A COCK AND BALLS STORY by VALERIE LAWS (ooer missus!)
Someone snapped my book on a flight from Ibiza! Too thrilled not to post this. Now to lower the tone... |
‘Mr Grant, really quite glad of an excuse to dismount, offered his cock to Lydia, who immediately flung a leg over it, explaining that she had put on a frock with pleats on purpose, as she always felt sick if she rode sideways.’
Round the Horne: Sandy claims as a pianist, Jules is '"a miracle of dexterity at the cottage upright' |
Some people have a juvenile sense of humour which takes delight in smutty double entendre and low forms of comedy. I’m one of them. I blame Julian and Sandy, whose utterly filthy sketches in Round the Horne I laughed at as a child even though I had no idea what the jokes were about as they were mostly in Polari, bringing underground gay slang into living rooms all over Britain. Anyway you have been warned, so if you like a rude joke, I’ll give you one (ooh missus!) Up Pompeii, the Carry On films, they were all family viewing on TV and nobody complained. If you understood, you must have a dirty mind. If you didn’t, no harm done. Nowadays Two Broke Girls has popularised this form of very English comedy in the US.
Frankie he say, Titter ye not! |
Lydia's cock waiting for her to fling her leg over it. |
No wonder people did so much ejaculating back in the day. They were always at it (come on!). ‘Robert ejaculates, and puts his foot on the accelerator’ (Diary of a Provincial Lady, EM Delafield). In Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey, Catherine her heroine is described thus: ‘At fifteen, she began to curl her hair and long for balls; her complexion improved...’ Ah yes I remember it well.
Don't try this at home. |
Seriously though folks, the thing about ebooks is you can change stuff, at any time: should we or shouldn’t we? The other thing that strikes a reader of older books is the use of language which is now considered inappropriate or offensive. I recently downloaded Monica Dickens’ 'One Pair of Feet,' her wartime nursing experience. She has various flirtations at dances with RAF officers including one whose nickname is the N word (he has dark curly hair.) No-one thought anything of it at the time, but now it’s such a loaded term that Stephen Fry changed the name of WWII air ace Guy Gibson’s dog to ‘Digger’ for the film of his life. The dog’s name was used as a codeword during the famous Dam Busters Operation. Some might argue that this is changing history, yet arguably the form of the dog’s name isn’t really important compared with the offence to and alienation of people new to Gibson and the Dambusters’ story. Gibson might have called his dog anything. Whereas, for example, to credit someone else (like, say, Mel Gibson) with the operation would indeed be wrong.
Mel Gibson invents the Bouncing Bomb for WWII's Ghostbusters Operation |
It’s an ongoing debate, to change or not to change, what to change, whether to have various versions (as they do with films after all), all are possible now: but it would indeed be a shame to change inadvertent rudery in old books to prevent new generations from giggling. Long may intercourse, ejaculation and cocks pop up on our Kindles! (Sorry, Matron!)
Visit my website www.valerielaws.com
Follow me on Twitter @ValerieLaws
Find me on Facebook
Comments
:-)
And yes, I think changing the 'n' word is right - it causes such distress when used thoughtlessly. And jokes about vicars and choirboys aren't funny any more either.
But cocks - they're still hilarious!
"Ooooh, dear, dear, these EUNUCHS! They burst into tears the moment you castigate them!"
I can see the sense in making adjustments where necessary to a remake of an old story...but probably best to leave the originals un-tampered with.
Good to see Frankie Howerd turn up in an AE blog post!
As for the casual insults and sneers which were acceptable in the past and not now... I'm in two minds. I agree that it's dangerous to rewrite the past - but if we're too accepting, there are thousands of people around today who are just aching for reinforcement of their ugly views. "In the past, when Britain was Great, they weren't coy about speaking out and saying {fill in ugly prejudiced view here."] - So, what my argument here? That such books should only be in restricted libraries, available only to scholars? - I don't know.
I think we should also take the lesson that we aren't apart from history - we're making it now. We have attitudes that will be found desperately primitive in the future, just as we can hardly believe what was acceptable 50 or 100 years ago. We just can't see them, because they seem normal to us.
And it's highly likely that the future will be MORE repressive and segregated, and they will laugh at our nonsensical ideas of equality. I don't like that idea at all, but fear it may come about.