We begin with an article in the Daily Express (U.K.) in which the BBC defends its decision to change the ending of the nursery rhyme:
A version used on the CBeebies channel was altered so rather than "couldn't put Humpty together again" all the King's horses "made Humpty happy again."This reportedly wasn't the first such occurrence:
The broadcaster said the change was made purely for creative reasons rather than trying to give a soft version of the rhyme for children.
A spokeswoman said: "We play nursery rhymes with their original lyrics all the time and the small change to Humpty Dumpty was done for no other reason than being creative and entertaining."
He told the newspaper that he had also seen Little Miss Muffet changed on the channel, so that she made friends with the spider instead of running away.But, as I discovered from Wikipedia, the original rhyme does not specify that Humpty Dumpty is an egg...
But the BBC spokeswoman said that alteration was made for similar creative reasons and there was "nothing more to it than that."
- Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
- Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
- All the king's horses,
- And all the king's men,
- Couldn't put Humpty together again.
So the BBC's alteration destroys the original purpose of the poem!
Image credit - and note that in this example the answer to the riddle is written after the poem.
The Brits are going mad with the Nanny State gig. They are protecting people from things from which they need no protecting. I expect they'll ban "Where the Wild Things Are" as being too scary for kids.
ReplyDeleteHumpty Dumpty wasn't an egg, that came from an illustration from Lewis Carrol. Humpty Dumpty was a cannon.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rhymes.org.uk/humpty_dumpty.htm
Or from Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumpty
ReplyDeleteReply to first anonymous, as per second anonymous -
ReplyDeleteThe theory that Humpty Dumpty was a cannon used in the siege of Colchester in 1648 during the English Civil War is often stated as fact.[3] However, the additional 'discovered' verse which reveals this meaning was actually written as a spoof for the Oxford Magazine in 1956 by Professor David Daube.[4] The story was originally attributed to Gloucester and has no substance in fact, despite its adoption by the tourist industry of Colchester.