The commonly held view of censorship is to prevent the spread of information, which is illustrated in the case of Peter Wright’s Spycatcher in 1984. The British government banned this novel to stop the dissemination of classified material. However, this ‘repressive intervention of authority’ only in part explains the true nature of censorship, with Foucault arguing that ‘censorship is productive’ rather than repressive (Heath, p.510). I would be inclined to agree only in part to this hypothesis; it seems that the productive element of censorship is only possible if the censorship is publicly known and overt, otherwise there is no action to counter-act it. In the example above, the publicly announced censorship caused extra publicity, thus ‘productive’ rather than actually repressing the book. Had the censorship occurred without the public’s knowledge, there would not have been the platform for increased attention.
Another way of authority control is propaganda. Wartime radically alters the day-to-day action of life, and publishing, as a means of communication to the public, was inevitably subject to propaganda. Wellington House in WW1 is a fascinating example of pressures on the publishing industry, with the aim to ‘counter German propaganda abroad’ and to assert ‘the righteousness of Britain’s cause’ (Potter, p.18). Yet it is difficult to accurately estimate the true burden on publishers – how much free choice did they have to reflect their own wartime sentiments in their own imprints, and how much of an effect did government censorship have upon them?
On the one hand, it seems as if it was a commercially-driven choice to publish Wellington House-commissioned or backed titles, as publishers were rewarded with the ‘5/5/ arrangement’ (Potter, p.19). Although this may not give large financial incentive, the increased circulation of invisibly-sponsored Wellington House material would have been a bonus in times of rising costs. With rocketing paper prices and workforces diminishing with army enlistment, any prospective boost to commerce would become even more tempting. Similarly, the very real threat of fines or even imprisonment for publishing overt war protestation (such as the case of C.W. Daniel) would have made the government propaganda a more desirable option.
But we cannot be too damning of publishers choosing commerce over conscience. As with all propaganda, the moral message pushed through was founded on belief, wrongly or rightly, that the nation needed to be united, and that publishers had a moral obligation to lift spirits to support the boys at the front. With men freely choosing to give their lives and families being ripped apart, many publishers would have felt that, regardless of censorship, they had their own part to play to support their nation.
On the one hand, it seems as if it was a commercially-driven choice to publish Wellington House-commissioned or backed titles, as publishers were rewarded with the ‘5/5/ arrangement’ (Potter, p.19). Although this may not give large financial incentive, the increased circulation of invisibly-sponsored Wellington House material would have been a bonus in times of rising costs. With rocketing paper prices and workforces diminishing with army enlistment, any prospective boost to commerce would become even more tempting. Similarly, the very real threat of fines or even imprisonment for publishing overt war protestation (such as the case of C.W. Daniel) would have made the government propaganda a more desirable option.
But we cannot be too damning of publishers choosing commerce over conscience. As with all propaganda, the moral message pushed through was founded on belief, wrongly or rightly, that the nation needed to be united, and that publishers had a moral obligation to lift spirits to support the boys at the front. With men freely choosing to give their lives and families being ripped apart, many publishers would have felt that, regardless of censorship, they had their own part to play to support their nation.
Reading:
- Heath, Deana, 'Obscenity, Censorship and Modernity' in A Companion to the History of the Book., Ed. Simon Eliot and Jonathan Rose (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), pp.508-519
- Potter, Jane, 'For Country, Conscience and Commerce: Publishers and Publishing, 1914-18', Publishing in the First World War: Essays in Book History, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007, pp.11-26