For as long as humans could communicate there has been censorship. The word censorship fist came about within the ancient Roman Republic. According to Dictionary.com it was then defined as a position where “either of two officials kept the register or census of the citizens, awarded public contracts, and supervised manners and morals.” These men were given the title of censors. Now, while we still consider censors as those who attempt to control thoughts, actions, and words, they are people who “examine books, plays, news reports, motion pictures, radio and television programs, letters, cablegrams, etc., for the purpose of suppressing parts deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds.” While the term censorship may not have been used in the same sense back when ancient Rome was at its most prosperous, the idea of what censorship stood for has definitely been around since then.
There is a tale of a Roman man by the name of Aesop, who compiled a book of stories and fables called, Aesop’s Fables. It is said that due to the sarcastic nature of these; “his insulting sarcasms” (wiki.org) that he upset the inhabitants of Delphi who in turn threw him off of a cliff. While censoring by death is considered outrageous and unthinkable to us current-day Americans, killing writers for their thoughts and opinions on certain subjects was not too uncommon a couple centuries ago. In fact, I am currently reading a book by a Nigerian woman for my other English class, where we we are discussing the fact that she doesn’t come right out and speak her mind on Nigerian politics. My professor was saying that her lack of outright political opinion may be strongly influence by the fact that Nigeria has a not-to-recent history of “knocking off” (a.k.a killing) famous writers strongly opposed to the current form of government.
While censorship of things pertaining to certain governments is huge when it comes to peoples’ freedom of speech and opinions, religious groups have also cracked down on many a writer, or groups’ published views or works. The Medieval Inquisitions from the 1180’s to the 1230’s were created [by the Church] as a “response to large popular movements throughout Europe considered apostate or heretical to Christianity” (wiki.org). Anyone that was considered a “threat” to the church; anyone who outwardly voiced different views then those of the church were considered dangerous. The church executed leaders such as Joan of Arc, and Thomas More. In 1534, while the Catholic Church already controlled some universities—most likely teaching its students the beliefs of Christianity—the church also “controlled all publications through its decree in 1543 that no book could be printed or sold without permission of the church” (Beacon for Freedom of Expression). However, history has shown us that even if you take away the legality of printing people’s thoughts and opinions onto paper, societies will find ways around this. Underground groups and presses form hidden from the law. The American historian and at one time president of Yale University, Alfred Whitney Griswold once said, “Books won’t stay banned. They won’t burn. Ideas won’t go to jail. In the long run of history, the censor and the inquisitor have always lost. The only weapon against bad ideas is better ideas” (Google Quotes).
While people are no longer burned, or beheaded for their so called “radical” or “inappropriate” thoughts and ideas, books are still burned, and censorship is still very much around. The Austrian psychiatrist, Sigmund Freud once said in 1933—quite sarcastically I might add—, “What progress we are making. In the Middle Ages they would have burned me. Now they are content with burning my books” (Google Quotes). From pamphlets against religious beliefs, to children’s books about two male penguins raising a chick on their own, to a series about a boy wizard named Harry Potter, groups of people still feel the need to censor what others should and should not read. I say, if you personally do not believe in something written, or you don’t want your kid reading a certain something out there, then don’t let them. However, don’t take that opportunity to experience it away from others. All people should have the freedom to voice their personal opinions and learn about others’.
* * * *
I plan to use this towards the begining part of my persuasive essay paper in order to give people a brief definition of the word Censorship. I may end up using it as part of my introduction, because I feel like one should always start from the begining (unless purposefully using a flashback technique). That way your reader has enough neutral background information to be able to form his/her own opinion. I also think that it helps boost your further persuasion because when the reader knows that the person trying to persuade them–in this case me; the author–is knowledgeable in that area then they are more likely to listen, and keep reading. Knowing the history of your topic of interest shows that you have done research on the subject, and aren’t just making things up.
However, where you get that research is also important as a writer. That is why I plan to try and find a different source(s) for the wikipedia.org site I cited a couple times. If my readers see that my information came from more scholarly sites then they will again be more inclined to listen to my argument. This goes for any other work as well. If I see what look like reliable sources cited by the author of the work I’m reading, then I am much more likely to assume that the information presented to me is true. In turn, I won’t doubt their credibility, and will be more open to their persuasion.
While this 700+ word history on censorship is merely a small part of my whole paper, it will greatly help me look reliable, and will let me tie in the larger parts of censorship; censorship as a whole, to my smaller main argument.
Leave a comment