Welsh Journals

Censorship. Hy Ifan Kyrle Fletcher. RECENT events in Wales have suggested certain thoughts to me on the very vexed question of censorship. A few years ago the Pwllheli Eisteddfod authorities refused to allow the Portmadoc Players to perform a play by Moliere; within the last months agita- tion was raised in Swansea over Pobl yr Ymylon Miles Malleson's thoughtful play, The Fanatics," was in danger of banning in Cardiff, and at the same time was the cause of a particularly vulgar attempt at notoriety-an attempt which happily did not succeed promi- nent public libraries in South Wales have refused George Moore's Memoirs of My Dead Life," and Anatole France's Penguin Island," to serious readers. These are but examples of the restrictions which are every day being imposed in the name of public morality. From the amount of censorship which exists it would seem as though the majority of rational opinion in this country is in favour of a supervision of our reading and playgoing. There is the Lord Chamberlain's censorship of plays; the further powers possessed by provincial Watch Com- mittees the police and post office supervision of reading matter; the censorship of lending libraries and the discreet but effective censorship by municipal libraries. Each of these persons or bodies is established to prevent work of per- nicious tendencies from reaching people who might be adversely affected by such work. This is a most laudable motive, and when vested in such an authority as the Lord Chamberlain's office or a Watch Committee it partakes of an ex cathedra potency. We have become used to censorship, and few to-day question its necessity in some form. Only when our amusement or pleasure is endangered do we pause to consider, not whether it is necessary, but whether it is desirable. It will be well to consider the different kinds of censorship and their effect both upon the public and upon art. The censorship of the Lord Chamberlain is conducted with dignity and con- siderable intelligence. The relaxation of the ban on G. B. Shaw's Mrs. Warren's Profession and The Showing Up of Blanco Posnet," speaks of a broader outlook. The refusal of licenses to Pirandello's Six Characters in Search of an Author," and Strindberg's Miss Julie," are the darker side of the picture. Happily the local Watch Committees seldom take action in these matters, for it is hardly to be believed that they can pass a better judgment than the trained officials of the Lord Chamber- lain's department. Police supervision of books is very perfunctory, and seldom takes effect except in extreme cases. Even here, however, there are examples which must be deplored by all intelligent readers; such a case was the banning of James Joyce's remarkable book Ulysses." It is difficult to find any justifica- tion for the censorship of libraries, whether commercial or municipal. One may reasonably doubt if commercial libraries undertake censor- ship for any moral reasons whatever. They see a great opportunity to appeal to that vast mass of the reading public who read books written for family reading." They certainly win the support at which they aim. Censorship by public libraries is undertaken in a very discreet way; indeed, so quietly is it done that many people are unaware of its existence. This very secrecy is a token, to some, that libraries would find it hard to justify the method. In every country a certain amount of censor- ship exists, if it is only the final arbitration of the police upon decency. But few countries have allowed so much restriction as our own. Only of recent years has America beaten us in organ- ised hypocrisy. The matter came to a head in 1910, when a reader at Boston Public Library was refused a copy of George Moore's Esther Waters without presentation of a special permit from the Chief Librarian. Then details of the censorship were made public, and some of the examples were almost unbelievable in their stupidity. None of the works of Richardson, Fielding, or Smollett were allowed in several public libraries, and an editor of a prominent New York journal would not print a reference to Measure for Measure for fear of prosecution. More recently the U.S. mailing authorities have prohibited the posting of books by Ovid, the Earl of Rochester, and William Wycherley, and have even mutilated a copy of The De- cameron printed in Italian by the Ashendene Press. It needs a Dickens to scarify such be- haviour with satirical laughter. The effects of censorship are not always those desired by the censors. It is only too well known that a banned play or book attracts an audience or readers far in excess of the number who are interested in the book apart from its banning. Such an attitude towards plays and books is very undesirable, but it is one of those forces which nullify the work of the censors. J. "deed, far from curing a population of bad taste, a censorship does not a little to stimulate an un- healthy interest. Like all acts of repression, it does not succeed in finally eliminating the un- desirable element. That can only be done-if it can be done at all-by much more positive action. No symptom of the quality of modern life is more alarming than this fear of the products of our own minds. We cannot trust ourselves, and in a vague terror we appoint committees and policemen to regulate our lives. This is no claim for license or disorder, but the expression of a feeling that the integrity of life is endangered