Many years ago a literature professor of mine began class by provocatively declaring that he believed in censorship. He followed this surprising and attention-grabbing affirmation by reminding the class that he was a parent and that there were certainly many films he did not want his daughters to be exposed to and all kinds of texts that he hoped they would never read. However, he continued, he wanted to be the censor. Then, with an awkward accusatory finger moving from one side of the room to the other, he followed this ideological thinking with a dose of realism by stating that the problem was that he did not trust any of his students or, for that matter, anyone else in the world to have the power to decide what was or was not acceptable. This meant, by default, that he therefore had to fight against censorship because despite knowing that there are many things that would be better kept away from human consumption, it was contrary to intellectual freedom for any one person –or group of people- to make decisions about censorship. While unsatisfactory, he concluded that censorship was a bad thing, even if it meant we had to live with some ugly creations.
Recent weeks have seen violent protests supposedly provoked by a film offering an offensive view of the Muslim prophet Mohammad. Only a short portion of the film is available online and, judging from what can be seen, it is ugly and purposefully divisive. My old literature professor likely would have included this film on his hypothetical list of censored works. Instead, though, because freedom of expression is more important, the film is there. This means that, for those of us who mistakenly waste our time watching it, we can criticize it for the trash that it is.
In the late 1980s Salman Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses was widely condemned as blasphemous. The price the Iranian government put on his life and the subsequent decade in hiding are well-known stories. In recent days I have been reading his memoirs from that remarkable period and while they strike me as a fascinating read, they pale in comparison to the text that provoked all the noise. At least that is my opinion and thankfully, if you also live in a society that values freedom of expression, you can also read these books and decide if you agree or if they should be put on your own personal list of censorship. Just remember, criticize freely, but keep the list personal.
Here is Rushdie himself reading one of the more controversial and, in my opinion, hilarious passages from his infamous novel:
Recent weeks have seen violent protests supposedly provoked by a film offering an offensive view of the Muslim prophet Mohammad. Only a short portion of the film is available online and, judging from what can be seen, it is ugly and purposefully divisive. My old literature professor likely would have included this film on his hypothetical list of censored works. Instead, though, because freedom of expression is more important, the film is there. This means that, for those of us who mistakenly waste our time watching it, we can criticize it for the trash that it is.
In the late 1980s Salman Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses was widely condemned as blasphemous. The price the Iranian government put on his life and the subsequent decade in hiding are well-known stories. In recent days I have been reading his memoirs from that remarkable period and while they strike me as a fascinating read, they pale in comparison to the text that provoked all the noise. At least that is my opinion and thankfully, if you also live in a society that values freedom of expression, you can also read these books and decide if you agree or if they should be put on your own personal list of censorship. Just remember, criticize freely, but keep the list personal.
Here is Rushdie himself reading one of the more controversial and, in my opinion, hilarious passages from his infamous novel:
