Censorship, the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, has profoundly shaped literary and media history. From ancient times to the modern era, authorities and societal norms have sought to control what people read, watch, and hear. This article explores significant historical instances of censorship, examining how these battles influenced artistic freedom and public discourse, providing a comprehensive overview for students studying this crucial topic.
Understanding Censorship in Literary and Media History: An Overview
Censorship isn't a new phenomenon. Throughout history, various entities—governments, religious institutions, and even social establishments—have imposed restrictions on artistic and intellectual expression. These actions were often driven by concerns over morality, public order, or political stability, leading to landmark trials and significant cultural shifts.
The Evolution of Obscenity Laws and Literary Merit
Before the 1950s, the primary concern in obscenity cases was whether a book was considered "lustful" or sexually exciting. Literary achievement often played a minor role, with courts initially unwilling to hear testimony on a book's quality. Some judges even argued that good writing made a "pernicious book all the more effective," making "well-written obscenity the worst kind."
By the 1950s, a subtle shift occurred. Courts began to acknowledge that sufficient literary quality could outweigh some "lustfulness," especially for classic works. This led to a legal distinction: "literature" that produced intellectual or aesthetic responses, and "pornography" that elicited primal, "groin" responses. These categories were often treated as mutually exclusive.
Victorian Era Censorship: Shaping Literature and Society
The Victorian Era saw significant societal upheaval due to industrialization, urbanization, and changing social structures. This period was marked by a strong fear of change and a puritanical backlash against perceived threats to moral standards, such as sex, women's emancipation, and individualism.
Thomas Hardy and the Victorian Battle for Expression
Authors like Thomas Hardy faced immense pressure from a highly critical audience. His novels, which often incorporated liberal themes and challenged religious dogma, frequently encountered censorship.
Hardy's Tess of the d’Urbervilles and Jude the Obscure faced significant roadblocks. Publishers rejected Tess for its "immoral situations," particularly its challenge to the sexual double standard. When serialized in The Graphic in 1891, Hardy was forced to make substantial modifications, including removing references to characters traveling on a Sunday and altering a scene where Angel Clare carried Tess, replacing it with him pushing her in a wheelbarrow. A mock marriage was even substituted for Tess's rape and seduction.
Despite critical acclaim, Tess was attacked for its morality, its suggestion that God is malicious, and its "coarse and disagreeable story." Hardy's prefaces to subsequent editions reveal his frustration, using metaphors of his novel being "torn into pieces" and asserting the importance of "truth" even if it caused offense. This highlights the pressures that led to Hardy's self-censorship to please his audience and address topics relevant to Victorian society.
The Birth of Bowdlerization
One of the most famous examples of literary censorship comes from Thomas Bowdler, who in 1818 produced his Family Shakspeare [sic]. His expurgated version of Shakespeare's works led to the verb "to bowdlerize," meaning to remove material that is considered improper or offensive, particularly from a book or play.
Landmark Obscenity Trials: D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover
D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover became a pivotal case in the history of literary censorship, challenging obscenity laws in both the United States and Britain.
The Novel's Controversial Origins and Early Publication
Lawrence wrote three versions of the novel between 1926 and 1928, using taboo language that far exceeded contemporary fiction. His third, most "lurid" version was rejected by English publishers who mocked his attempts as hypocrisy.
Lawrence then turned to Guiseppe Orioli, a bookseller in Florence, Italy, understanding that foreign editions of banned books could be highly profitable. The first Florentine edition of 1,000 copies sold out in 1928, despite its high price. Pirated editions soon emerged to meet demand, and in 1929, Lawrence published a cheaper edition through Edward Titus in Paris, including a preface detailing his struggles with censors.
For the next 30 years, Lady Chatterley's Lover remained either outlawed or severely bowdlerized, bearing little resemblance to the author's work. A 1944 American edition of Lawrence's milder first draft was deemed "clearly obscene" due to its advocacy of adultery, though this was later reversed on appeal.
The American Trial: Grove Press and Redeeming Social Merit
In 1959, Grove Press deliberately issued an unexpurgated edition of the 1928 version of Lady Chatterley's Lover to test the limits of what was considered obscene. This edition, distributed through a book club, was seized by Post Office authorities.
However, in a countersuit, U.S. District Court Judge van Pelt Bryan ruled in favor of the book, finding "redeeming social merit" and praising Lawrence's "descriptive passages of rare beauty." The U.S. Court of Appeals upheld this decision in 1960, declaring it a "major and distinguished novel" by "one of the great writers of the age."
This decision led to an explosion in sales. Due to Grove Press lacking a formal contract, the book was in the public domain, leading to multiple editions, including a Pocket Books version selling a million copies in six days at 35 cents each.
The British Trial: Penguin Books and the Obscene Publications Act of 1959
Inspired by Grove Press's success, Penguin Books announced in January 1960 that it would publish a complete edition of Lady Chatterley's Lover in Britain. This was seen as a challenge by the Director of Public Prosecutions, especially since Penguin planned to sell it for 3/6 (17p), making a previously exclusive book accessible to the general public.
The trial, held at the Old Bailey in October 1960, was a highly publicized event. The defense mustered 70 expert witnesses, including academics, literary figures, clergymen, and politicians. The prosecution's counsel, Mervyn Griffiths-Jones, inadvertently helped the defense by suggesting the book was "not fit for your wife or your servants" and by listing its "30 'fucks or fuckings,' fourteen 'cunts,' thirteen 'balls,' six each of 'shit' and 'arse,' four 'cocks' and three 'piss.'" This patronizing tone likely alienated the jury.
On November 2, 1960, after deliberating for three hours, the jury found Penguin Books innocent. This verdict was a cultural landmark, signaling the start of the "sixties" as a cultural phenomenon, as Philip Larkin noted. Penguin dedicated the next edition to the jury, selling 2 million copies in a year. The trial's outcome on both sides of the Atlantic initiated a new style of paperback publishing, allowing for a broader depiction of sex and violence in literature.
James Joyce's Ulysses: A Century-Long Battle for Literary Freedom
Another monumental work that faced intense censorship was James Joyce's Ulysses, challenging the boundaries of modernist literature and free expression.
Early Bans and Seizures
First published in Paris in 1921, early editions of Ulysses were distributed to subscribers worldwide. However, British customs seized and burned 499 out of 500 copies of a 1923 printing. Similarly, in America, episodes serialized in The Little Review in 1919 led to the editor being fined. When the complete book was published, many copies were smuggled, and some 30,000 bowdlerized and pirated editions appeared to meet demand.
The Landmark U.S. Court Case
In 1933, Random House deliberately challenged the U.S. Customs ban by attempting to import an unexpurgated edition. The resulting case, United States v. One Book Entitled “Ulysses” (1933), led to a significant ruling by Federal District Court Judge John M. Woolsey. He praised Joyce's loyalty to his technique and his honest attempt to depict his characters' thoughts fully. Woolsey noted that the criticized words were "old, Saxon words known to almost all men and, I venture, to many women," and were naturally used by the characters Joyce sought to describe.
The judge famously stated, "I have not found anything that I consider to be dirt for dirt’s sake. Each word of the book contributes like a bit of mosaic to the detail of the picture which Joyce is seeking to construct for his readers." This decision, upheld on appeal, freed Ulysses from censorship in the U.S. and eventually led to its general availability, including unexpurgated editions in England and America by 1937.
Media Censorship Beyond Books: Film, Theatre, and Press
Censorship wasn't limited to printed words; it extended into other forms of media, often with distinct regulatory bodies and historical contexts.
Film Censorship: The Lady Chatterley's Lover Film Ban
The 1957 French film version of Lady Chatterley's Lover, titled L’Amant de Lady Chatterley, faced its own censorship battle in the U.S. It was banned in New York under a law prohibiting licenses for films that presented adultery as "right and desirable for certain people under certain circumstances."
In Kingsley International Pictures Corporation v. Regents of the University of New York (1959), the U.S. Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Potter Stewart, rejected the ban. The Court ruled that the New York law was unconstitutional because the film was banned for an "idea"—the portrayal of adultery as acceptable—rather than for outright obscenity. The First Amendment protects the dissemination of ideas, however abhorrent, unless they fall outside its protection (like outright obscenity).
Justice Black, in a concurring opinion, stressed that any form of prior censorship violated the Constitution, emphasizing that judges are ill-equipped to supervise private morals.
Theatre Censorship: The Lord Chamberlain's Office
In Britain, the Lord Chamberlain held absolute censorship powers over the English stage until 1968. This authority, codified in acts like the Stage Licensing Act of 1737 and Theatre Regulation Act of 1843, meant every script had to be submitted, with no appeal against his rulings.
While individual playwrights often railed against censorship, a more general movement began with modern writers like Shaw and Ibsen. The 20th century saw increasing agitation, but despite efforts from the literary establishment, little changed. By the late 1950s, with the emergence of revolutionary English drama, many felt the Lord Chamberlain's anachronistic powers were merely tolerated.
However, after the Obscene Publications Act of 1959, tolerance collapsed. A 1962 bill to abolish the Lord Chamberlain's powers was defeated. The battle intensified in 1965 when Edward Bond's play Saved, depicting a baby being stoned to death, was staged at a theatre club to avoid cuts. The Lord Chamberlain refused to ignore it, leading to police charges and fines for the Royal Court Theatre's directors.
Increased public protest and a private member's bill gained all-party support. The Lord Chamberlain's intransigence, including cutting a college production of Chaucer's Miller's Tale, only fueled the opposition. Finally, in September 1968, the Theatres Bill became law, abolishing the Lord Chamberlain's office after 400 years.
18th Century Censorship: The Press and Postal System
The liberty of the press was a constant discussion point in 18th-century England. Robert Walpole, Britain's first de facto prime minister, actively obstructed the opposition press. He used the postal system to ship government-friendly literature for free and to control public discourse by preventing the distribution of anti-government newspapers and checking the correspondence of publishers.
The judicial system was another efficient tool for censorship. The law of seditious libel was used for political purposes, issuing general warrants for arbitrary house searches and arrests. Publishers and printers faced severe consequences, including confiscation of assets, imprisonment, high bail, and delayed trials, often forcing smaller newspapers to close.
Modern Challenges: Orwell and OZ Magazine
Censorship continued to evolve, taking new forms and facing new challenges in the 20th century.
George Orwell's Struggle with "Voluntary Censorship"
George Orwell experienced censorship on two levels: directly, by finding it difficult to publish his own work, and more broadly, by reflecting on "truth-telling" and language in totalitarian and liberal societies.
Orwell faced immediate challenges, especially with his anti-Stalinist views. After initial enthusiasm, his publisher Victor Gollancz refused to publish a book he started, fearing it would "harm the struggle against fascism." His masterpiece, Animal Farm, a clear allegory against Stalin and the USSR, was rejected by multiple publishers during WWII due to its "unhelpful" and "unpatriotic" stance, only being published three days after the Japanese surrender in 1945.
However, what increasingly concerned Orwell was "voluntary censorship." This wasn't official state censorship, which he didn't oppose in principle during wartime. Instead, it was the self-denial imposed by an "unofficial literary establishment" or "intelligentsia"—a social and ideological group, primarily pro-Soviet socialists, who held hegemonic influence.
Orwell's The Road to Wigan Pier, an empirical study of unemployment and poverty, had its second half—an analysis of British socialism's shortcomings—almost dropped by Gollancz due to this "voluntary censorship." His experiences in the Spanish Civil War, particularly his attempts to expose Soviet duplicity, revealed how publications like the New Statesman refused his articles because they "controverted the political policy of the paper." He saw this intelligentsia, in thrall to the Soviet Union, as a threat to his democratic socialism.
The OZ Magazine Trial: A Counterculture Clash
OZ magazine, a British counterculture publication, pushed boundaries with its "weapons of revolution: obscenity, blasphemy and drugs." By 1970, OZ 28 was devoted to schoolchildren's contributions, though the adult staff retained responsibility for the cover, which featured "camp-porn lesbian orgy," and soft-core personal advertisements.
Following police raids, the OZ directors—Richard Neville, Jim Anderson, and Felix Dennis—were charged under the Obscene Publications Act (1959) and the Post Office Act (1953) for publishing and possessing obscene material and sending indecent articles through the mail.
England's longest obscenity trial lasted nearly six weeks. The defense argued for liberty and freedom of speech, deploying expert witnesses similar to the Lady Chatterley's Lover trial to justify the "literary or artistic excellence" of the schoolchildren's "exuberantly lavatorial contributions." This trial famously introduced the "aversion theory" defense: that "grossly lewd and unpleasant" material, far from encouraging perversion, would actively repel consumers from it.
Despite this, all three defendants and the company were found guilty. Their harsh sentences, including jail time and forced haircuts, sparked public sympathy and protests. While bail was granted pending appeal, the judge's actions highlighted the deep divisions between pro- and anti-censorship lobbies.
The Enduring Impact of Censorship Battles
The historical battles against censorship, from the Victorian era to the 1970s, significantly shaped the landscape of literary and media freedom. Landmark trials for works like Lady Chatterley's Lover and Ulysses challenged and ultimately broadened the legal definitions of obscenity, allowing for greater artistic expression.
The abolition of the Lord Chamberlain's powers and the exposure of governmental interference in the press and publishing, as seen with Orwell, demonstrated the continuous struggle for unfettered creativity. These historical moments underscore the vital role of artists, writers, and legal defenders in pushing boundaries and defending the right to disseminate ideas, no matter how controversial.
Frequently Asked Questions about Censorship in Literature
What was the Obscene Publications Act of 1959?
The Obscene Publications Act of 1959 was a British law that offered some latitude for "obscene publishing" if a work could be proven to have literary, artistic, or scientific merit. It was under this act that Penguin Books was tried and acquitted for publishing an unexpurgated edition of Lady Chatterley's Lover, setting a major precedent for literary freedom.
How did the Lord Chamberlain's office censor theatre?
Britain's Lord Chamberlain was an absolute censor of the English stage until 1968. Every play script had to be submitted to him for approval, and there was no appeal against his rulings. His power was codified in acts like the Stage Licensing Act of 1737, allowing him to ban plays for indecency or anything that shocked "the Publick Quiet, or the Reputation of Private Persons."
What is "voluntary censorship" as described by George Orwell?
"Voluntary censorship," as identified by George Orwell, refers to the self-denial or suppression of ideas driven not by official state decree but by an "unofficial literary establishment" or "intelligentsia." This group, often holding a dominant ideological view (like pro-Soviet socialism in Orwell's time), could exert pressure on publishers and reviewers, making it difficult for dissenting voices to be heard or published, even without explicit legal bans. This is a key aspect of understanding censorship in literary and media history for students.
What was the "aversion theory" in the OZ trial?
The "aversion theory" was a defense strategy used in the OZ magazine trial in England. It argued that certain highly explicit or "grossly lewd and unpleasant" material would, paradoxically, not encourage consumers towards perversion but would instead actively repel them from it. This theory was an attempt to justify the publication of controversial content by suggesting it had an unintended, deterring effect rather than a corrupting one.