 |
| Image via: Bookish |
The practice of book
censorship is predominant in human history for a long period. The traces date
back to ancient China where censorship was marked as a legitimate tool for
regulating the political and moral outlook of the people (Newth, 2010). As
stated by Newth (2010), the origin of the term ‘censor’ was from the office of
censor of 443 BC, Rome. As for the Greeks for the maintenance of good
governance, it is important to shape the character of individuals of the state
and so censorship gets noted as an honourable task (Newth, 2010). However, with
time the act of censorship started getting associated with controversial
statements at large.
The
concerns related to censorship remained controversial throughout the pages of
history. The core objective of censorship is to prevent and further restrict
the kind of creations, offering accessibilities and disseminating the flow of
data and ideas (Emery, 1994). According to the critical speculation of Emery
(1994), the activities initiated under censorship get supported by the
ideological suppression of any particular culture or otherwise to stretch the
reader’s understanding towards a particular field of creation.
Book Censorship 1600-1750
It
is the middle of the 15th century that Europe invented the printing
press and soon the battle of religious publication started getting severe. As
printing gets spurned in the European nations, developments of newspapers and
newsletters became predominant. Publication of ‘Relation of Strasbourg’
in the year 1609 became the most popular printed newsletter. It was structured
as per the religious and political norms of the age. Following the same trend,
the first newspaper came up in Switzerland, in the year 1610. It was in huge
public demand, yet without making any offence to the religious or the political
platforms of the nations. This publication was followed by a newspaper from
Habsburg (in 1620), then in England in the year 1621, followed by France in the
year 1631, Denmark (in 1634), Italy (in 1636), Sweden (in 1645), and Poland (in
1661) (Newth, 2010). The impact of censorship still showed over the publication
house of Elzeviers and Blaeu. Elzeviers used a fake identity - 'Cologne,
Pierre Marteau'; and Blaeu used the fake identity 'Eleutheropolis';
for the publication of Socinian text, which was regularly banned by censorship
(IISG (2016).
The
printings were highly aided by Catholic Church and related missions, yet the
hold of the expressions by the Protestant Reformation as well as
"heretics" like Martin Luther played an integral part in this battle.
It is then that the need for censorship appeared to be the tool for restricting
freedom of expression in that period and the ages to be followed.
For
instance, during this phase, John Milton targeted the entire bureaucratic
system for leading the practice of pre-censorship. Medieval Europe for Milton
was a phase of conflicts. His disputed speech as declared in "Areopagitica"
of 1644 referred to the Parliament. It is in this speech that Milton opposed
the proceedings of Licensing Act of 1643. As specified by Curry (1997) the
censorship of intellectual expression has always been a matter of criticism and
is noted in the United Kingdom. With the establishment of Licensing of
the Press Act of 1662, the Parliament of England entitle the act as –
"An
Act for preventing the frequent Abuses in printing seditious treasonable and
unlicensed Books and Pamphlets and for regulating of Printing and Printing
Presses."
However,
initially, the power of censorship was much bestowed upon Sir Roger L'Estrange
and censorship remained a matter of controversies and conflicts. By 1679, the
act expired. Under the reign of Charles II as in George III, the press was
restricted to the level of ‘prosecutions for libel’ (Patterson, 1993). By 1685,
the Licensing Act of 1662 was renewed, yet there was no marked liberty to
press.
This
Licensing Act expires in the year 1692. In the meantime, Milton’s contributions
and the constant struggle for the establishment of free expression of thoughts
led to the lapse of Licensing Act in the year 1694. By 1695, the governance of the
Commons denied to renew this Act (Patterson, 1993). It is here that
the censorship over publications was also considered as part of the press
release. The political dominance remained strong and in favour of the Religious
beliefs and practices as followed by the governing bodies. By 1710, the UK
Parliament first declared about Copyright Act which led to the declaration that
authors possess natural and very inherent ownership of their written content
(Patterson, 1993).
As
the Copyright Act starts getting approval, the authors were held responsible
for their writings and they started to gain more recognition for their work.
Copying or imitating ideas was restricted. The later years of the 17th century
and the early half of the 18th century represented emerged as a
phase of advocating liberty to thoughts, rights to expression, and maintenance
of the dignity of the individual expressions. However, political pressure
remained prevalent in many nations (Newth, 2010). It was in Sweden that for the
first time, censorship was abolished and a law was established that guaranteed
freedom to the press. The same trend was later followed by other European
nations like Denmark in 1766 and Norway in 1770.
Book Censorship 1800-1900
The
publications as noted in the last two centuries were derived to have more
inclination towards the religious and political means of establishing
determined ideologies in society. However, inspired by the debates led by John
Milton the phase of Enlightenment came into being in the later part of the 18th century.
The beginning of the 19th century too followed the power of
expressing thoughts in a more liberated manner. As against the strict
restrictions of the 17th and 18th centuries,
the publications of 19th-century Europe appeared more free and
independent. According to Newth (2010), the liberated styles of writing of
the 19th century ceded censorship and demands for a free
press began to lead the population, especially in Europe. However, there was
tight control over publication in Russia and Britain for books that were
dealing with political issues. For example, due to free expression of thoughts
in 1739, Jacob Campo Weyerman was sentenced to ‘life imprisonment’ and died
in prison (IISG, 2016 a). The restrictions were even expanded in the colonial
regions that were under Russian governance, like the Baltic; and Australia,
India, Canada and Africa under British governance. Australia even faced full
censorship till the year 1823, whereas in South Africa, publications of any
order remained under extensive censorship. The case of South Africa was more
than any religious or political concern. It was rather about the humanitarian
aspect of discriminating against people of racial origins (Newth, 2010).
Against
all these restrictions the United States of America was getting more concerned
with obscene publications. It was in the year 1815 that U.S. governance started
getting convictions related to obscene publications. This was followed by an increasing
count of pornographic publications. As a result, laws were established to
implement legislative censorship in the 19th century. The focus
of censorship during this phase made a drastic shift from religious and
political concerns to the restrictions of obscene publications. Sooner the
concerns started getting predominated in the European nations and censorship
started getting focussed on issues raised by socialism, feminism, and issues of
mass literacy. Transformative modes of change were marked to the power game
between the public demands and the elite benefits of the private sectors. It
was in 1847 that Customs Act from Canada came into effect and prohibited
obscene publications (Carefoot, 2009). This gets followed by the Customs
Consolidation Act of Britain in 1853. Violations of these Acts resulted in the arrest
of many authors, booksellers and publishers. Cases were filed against many
libraries for circulating obscene books. By 1857, the 2nd Empire
of France trialled Gustav Flaubert for his Madam Bovary and
Charles Baudelaire for his Les Fleurs du Mal. Even
their publishers were trialled for publishing these books. The opposition
towards legislative censorship of art led to the demands for aesthetic freedom
under the tag of ‘art for art’s sake’. This is a tremendous shift whereby the
independence of expressing artistic creativity demanded freedom (Roberts,
1985). It was a shift from the cries of intellectual freedom of the former
century towards the freedom of aestheticism. As a whole, censorship was more
specified in terms of restricting personalised depiction of art rather than
anything that is a declaration of fact. The concentration of censorship turned
mostly towards ‘sexual literacy’ as against religious and political concerns. For
instance, during the 1880s, French naturalism in Australia censored the works
of Emile Zola and the publishers of the books, Albert Vizetelly. In the year
1848, there was a liberal breakthrough for the press and in 1869, Dagbladzegel,
taxation on newspapers was abolished(IISG, 2016 b). This led to the emergence
of modern mass media. However, as identified by Heath (2006) such restrictions
were only severely made prevalent in Australia, as against another British
colony, India. Hence, the restrictions were constant from legislatures of
different nations, yet the variations of strictness remained constant in every
nation as per their cultural set-up.
Book Censorship Current
The
increasing pressure of censorship, especially those led by political governance
has made the trends of publications more concerned with expressing thoughts
that will be accepted rather than freedom of thought from any specified field
of action. In the contemporary scenario, censorship is though not much visible
in political and religious domains of expression, yet there is an underneath
current that shows that no outrageous expression will be ever accepted by any
political or religious parties. Restrictions over obscenity are still
implemented with great severity. According to IISG (2016 c), advanced
technology has made publications cheaper and easier and cheaper and censorship
more liberal. For example, in the domain of illegal publications, mimeograph is
a popular printing technique during the 1970s and 80s. Rather than developing
art or content that can evoke social unrest. However, having said that it is
appropriate to consider the investigative decoration of Cohen who refers to the
free platforms of social media developed by technological developments of the
modern world.
Cohen (2012) illustrates the ways of unrestricted accessibility of expressions through the online spread of information and participation in various social media networking services, can lead to the rejection of censorship in general. However, Cohen further stated that it does not mean that people will lead to an ‘unprecedented era of freedom’ (2012). According to Cohen, the laws of privacy with the emergence of technology are yet to meet every level of censorship as it was for the print media. The censorship of books is still initiated at large, for example in the case of Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses. It was in the year 1988, when Salman Rushdie, an Indian-origin Briton came up with a book that illustrated Prophet Muhammad as a state that is ‘less-than-reverent light’. Under this condition, Ayatollah Khomeini declared a fatwa, whereby Rushdie as an Islam follower is subject to be killed (Simkulet, 2015). In this frontier, Cohen refers to the risk of writing against religious and political subjects, and at the same time the act of preserving freedom of expression at large (2012). In this context, Swiderek (1996) even referred to the issues of getting controversial for freedom of expression and getting censored instantaneously. For Swiderek (1996) the younger generation is the way to deal with media and further enhance their expressions with adequate regulations of censorships as prevalent in the respective nation. It is right to accept Jansen, who stated defined censorship as regulation to some relevant extent is “the knot that binds power and knowledge” (1988). For Jansen, in the contemporary scenario, censorship is more like outlawing literary limits of expression. There is a demand for being socially, religiously, politically and institutionally appropriate.
Eventually,
with the advent of technology, the scope for the expression of thoughts and
feelings; is attaining extensive independence. It is more getting concerned
about individual discipline and maintaining social and political decorum with
necessarily admitted justifications. As rightly interpreted by Kirchick (2012)
censorship of books or any other print media is still a definite act of being
under political control. However, the freedom of expression through social
media networking sites, like Facebook and Twitter must remain self-controlled
and authentically justified. Censorship is no more the responsibility of a
state but is in the hands of the moral and ethical ideologies of the global
population. The current trend of censorship, especially over social media
networking sites, actually demands ‘self-censorship’.
No comments:
Post a Comment