Literary Censorship: The Changing Standards

Laila Al-Sharqi, Irum Saeed Abbasi

Abstract


Censorship is a double-edged sword that has bred legal, political, and moral wrangling across the globe. The basic controversy, which harkens back to ancient times, stems from the motivation and intention of the censoring authority. The censoring authority controls literary and informational contents, based on the promulgated political, moral, religious, and cultural values of the land. Historically, the politicians, judiciary, clergymen, powerful groups, and the public at large were involved in guarding public morals and rooting out obscenity. The obscenity laws outlawed the selling, purchasing, printing, importing, and mailing of obscene items. However, in today's day and age, the Internet has made it difficult to control the circulation of what was once considered obscene. Censorship has evolved to monitor and control online content to keep abreast with the changing times; nevertheless, it does not always effectively control the questionable content. Moreover, in the past, cultural values and demography played a vital role in deciding what needed to be censored. Internet, as an electronic global village, has redefined demography; therefore, the global as well as indigenous standards upon which literature were once analyzed for censorship is now blurred. The promise of free speech has given power to the people that live in mature democracies. However, there should be a self-imposed code of conduct so that the right of free speech does not infringe on others' right of existence. This paper reviews censorship, tracing its historical path and evolution over the years, its changing standards, and its pros and cons. Lastly, the paper discusses the need to conjoin freedom of speech with the responsibility to protect the diverse cultures, religions, races, sects, genders, and especially the young generation.

 


Keywords


Art, censorship, freedom of speech, literature, morality, obscenity

Full Text:

PDF

References


Art. (2015). In Merriam-Webster online. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/art

Bradshaw, D., & Potter, R. (2013). Prudes on the prowl: Fiction & obscenity in England, 1850 to the present day. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carr, D., & Davis, R. (2007). The lure of evil: Exploring moral formation on the dark side of literature and the arts. Journal of Philosophy Of Education, 41(1), 95-112. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9752.2007.00541.

Censorship. In The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia (6th Ed.). Available from http://www.worldcat.org/title/columbia-electronic-encyclopedia-6th-edition/oclc/746941797?referer=di&ht=edition

Ethic. (2015). In Merriam-Webster online. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethics

Feldman, S. M. (2008). Free expression and democracy in America: A History. London: University of Chicago Press, Ltd.

Jenkins, I. (1944). The legal basis of literary censorship. Virginia Law Review, 31(1), pp.83-118. doi: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1068570

Kazemek, F. E. (1995). Choice, reason, and censorship. Reading Today. p. 2018.

Kidd, K. (2009). “Not censorship but selection”: Censorship and/as prizing. Children's Literature In Education, 40(3), 197-216. doi:10.1007/s10583-008-9078-4

Kieren, M. (2006). Art, morality and ethics: On the (im)moral character of art works and inter-relations to artistic value. Philosophy Compass 1(2) 129–143. doi: 0.1111/j.1747-9991.2006.00019.x

Kingwell, M. (2014). The ethics of ethics and literature. World Literature Today, 88(5), 23.

Literature. (2015). In Merriam-Webster online. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literature

Literature. (2015). In Oxford dictionary online. Retrieved from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/literature

Mullin, K. (2013). Poison more deadly than Prussic acid: Defining obscenity after the 1857 Obscene Publication Act (1850-1885). In Bradshaw, D., & Potter, R. (Eds.), Prudes on the prowl: Fiction & obscenity in England, 1850 to the present day (pp. 11-29). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Potter, R. (2011). Censorship. In Harding, J., & Harding, J. (Eds.), In T.S. Eliot in context (pp.83 - 92). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Potter, R. (2013). Obscene modernism: Literary censorship and experiment, 1900-1940. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Southern, G. (1930). Literary censorship. The Australian Quarterly, 2 (6), pp. 110-115. doi. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20628862




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.6p.33

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2020 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.