Originally Posted by touma
Originally Posted by Junker Woland
... but even with it being author initiated, I still don't can't agree with censorship, regardless of reasoning.
Do you really consider it to be "censorship" when an artist changes his own work?
I'm not Junker Woland
, but ... to me, censorship is largely about intent. If something is changed to avoid giving offense to bluenoses, to avoid getting in trouble, or to market a title to a younger or broader audience -- all those reasons amount to unacceptable censorship IMO.
In this case, the artist was essentially self-censoring for commercial purposes. It wasn't an artistic choice, it was sales-driven. It's not terribly different from those situations where American manga publishers try to excuse their censorship by saying the artist authorized it, which doesn't impress me one whit.
Dark Horse had another option that isn't mentioned here: to tell the artist that if shrinkwrap was that much of an issue for him, they would simply have to gird their loins and publish the thing uncensored and
without shrink-wrapping. No law that says you have to shrinkwrap, after all. As far as I'm concerned, that would have been the principled decision in this situation.