It doesn’t happen often, but I do occasionally get email from people asking—always very politely (well, almost always very politely)—whether I have ever considered producing a bowdlerized edition of my books.
Mind, none of them uses the word “bowdlerized”; I doubt most people under the age of forty have ever heard it. It comes from:
Thomas Bowdler (pronounced /ˈbaʊdlər/) (11 July 1754 – 24 February 1825), who was an English physician who published an expurgated edition of William Shakespeare’s work, edited by his sister Harriet, intended to be more appropriate for 19th century women and children than the original.
He similarly published an edited version of Edward Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. His edition was the subject of some criticism and ridicule and, through the eponym bowdlerise (or bowdlerize),[1] his name is now associated with censorship of literature, motion pictures and television programmes.
[Source: Wikipedia]
Now, what these readers would like me to expurgate from my own work, in order to accommodate their desires and sensibilities, ranges from sex-scenes (one very nice woman wrote to ask if I could produce an edition of OUTLANDER from which all the sex scenes were removed, because she was very eager to be able to discuss the book with her fifteen-year-old daughter, but didn’t think her girl was quite ready for the original. By biting my thumb rather hard (she was very nice, and meant well), I was able to refrain from writing back and asking her whether it might not be a trifle simpler just to wait a year or two for her daughter to be ready for the notion that married people have sex, than for me edit and republish a 700-page book–always assuming that I could convince any publisher that there was a market for such a thing? (My guess is that unless her daughter has been living under a rock for the last five years, she knows a lot more than I’ve ever thought of putting in a book, but possibly her mother doesn’t let her watch television)) to Bad Words in general (“I notice people say “Fuck” a lot in your more recent books,” one reader wrote, rather censoriously. “Jamie doesn’t even know what that word means in OUTLANDER!” Well…he’s probably picked up a few expressions from Claire over the last twenty years. But Jamie’s not usually the one saying that word, even in the later books. It would be pretty common to Roger, though, as well as to some of the coarse folk who live in the backwoods), to—very specifically—the use of the Lord’s name (only “Jesus” or “Christ,” evidently. “God” doesn’t appear to bother these particular readers in this context, let alone local variants like “the Holy Spirit”.).
OK. Approaching these concerns from last to first:
I have every sympathy for someone whose religious sensibilities make them uncomfortable with blasphemy, whether casual or heart-felt. I personally am very disturbed by people who curse or use profanity and crude language in restaurants, and a terrible lot of people do these days. (I don’t think it’s just the places I eat in…)
On the other hand, I’m kind of bemused that not one of the people who take the Third Commandment so much to heart that they are horrified at seeing it broken in print are evidently bothered in the slightest by the shattering of the other nine commandments that goes on in these novels. Graven images, skipping church on Sunday, dishonoring one’s parents, bearing false witness, coveting oxen, asses, wives…theft, murder, fornication, adultery–yeah, we don’t mind seeing any of that. The J-word, though….
(Let me pause for a moment of didacticism here, in which I will attempt to explain the subtleties of the terms blasphemy, profanity, and obscenity. To wit:
blas•phe•my
Show Spelled[blas-fuh-mee] Show IPA
–noun, plural -mies.
1. impious utterance or action concerning god or sacred things.
2. Judaism .
a. an act of cursing or reviling God.
b. pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton (YHVH) in the original, now forbidden manner instead of using a substitute pronunciation such as Adonai.
3. Theology . the crime of assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God.
4. irreverent behavior toward anything held sacred, priceless, etc.: He uttered blasphemies against life itself.
pro•fan•i•ty
Show Spelled[pruh-fan-i-tee, proh-] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ties for 2.
1. the quality of being profane; irreverence.
2. profane conduct or language; a profane act or utterance.
3. obscenity ( defs. 2, 3 ) .
Profane
–adjective
1. characterized by irreverence or contempt for god or sacred principles or things; irreligious.
2. not devoted to holy or religious purposes; unconsecrated; secular ( opposed to sacred).
3. unholy; heathen; pagan: profane rites.
4. not initiated into religious rites or mysteries, as persons.
5. common or vulgar—verb (used with object)
6. to misuse (anything that should be held in reverence or respect); defile; debase; employ basely or unworthily.
7. to treat (anything sacred) with irreverence or contempt; violate the sanctity of: to profane a shrine.
obscenity – 5 dictionary results ob•scen•i•ty
Show Spelled[uh b-sen-i-tee, -see-ni-] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ties for 2, 3.
1. the character or quality of being obscene; indecency; lewdness.
2. something obscene, as a picture or story.
3. an obscene word or expression, especially when used as an invective.
[Source for all of the above: dictionary.com]
Let me state for the record that no one in any of my books has ever pronounced the Tetragrammaton in the original. Not once.
And Jamie Fraser is on record as stating that he only _felt_ like God (while having sex with his wife); he never said he _was_. So I think we’re clear on those particular charges of blasphemy. I’ll get back to the question of impious utterances in a bit.
Now, if you read further on the dictionary.com site (and others), you’ll find that blasphemy, profanity, and obscenity are often used as synonyms for each other—and they often overlap, depending on usage–but there are differences.
The F-word (I’m sorry, I was raised as a Catholic and I have considerable trouble saying that word out loud. Fortunately most of the people in my books have no such scruples) is often obscene, and quite possibly profane, but not blasphemous. I.e., there’s no mention of God or anything sacred (well, not in the word itself. If you started applying it to sacred concepts—which a good many cultures do, in terms of insult (French-Canadian Catholics, for one)—then that’s different). (Ulster Protestants given to tattooing such sentiments as “F— the Pope” on their foreheads (no, I’m not kidding; some of these people feel strongly about their sectarian sensibilities) are not committing blasphemy _per se_, as while the Pope may be a person of reverence, he isn’t God. “F the P” is therefore mere profanity.)
Profanity can also be blasphemous, if an invocation of God is involved—but if you leave God out of it, profanity is not usually blasphemy. It’s just irreverence, and that’s pretty firmly in the eye of the beholder and the standards of the times. Go to, thou saucy fellow!
As for obscenity…the Supreme Court couldn’t do better than, “we know it when we see it,” and I don’t propose to try to top that.
Anyway, the point here is that it’s only blasphemy (or what is perceived as blasphemy) that concerns the “I do wish you would not take the Lord’s Name in vain” letters. One reader informed me that she had gone through my books with a black marker and obliterated all such usages, so that she could read the books in comfort. I congratulated her on her helpful ingenuity; genius often lies in simplicity.
But let’s look at that. Does any use of the C-word (the six-letter one) or the J-word that is not portrayed as a prayer or a scriptural reference constitute blasphemy?
I don’t think so.
Here we come to the “impious utterances” definition of blasphemy. “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.” Well…what is “in vain”?
When we did catechism class back in the day, we were taught that “in vain” meant that you mustn’t use God’s name to curse somebody, in the “You g_d_ son of a four-legged what-not..!” kind of way. (Catholics, btw, do include “God” (and the Holy Spirit, for that matter) as being “the Lord’s name.”). Using God’s name as a casual interjection—“Jesus, it’s hot,” or “God, I’d kill for a beer,” was crude and thoughtless and a well-brought-up person ought not to do it—but it wasn’t blasphemy, either.
People in my books do in fact use this sort of casual reference fairly often—because men in certain professions (soldiering, for one) and in the exclusive company of other men, very frequently _do_ do that. (You notice that the women in my books don’t do this.)
In my experience (owing to unorthodox career choices, most of my colleagues and close friends were men, up to my early forties), men who do this are customarily calling unconsciously upon God to witness something, asking for casual assistance in a moment of stress, or merely expressing an intensification of emotion (amazement, shock, anger), and do not actually intend offense to their comrades or impiety toward the Almighty.
Now, plainly opinions differ on just what’s an impious utterance and what’s not. That being so, though, we’ve got a few different considerations going here:
1. The notion that a writer ought to try never to offend anyone’s conception of morality or decency.
2. Whether a writer should or should not portray offensive behavior (i.e., behavior condemned by a majority of the populace), and if so, under what circumstances?
3. The question of how far historic speech might differ from modern speech, and whether an historical novelist should take that into account?
OK, #1 is simple. Putting aside aesthetics and the moral imperatives of art, it’s flat-out physically impossible to write something that won’t offend somebody. Ergo, the notion that a writer should try to do so is ludicrous.
#2 is also pretty simple. People don’t always behave well; the briefest glance at the television news makes that pretty clear. If art (whether novels, photographs, or anything else) is going to serve as a reflection of or a reflection on humanity, it’s going to show people doing stuff that may not be moral by anybody’s compass. The essence of art is conflict. Conflict may be difficult to look at (or utterly fascinating. Sometimes both at once), but you can’t do without it and make art.
#3. Now, historicity. Language evolves, and so does social custom. What is obscene or blasphemous in one time often isn’t, in another. If you called a man a fig-licker today, he would probably merely blink at you, whereas them was duelin’ words in the 18th century.**
A writer dealing with historical settings has a lot of things to consider, and one of these is how much “historical” language or figures of speech to use, and how to portray historical characters in such a way that they seem realistic and empathetic to a modern audience, but still belong plainly to their own time.
Well, one of the ways in which you do this is to use figures of speech that are extremely common, and likely always have been, as well as those particular to a specific age. And calling upon the name of the Almighty in moments of strong emotion and/or casual conversation has probably been part of human speech since people discovered the concept of a deity.
Now, I could go on and on (well…even more on and on {g}) about this business, because I find it fascinating, but I do have work to do. I think the best I can do here may be to quote a bit from THE OUTLANDISH COMPANION. This letter was written as part of an exchange with a courteous gentleman who’d written to object to the F-word, which emerged from one of the audiobooks as he was driving with his four-year-old grand-daughter, and is included in the “Controversy” section of the COMPANION:
“Well, I have children myself (11, 13, and 15 at the moment), and we try not to expose them to “bad language,” either, in spite of the fact that they all know all the words already (there’s still some point to insisting that these are not suitable for civilized conversation, after all).
The thing is, though–my books are definitely written (and carefully written at that) for adults. When I do use bad language in the books (oddly enough, I never use it, personally; never), it’s because it seems to me to be called for, by the circumstances and character. In the case of the F-word in DRUMS (I did use that same word in all the other books, by the way, though sparingly), it’s used by a young man in the grip of angry (and sexually motivated) passion, in the late 1960s. Given this character, this time period, and this set of circumstances, his language seemed entirely appropriate.
Now, one reason for insisting that bad language not be used in everyday discourse is, of course, that it’s low-class and offensive. One other reason–equally important, in my opinion–is that such language does have its own legitimate purpose; that is, to express feeling that is also beyond the limits of normal civilized discourse. To use such words casually deprives them of their impact.
You can see that, in the scene in question in DRUMS. If Roger normally spoke like that, the reader wouldn’t have (what I hope is) the impression of a man driven almost beyond endurance, and holding on to his notions of decent behavior with great effort.
Okay. So, the point is that when I do use strong language, I have a specific reason for doing so. It really doesn’t seem reasonable to me to eradicate such language–chosen and used carefully, to a purpose–on the grounds that someone might someday wish to listen to a taped version of an adult book in the presence of a small child.”
(My correspondent very graciously thanked me for hearing his concern, btw, and agreed with my conclusion.)
Right. Well, moving backward from blasphemy and Rude Speech, we come back to the inclusion of sex in my books. I can honestly say that of a thousand letters I get that mention this, 999 readers think there should be more sex. {g}. But there is the occasional one who thinks that the inclusion of sex lowers the tone, impairs my literary reputation, or should be omitted so as to make the books more…um…acceptable {cough} to younger (or possibly older; you wouldn’t believe how many people think their elderly parents or grandparents would enjoy my books but be put off by the sex*) readers.
Well, I think my literary reputation will have to take care of itself; I can’t do anything but write the best books I can, and history and the readers will make of them what they want to.
I do think that the sex scenes are both necessary and integral to the story, or they wouldn’t be there. These aren’t romance novels, but they are (among other things) the story of a very long and complex marriage. Now, there may possibly be long and successful marriages that don’t include sex, but I don’t personally know of any.
Neither are any sex-scenes included for the sake of gratuitous titillation (any titillating that happens is purely fortuitous, I assure you), nor are any of them just about sex. They have structural and emotional reasons for being where they are, and the book would not be the same story, nor have the same complexity, without them.
Still, the bottom line here is the Eye of the Beholder. There is no book that will say the same thing to all readers. A good book will say something different each time it’s read, even by the same person. And each reader brings his or her experience, background, prejudices, desires, and perceptions to the reading.
That being true, there’s little point in bowdlerization. What offends one person will be revelation and elevation to the next. That’s why we have a great variety of books.
“If thine eye offend thee, pluck it out,” seems a trifle extreme here as a response—but if there are particular things in my books that annoy or offend a reader as an individual, the ultimate power to control these does lie with the reader, not with me.***
Thank you for reading!
*(I am irresistibly reminded here of a book-signing event in Chicago, where I signed books for a grandmother, her daughter, and grand-daughter (intergenerational—and multi-gender—trios are pretty common at my signings). I was chatting with the grandmother while signing a book for her grand-daughter, and she said, “You know, I was in the middle of VOYAGER and I turned to my grand-daughter and said, ‘I’ve just had the most terrible thought! We’re both lusting after the same man!’”)
**To save you looking it up, the modern equivalent slang would be “muff-diver.” Weirdly enough, I don’t think there’s a female slang version of this epithet, though there is a purely formal descriptive term. But when was the last (or the first, for that matter) time you heard someone called a fellatrix?
*** A good-quality Sharpie costs about $1.79.
Very well said. Don’t change a thing. I love the “juicy” bits. They make the book more interesting and fun to read. Besides, people do talk like that and people do have sex. Fact of life! If someone doesn’t like that, they don’t have to read it!
Thanks Diana. Keep writing.
Hi Diana,
I believe as adults we are capable of deciding for ourselves whether or not to read one book or the other and it is up to that person alone to continue reading or put down the book and say this is not for me. My husband describes the need for people to have everything made ‘safe’ for them as the nanny state. About three or four years ago, my family and I went on vacation in this very tiny rustic cabin next to a lake; a nice relaxing vacation. I brought with me A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini. I was a labour and delivery nurse at the time. The book describes his female relatives experiences in Afghanistan. There is a scene where the main character is undergoing a C/section without the benefit of anathesia. To make matters worse, they are reusing the gloves used in surgery. He describes the rubber gloves hanging from a clothes line over top of a dirty sink. I was in bed reading this and I became so upset by this scene, I had to take a walk to cool down in order to sleep. Do you suppose I should write to Khaled and ask him not to write any more disturbing obstetrical scenes?
Jackleen
Hey,
Personally, I did not share The Outlander series with my daughers until they were married. They survived just fine; they are happily married to incredibly cool guys; and I am sure they are all having amazing s** ; ) (at least that’s what they tell me). Waiting for anything is not going to kill any of us, and most of the time, these issues discussed in this series of comments, may actually be about the inability to communicate on an intimate level with our children.
I spend a lot of time reading and writing. I teach. I also spend a lot of time discussing logical fallacies. Your (Diana) argument is provoking and well written; however, if some of your readers want to be taken seriously, they must reign in their emotions and think clearly (really, I’m merely speaking as a teacher here). Slippery slope and post hoc arguments make for the stereotypical “emotional woman”. We all want to be taken seriously, and “emoting” won’t cut it.
Here are two interesting arguments on a similar topic that may elicit some critical thinking. They are taken from the book Language Matters: A Guide to Everyday Questions About Language by Donna Jo Napoli and Vera Lee-Schoenfeld: ” How Does Language Wield Power Over Us? – Can it Overpower Us?” and “Does Exposure to and Use of Offensive Language Harm Children”
It takes courage to consider views other than our own – be brave.
RM
I love, love, LOVE these books. I read ALL of the series in the first 2 weeks that I got my Kindle. You are an amazing author who writes with so much depth I sometimes feel I am drowning…in a good way! Don’t change a thing!
I am sorry that folks can’t figure out why your books are the way they are without you having to write such huge explanations……of course everything you write is big so why not blog entries?
Diana…..I think you are the most WONDERFUL writer. I LOVE your books (and I’m 45), my 73 year old mother loves your books, and my 52 year old HUSBAND loves your books. He is disabled and cannot see well so I read your novels to him (complete with attempts at voicing the characters and catching the emotions, etc…….I’m a closet actress…LOL). I have read the ENTIRE Outlander series to him and we are both anxiously awaiting the next book. True, I’ve blushed as I read some things to him…..but it never stopped me from reading OR from continuing to read. Your response here was quite thorough and well written. Anyone who doesn’t “get it” at this point just isn’t going to get it…..I feel bad for them. We, your fans LOVE your work and I feel like I know you, even just a little bit, by eavesdropping on the fictitious lives of your characters. Thank you very, very much and keep writing those books the way YOU think they need to be written. 
Melody Ayer
Dickson, Tennessee
Yes – thank you for your comments…- I have read and enjoyed your books several times – and my 14 year old Grand-daughter has read them too….no problems from us…and what she doesnt understand – she asks about
Which I think is healthy.
Dear Mrs Diana G.,
I just have to say I love you andyour books! The thought that anyone would want you to change your stories just make me cringe. Just so some people can feel comfortable . Boo on them. Think of authors like Bram Stoker or Ald0us Huxley having to change scenes or words in thier stories just for the relief of some people. I mean the whole world would be different, and seriously not in a good way.
To me your in the catogories of these same authors and to even better. Just keep writing what you want. For you not even us you crazy fanatic fans!
With much love and respect
I don’t know about the rest of you, but I can’t wait to see these books in film or on T.V.
I just saw the preview to A Game Of Thrones series. Wow, I’d love to see this on HBO one day.
I think an HBO series would be the best way to go for Outlander…
Brilliant! I’ve been wanting a movie of the series for ages, and an HBO production would not only do it justice, but include the naughty bits and the language!
When I first read The Outlandish Companion and found out that you actually received letters from people asking you to censor (“Bowdlerize” — thanks for the nifty new word ) your books and refrain from certain material in future writing, it absolutely astounded me.
Here are these FANTASTIC books, which I personally consider myself lucky just to have encountered, and yet certain persons wish to quibble about tiny portions that they find offensive? It just doesn’t make sense. I don’t personally agree with killing small fat children, but it didn’t stop me from reading “Lord of the Flies”, nor will I be writing any letters asking for that portion to be removed from the story.
I just don’t see how *fiction* can offend anyone, personally — *real* people swear and cheat and fight and do terribly “offensive” things, so why on earth would anyone expect fictional characters to be any different? To be honest, I’m not sure that anyone COULD write a book without any “offensive” content. Just look at the Bible — it has to be by far one the most violent, adulterous, chock-full-of-sins book that I’ve ever read.
And to the parents who complain of supposed “offensive” content because they don’t find it appropriate for their children: Why must everything in the world be “child friendly” anyway? There are literally *thousands* upon thousands of children’s books, movies, games, toys, food, restaurants… EVERYTHING, really… and you’re complaining that this particular set of books is by your standards “inappropriate” for your widdle precious darlings? Who bloody cares?! Not everything HAS to be made for your children. Grown-ups can have things too, you know.
Sorry, lost my cool a bit there. It just frustrates me that these wonderful books would be criticized in any way, least of all for silly reasons like these. If anything, I would prefer MORE sex scenes in these books — any passages in which Jamie and Claire interact is always fascinating, and their relationship is by far the best one in literature that I have encountered.
Thanks for these wonderful stories!
Katie
When going through pre-cana classes nearly 13 years ago, the obvious emphasis was on the sacrament of marriage, two separate lives becoming one, encouraging couples to remember to bring God into their marriage, to pray together. When Fr got to the sex part, he told us that one of the best ways to pray together is to have intercourse. Why do you think at the time of climax you say things like, “Oh my God!” or “Jee-sus!”? According to this most popular, well-respected Jesuit priest of my diocese, Jamie & Claire are merely doing what God asks of all married couples: keeping Him present by calling out reverently while praying together (often).
On a personal side note… over time without trying, this priest shattered my agnostic Presbyterian (if one can be such a thing) views and eventually led me to become Catholic. However, I still swear like a sailor and find that holding my tongue is one of the most difficult things I do as a parent!
Part of the reason I read books, fiction or non-, is to learn things, to be exposed to different ways of viewing the world, to travel vicariously through the characters’ stories. I don’t like everything I read, but I think I understand a whole lot more, am more adaptable, and more tolerant for the experience. Like everyone else here, I love how complicated and detailed your books are. I’m amazed at how you connect us the readers to your characters. Thank you.
You know. I was doing a little bit of research for an assignment and discovered that the F word first appeared in print in 1503 or thereabouts (sorry, doing this from memory, not from the book I found it in). The F word is therefore not at all a modern word, only its more common usage.
As for mothers not wanting daughters to know about sex….well!!
Dianna- You should have someone screen your fan mail and instruct them to file complaints like these in the recycling bin! This is just taking away from your writing time!
AND I NEED THAT BOOK!
Oh, and be sure to add in a few extra ‘Jesuses’ and sex scenes just to prove that the crazies didn’t affect your style!
Obviously, as I’m sure the bulk of your fan mail and your bank account reflects, you had it right the first time!
Mucho Kudos and PLEASE get Jamie and Claire back to us as soon as possible!
I enjoy your blog as much as I enjoy your books! Don’t change a thing they are wonderful.
Thanks for the laugh. I just cracked up with your line, “Now, there may possibly be long and successful marriages that don’t include sex, but I don’t personally know of any.”
Hello Diana,
I was going to start off by saying that I am your biggest fan, but I am afraid I would cause a huge arguement based on the number of people who respond to your blogs alone. So I will just tell you that for many years ,I was not much of a reader. I never seemed to make the time with three little ones at home; then quite by accident I came across Outlander (enough said). Since then I have discovered the joy of reading again. Maybe its having been brought up with a Scottish background, I cant help but sometimes laugh out loud at some of the language and sayings you have put in. The sex/love scenes (I agree with most,there are not nearly enough of them) are so crucial to the story and marriage that altering them in the least would be a travesty.
Anyway I just felt like I needed to say Thank you for making such wonderful stories, please don’t stop .
I always re-read your books when anxiously waitng for the next instalment. I have read many other authors since discovering you and have to say that when I read your books ,it honestly feels like someone is right next to me telling me a great story.
So carry on being the Genius that you are and the rest of us will just sit back in awe.
Dear Kathleen–
Thank you! {smile}
–Diana
Hi Diana,
I know I’m off subject here, but I just read the story of Roger’s parents in “Songs of Love and Death” and wondered if you could refresh my memory. In which book is his side of this story written. Thank you, this will save me many hours of searching.
Jennifer
Jennifer:
It’s in Echo…Roger is reminiscing about a conversation that he and Clare had when he was back on the Ridge.
Thank you.
Actually what I’m looking for is where he is remembering the events of the day his mother passed.
It’s in The Fiery Cross, chapter 98, entitled “Clever Lad.” Hope that helps…
Yes! That is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you!
Thank you for many, many enjoyable hours lost in your books. I don’t see that there is any reason for you to change the way you write. You are able to transport us (your avid readers) to every time, place and situation with the depth of your writing. To omit anything would be a sad loss. Thank you again.
I truly love your books just the way they are. I could not put them down and am waiting for the next one. I am a Christian and am not offended by your books. It is a wonderful story of, to me, how life truly is. Not so perfect and with all kinds of people who act out not so well at times. If someone is offended then I would suggest they find another book. The books are for adults and adults should take more care around children. That is their own fault. You would not watch some movies with children, such as a war movie, but that does not mean a story shouldn’t be told.
Adults who are married have sex. I have been married 23 years. Sex is a wonderful part of the arrangement and God made it for us. You can understand how much Jaimie and Claire love each other through the telling of it.
The language is how some people really are, maybe not those who are complaining, but appropriate for the story. Again, if you don’t like it, ultimatly the reader is in control to just pick up another book.
I love that the story is long and ongoing. I am not ready for the story to end. I have only read the books once, but can tell I need to go back and revisit them before the next one comes out. I love the charachters and the depth of them. There are so many of them. It keeps me on my toes. Thank you for writing this story.
Dear Pam–
I think I can do that, but given the number of comments on this posting, it might take me a little while to find yours. I’m just going out to an appointment, but will make a note to look for it and delete it when I come up to work tonight.
–Diana