Blogs

Anthony Horowitz

Anthony Horowitz’s new novel, The Power of Five: Necropolis (Walker Books) is out on 30th October.

Twit for twat

What is the difference between a twat and a twit? Quite a lot, it would seem, to the folk at Random House who have agreed to reprint future editions of Jacqueline Wilson’s novel My Sister Jodie replacing one with the other. A twit, of course, is a 1930s word meaning a foolish person and is perhaps derived from nitwit. A twat, on the other hand, is altogether nastier, although it appears in a poem by Robert Browning, who mistakenly believed it was a type of hat. In fact, well . . . it’s the vulva, isn’t it? It’s unclear how it became a term of abuse.

Anyway, 55-year-old housewife Anne Dixon took on the combined might of a leading publisher and a bestselling children’s author (according to the Daily Mail) and won. “The book is clearly for children,” Dixon said. “They should not have to be subjected to trash and vulgarity.”

The Mail also accused Dame Jacqueline of trash and vulgarity earlier this year. A piece by Winifred Robinson drew our attention to Love Lessons, in which a 14-year-old snogs her teacher. And Girls in Tears with its scenes of binge drinking and vomiting. Mrs Dixon might have known, therefore, what to expect. But it wasn’t this that offended her. It was just one word.

Why does “bad language” still have such a power to offend when children of every class and culture use it so often, it has become virtually meaningless? Take the word “fuck”, for example. It must be one of the most commonly used words in the English language.

And why is offending people such a crime? Three people complained about the t-word, as it must now be known—out of the 150,000 who bought the book. And come to think of it, how did nine-year-old Even Coulson even know what it meant unless great aunt Anne explained it to her? Couldn’t she have said it was a type of mushroom or something and moved on?

There’s a serious point here. Wilson owes her success to the way she has captured a generation of adolescent girls with razor-sharp precision: their thoughts, their morality, their language. She is in every sense the voice of a generation. Changing one word may be a tiny step but it’s still a step in the wrong direction. How long will it be before whole books are rewritten or censored simply because some publisher fears they might give offence? Actually, it’s already happened. The Jewel of Medina by Sherry Jones has been axed for exactly that reason. And here’s a funny thing—that was Random House, too.


Add comment

By posting on this website you agree to the Bookseller Comments Policy. Comments go direct to live, please be relevant, brief and definitely not abusive. Report any "unsuitable" comments by clicking the links.

Name

Comment

Email

Comments on this article

By Beaker

Isn't the fact that JW apparently didn't realise the meaning of the word relevant here - would she have used it in the book had she realised, or would she have stuck with the more innocent 'twit'? Then this would make this more of a correction rather than the sort of censorship worth getting riled up about (like RH chickening out on The Jewel of Medina).

28 Aug 08 12:30

Unsuitable?

By Tracey

JW didn't know the meaning of the word? What, a wordsmith of JW's calibre? I doubt that very much Beaker.

28 Aug 08 17:32

Unsuitable?

By bibliobibuli

i used it innocently for years as a variant of twit without knowing there was another meaning so i leap to JW's defense.

28 Aug 08 23:38

Unsuitable?

By Toby

I absolutely agree - the 't' word is one of those, like many others, which may have had a somewhat 'obscene' origin, but it's usage now is very much more akin to that of twit - I would say it's much stronger (maybe they're REALLY stupid, rather than just foolish) but despite its etymology, I still find it relatively inoffensive. I wonder if the girl (or any others her age) have access to computer games (Grand Theft Auto springs to mind) or *gasp* maybe even a television. I can understand the mother's complaint, I really can, but come on now - as you said, surely she was aware of the kind of novel she was buying. It's like going to see an 18 rated film and then complaining about the sex and violence. I know - perhaps we should introduce age guidance on to childrens books so their dainty eyes won't be offended by words used regularly in their playground... ...oh...right...

29 Aug 08 12:15

Unsuitable?

By Sensibility

Anthony, I dont remember any rude words contained within your literature. I presume you chose not to include any because they are offensive. One hopes that Alex Rider wouldn't resort to a word such as 'twat' in his battle against Major Yu, in the same way that if Nicholas or Cassian came home in their early teens, you wouldn't appreciate them using such word at the dinner table. Just because the 'f' word is in common usage, doesn't mean render it inoffensive and I think to use the 'f word' example, immediately after suggesting that certain words have become 'virtually meaningless' is irresponsible on the part of an incredibly popular children's author. I think you are setting a bad example to your readership. There may only have been three complaints but I imagine there are many many many more people out there who have the book sitting on their shelf, without realising until now that the book that their son or daughter has read, contained the offensive word and are now mightily p****d off'. 'Twat' IS a rude word. Publisher replaces the word. I applaud them.

29 Aug 08 20:46

Unsuitable?

By Mary MacInnes

AnnDixon has made a mountain out of a mole hill and highlighted an archaic and little known meaning of the word. What a twat.

31 Aug 08 16:05

Unsuitable?

By Alexx

This just begins the road to censorship. Perhaps she completely meant to use the word 'twat'. And so what if she did. That is the beauty of writing. You can write what you wish. If we go down the road of taking out offensive words, we are beginning to look at a 1984 society in its infant stage.

02 Sep 08 09:37

Unsuitable?

See Also