Messing with the original

Weidenfeld and Nicolson are soon to launch a list of compact classics - that is, long novels that have been shortened, cut down to more manageable length for readers who want this. Jenny Diski is against: she says readers should take or leave the books as they are. Kathryn Hughes disagrees. She argues that many of these classics can do with losing bits that are inessential. I'm not so sure about that, but otherwise my view is - so what? Cutting a classic novel makes it into a different book from the original (and in most cases probably one of less worth), but if someone can read the shorter version with enjoyment, that is a good in itself and it gives them a partial acquaintance with the spirit of the original. The books are not sacred objects. Diski allows that they may be made into films or plays, and 'screwed around with' in the process, but she offers no explanation of what's different, and worse, about simply shortening them.