Peter Moore: Should we update Agatha? French say 'non'

Sacre Blue, Le Francais culture minister, Rachida Dati, will not allow any changes to update our Agatha Christie. “I was shocked by the rewriting of the Agatha Christie books” she told the parliament’s culture committee, presumably in French. Voilà. I agree- c’est bonne as it is.(apologies for my French but I failed O level French several times)

Agatha is popular in France and even lived there for a while spending two years as a teenager in Paris and holidaying in the Pyrenees.

“Murder on the links”, “The Mystery of the Blue Train” and “Death in the Clouds” are all set in France.

When the French found that she was born in the Riviera did they realise that it was the English Riviera and not Nice?

Perhaps Madame Dati is not right tout le temps. There are some dubious phrases in Agatha’s books. The book “and then there are none” is an improvement on the original title “Ten little 'you-know-what' boys”.

The French are not happy with the Anglo-Saxon fashion to edit everything to comply with today’s tastes. They blame Le wokery. They argue that, even if there are outdated references to race, gender or ethnicity they are of their time and should not be changed. The newspaper Le Figaro said that “the totalitarian regimes of the 20 th century have disappeared. Another has been emerging in the United States, less brutal but more insidious”. I am not sure that the totalitarian regimes which “edited” books and papers have all gone. Could anyone publish a book in Russia defending the Ukrainian government or critical of Kim Jong Un in North Korea?

The Parisian publishing house Gallimard has refused to accept the English language changes to Roald Dahl’s “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” and “James and the Giant Peach” when they took out words such as “fat” and “ugly”. I can see their argument. If everyone was thin and beautiful the story of “Cinderella” and “Mr Greedy” would not work. Who would enjoy a pantomime when the dame looks like Miss World?

But the French have changed Enid Blyton. “Five go off on a caravan” was changed to “The Famous Five and the star circus”. The French word for caravan, saltimbanques, could be offensive to circus performers. My French is not good enough to know why. Shall we ban Noddy because Big Ears is offensive to anyone suffering from aurisophobia? (I’ve just invented aurisophobia so don’t google it).

Do the French have un point when they object to changing our Agatha? (or should it be une point, I am not sure whether point is male or female). Are attempts to make literature more acceptable in the21st century damaging the originals?

When I was a teenager I read most of the James Bond books, which I loved. More recently I decided to reread “On her Majesty’s Secret Service” to see what it was like now I’m a little bit older. The story was as exciting as ever but there were bits that even I found cringeworthy. The main baddy, Blofeld, explains to Bond the importance of hypnosis. It is even used in medicine to treat conditions such as homosexuality. We are unlikely to hear that line in any future Bond movie whoever takes over from Daniel Craig.

I have also still got a book which I loved in my childhood called “Patch Pants the Taylor”. He travels to Africa and sees all the native cannibals with bones in their hair, dancing round a pot. I have not tried reading it to my grandchildren. We are not the first generation to censor books to protect sensibilities. In 1807 Dr T Bowdler, a physician, published “The Family Shakespeare” which contained 20 of Shakespeare’s plays rewritten suitable for the ears of his wife and children. In 1818 he published the rest of Shakespeare’s plays. He removed offensive words by changing “Out damned spot” to “out crimson spot” and the exclamation “God” is replaced by “Heavens”. Perhaps I should have given a trigger warning before quoting the shocking original.

I am always reluctant to admit it but, peut-etre, Le Francais have a point.