require this consent as third-party providers [In diesem Zusammenhang können auch Nutzungsprofile (u.a. auf Basis von Cookie-IDs) gebildet und angereichert werden, auch außerhalb des EWR]. By setting the switch to “on”, you agree to this (which can be revoked at any time). This also includes your consent to the transfer of certain personal data to third countries, including the USA, in accordance with Art. 49 (1) (a) GDPR. You can find more information about this. You can withdraw your consent at any time via the switch and via privacy at the bottom of the page.

Now the publishers’ sensitivity readers are attacking Miss Marple. The little gray cells of Hercule Poirot should finally think as sensitive readers can be expected to do today. But what are the consequences of the intervention?

JNow Agatha Christie is being revised for the contemporary reader who no longer wants to endure ethnic stereotypes, jokes about Jewish names and noses, or embarrassing descriptions. So-called “sensitivity readers”, reports the London “Telegraph”, have adopted Christie’s language for new editions of the cases of Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple.

Thus, in 1964’s “Caribbean Affair,” Miss Marple’s musings on a hotel clerk’s “wonderful white teeth” are eliminated. And in Christie’s debut novel, The Missing Link, published in 1920, Hercule Poirot’s comment that someone was “a Jew, of course” was deleted.

also read

Of course, all of this is highly questionable. Why not ask readers to read the original texts, trusting that they will make up their own minds about the limitations of a crime writer who died 47 years ago at 85? Isn’t it a falsification when characters in a novel, whose inner monologues throb with perceptions that no one would allow themselves today, now appear as if they had undergone anti-discrimination training?

And where is this supposed to lead – will we at some point no longer be able to determine that authors such as Agatha Christie, Roald Dahl or Ian Fleming thought racist, anti-Semitic or sexist because one can no longer prove it with their work, which has been cleaned of all irritations?

also read

In Christie’s case, the interventions in her texts have a special touch. After all, her work was toned down for sensitive readers while she was still alive. After World War II, her American publisher received letters about racial stereotypes in her work, including one from the influential Anti-Defamation League.

Her agent did not pass the letters on to her, leaving the publisher to remove any potentially objectionable passages about Jews or Catholics. She never noticed the changes that were made.