The Absurdity of Censorship
A little while into watching Oppenheimer the other day, and trying desperately not to laugh at the clumsy censoring of a nude scene, it struck me that someone at the CBFC had to carefully watch the scene to apply the black masking on Florence Pugh’s breasts. Not just watch it in passing and declare it worthy of censorship but look carefully at where her breasts ended, how much of the curve of her back to show so as not to hide her totally but also not show enough of the image to evoke buttocks.
It also brought to mind this famous anecdote: After Samuel Johnson published his great dictionary of the English language he was reportedly approached by two ladies who said to him, “Mr. Johnson, we are glad that you have omitted the indelicate and objectionable words from your new dictionary.”
“What, my dears!” said Mr. Johnson. “Have you been searching for them?”
What this anecdote and also the careful censorship of Oppenheimer shows us is, to censor something, someone has to go looking for something to censor.
And the person who censors sees what is supposedly not to be seen.
So what happens to these people? If this thing is so awful that people shouldn’t see it, what happens to those who do see it? Are they corrupted? Are the irreversibly damaged by Florence Pugh’s breasts?
Adults telling other adults that there are things they shouldn’t see is either:
‘I have seen this thing - it ruined me, it corrupted me, it destroyed by purity. Now affected so deeply by this filth I will walk out of this room and go and rape ten people. It will ruin you too. Thus for the sake of the harmony of society, you should not see it.’
‘I have seen this thing - I am unaffected by it because I am made of sterner stuff. But you will be because you are either weaker, stupider or inferior.’
Do you, yes you, think you are weaker, stupider or in any way inferior to the esteemed members of the CBFC? Or are the members of the CBFC irreparably damaged by the things they see every day - if so what heinous acts are they committing on a daily basis that evince the negative effect of these things they see?
Or are they performing some great noble deed, sacrificing their sanity, decency and purity for the sake of the goodness of our country?
Censorship, like all the tools of authoritarians, is more concerned about the group than the individual and is more concerned with purity than progress. This can only lead to more and more censorship, less criticism, and the slow transformation of an open society to a static one.