Perils Of Censorship

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 144, 15 March 1938, Page 11

Perils Of Censorship

Sir, —In addressing a conference of Justices of the Peace, Mr. Woodward, S.M., has made what was described in yesterday’s news columns as “a vigorous indictment of second-rate foreign films in their effect on the minds of the young people of New Zealand.” He went on to advocate “that a much stricter censorship of films was required.” It is further reported that Mr. Woodward “stressed that justices were chosen for their experience and sagacity” etc. Succumbing immediately to the flattery of these compliments, ■ superimposed on a confident statement of what in the first place is problematical as" to fact, the justices appear to have forthwith resigned every appearance of their implied judicial faculties and to have assured Mr. Woodward “that the conference would do all f in its power to remedy the present state of affairs.” How is it that on every real or alleged charge of anti-social behaviour (such as the showing of second-rate films) we immediately have prohibition and “stricter censorship” suggested as the cure? Having succeeded with the “stricter censorship” how is it suggested that the young New Zealander should, ever develop any sound moral or aesthetic judgment of what is essentially good and what is meretricious? No. If there be any truth in the assertion that in certain pictures “money is shown as a god, love debased, and the ideal of womanhood represented by grimacing hussies” then the recognition of the truth of these statements must depend on the harder course involved by the education of the moral and aesthetic faculties of our young New Zeauanders, not in taking the easy course of removing everything that makes the use of their own judgment possible or of any real value. And it may also be added that there is no law as yet, compelling children to attend these pictures, so that regarding these films as his remarks indicate, Mr. Woodward is really censuring those who are in control of the children, i.e. in most cases the children’s parents, and is therefore presuming on the ground of telling other people how their children should be brought up. No doubt there are individuals, under certain citgumstances, who do not benefit by particular classes of films, but this does not warrant the entire community in returning to raw meat and cold" water which, in the last analysis, is where all censorship and prohibition end.—l am, etc., L. W. SIMPSON. Ongaonga, March 10.