A few days ago, I was reading a list on this sub with the names of the most well-written books ever, and I happened to see Charlie and the Chocolate Factory on it. I had heard the name of the book when the movie came out but never got around to watching it. A few days earlier, I saw the book in a store and decided to give it a shot, as I do love reading children's fantasy novels once in a while and really enjoy them.
Needless to say, I really liked the book a lot. When Grandpa Joe gave his little money to Charlie to buy the chocolate and the moment they shared afterward, it left me misty-eyed, as I missed my late grandfather. Another highlight of the book for me was how immersive it is. I could totally see the scenes playing out in front of my eyes as I was reading it, and I love books that make it effortless to do so. I was also happy to see the undisciplined kids suffer the consequences of their actions. Great lesson for all the babies out there.
The only thing I found rather odd and did not like about the book (and I might be reading too much into it) is the inclusion of the Oompa Loompas and how they have been portrayed. Little people from lands that mainly consist of jungles, with no food to eat, literally being made slaves for shelter and food… yeah, doesn’t refer to any living race, right? SMH.
I wish they edit their description for future use or just make them goblins or elves.
by Waste_Project_7864
4 Comments
I’ll say one thing, as Roald Dahl holds a special place in my heart as a children’s author: Dahl makes societal statements as caricature. So the absurdity of the Oompa-Loompas was written for a reason and their depiction was also intentional (if not a little problematic). Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is a caricature of capitalism and specifically American capitalism as the books were meant to take place in America. Dahl has “sugar-coated” (pun intended) greed and what it can do to people and juxstaposed it with Charlie, a poor, kind and selfless child.
So it wouldnt stoke your sensitivities if they were goblins or elves? Oompa Loompas are fictitious..
Good news for you is about every print since the 80’s has removed that they are dark skinned pygmies from africa. Roald stated that wasnt his intent (any correlation to slavery) but understands where people were coming from, thus it was changed in the book to Loompaland. I havent read any updated versions but I think the orange skin/green hair was only in the movie. Probably just white washed them would be my guess.
Edit: fact check all that, been a while.
I think it’s important to keep depictions like that which you’ve highlighted about the Oompa Loompas uncensored/unedited. It acts as a means to demonstrate that things can/do/should change over time. If we go back and change things that no longer fit the narrative of today, we’re edging dangerously close to *1984* territory, and I want no part in living in a society that is any more Orwellian than it already is.
My girlfriend is an elementary school teacher with this book literally in her curriculum, and she talks about this in an age-appropriate way to demonstrate that even though things were acceptable at one point, that doesn’t make them acceptable today.
>I wish they edit their description for future use or just make them goblins or elves.
I don’t. Books are often a reflection of the times they were written in, and should be left intact so that future generations can see that reflection.