Does anyone actually LIKE abridged books?

[littlefuzzy]

I picked up a beautifully illustrated oversized version of The Wind in the Willows for $9.95, and was disappointed to find that the illustrator had also "sensitively abridged" the book... I have always hated abridged books, even as a child.

When I was a child, I even considered it insulting, in essence telling me that I wouldn't be able to understand the book unless it was "dumbed down."

Many times, it is difficult to find an unabridged version, especially when the book is a classic that was written for younger readers, or one that has made its way into required reading lists for schoolchildren (Little Men, Little Women, Tom Sawyer, Alice in Wonderland, Robinson Crusoe, etc., etc., etc.)

Something that is even worse than abridging, in my mind, is the actual editing of books to remove or tone down controversial subjects, such as racism. Yes, Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, Uncle Tom's Cabin, etc. have slaves and slave owners in them, does that mean they are bad literature?

Are any of these practices any better than editing or cropping a movie to sanitize it for television, and to have it fill up the television screen?

[Scarecrow]

I see no point to abridging a book in print or in audio format.

[Stangman68]

abridged books

[hotaru_san]

I read abridged versions of a lot of classics when I was young (8-10) but I haven't read anything abridged since then. I think it was good for me at the time because it allowed me be able to read great literature on a level that I could understand. It also made more interested in the stories once I was older because I knew that I had missed parts of the books.

But I wouldn't read an abridged book now.

[suziq999]

The only abridged verison I would read is Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. It has some parts that SERIOUSLY need cutting out. I read the unabridged and wanted to cry realizing half the stuff I read had nothing to do with the plot.

[Jeremy517]

Originally posted by suziq999
The only abridged verison I would read is Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. It has some parts that SERIOUSLY need cutting out. I read the unabridged and wanted to cry realizing half the stuff I read had nothing to do with the plot.

Thats exactly what I came here to say. The extra stuff is bad bad bad.

[darkside]

I usually get unabridged audio books from Audible.com, but I have to admit I've read many a book that could have used some editing. I can't count the number of times after finishing a chapter when I wondered why it was even in the book. Many times authors include things that add nothing to the story or characters and does not move the narative along at all. Its almost like authors today get paid by the page instead of the story.

[BoatDrinks]

abridged

[gondorspit]

I haven't read an abridged book since I was young, the 100 page Reader's Digest Moby Dick , but after reading D. H. Lawrence I understand why it is done.

[eedoon]

I myself would hate if this post is changed by someone. Imagine how someone feel if people just change their books. The only place abridged books belong is the garbage bin.

[greatjedi]

To me, reading an abridged book is like watching a film in pan & scan. I know I'm missing something, and it just drives me crazy.

[Vampyr]

Originally posted by Scarecrow
I see no point to abridging a book in print or in audio format.

I agree.....Although I would guess that audio books would be good for the blind.

[Mazinger]

Originally posted by suziq999
The only abridged verison I would read is Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. It has some parts that SERIOUSLY need cutting out. I read the unabridged and wanted to cry realizing half the stuff I read had nothing to do with the plot.

Try reading his Notre-Dame De Paris... I almost jumped out the window while reading this novel. It's not as bad as Les Miserables though.