CENSORSHIP AND LIBERTY.

Taranaki Daily News, 16 January 1935, Page 6

CENSORSHIP AND LIBERTY.

With characteristic independence of spirit Professor Sewell has tossed a bomb into the ranks of the conservatives by advocating the complete abolition of all forms of censorship, and incidentally putting in a word or two on behalf of Socialism. It was only to be expected that the public would be drawn —indeed one would not be surprised if the professor rather anticipated and enjoyed such a prospect—and that the expectation has been realised is apparent from letters in the correspondence column this morning. “There is a whole heap of truth,” as Americans would say, in the views the professor expressed. A similar issue is at stake as each one of us is emerging from the years of adolescence. It is common knowledge, for instance, that young people who have lived the most sheltered of lives, and have had every possible parental affection and protection bestowed upon them to keep them from the seamier side of life, are often unable to withstand the shock of the new order of things as they are suddenly plunged into the world at large. There are, and always will be, two schools of thought on the subject, but surely it is possible to strike a happy medium. It is difficult to believe that it is beneficial to give young people at their most impressionable age unrestricted access to literature of the basest kind. It is all very well to say that bad literature will fail on its own demerits, simply because it is bad art. Are young people capable of interpreting it from this point of view and basing their outlook accordingly? Rather, it seems, do they run the risk of gaining an unhealthy and wholly jaundiced view of life which even years of experience may not correct. There is, nevertheless, much in favour of the principle expounded by the professor. He is more open to criticism in the illustration of his point. With all due respect to his learning one cannot refrain from challenging him on his citation of France as being “the most moral country in the world, with a Government at least as stable as any other.” The former assertion is at least debatable, with the majority of opinion contrary to the view expressed, while the latter is disproved by facts and figures. Revelations following the Stavisky scandal give the impression that few civilised countries are more politically corrupt than France at the present time, and the instability of the Government is one of the chief difficulties in attempting to carry out a foreign policy with any degree of assurance. There will be many who will disagree with Professor Sewell on these and other points, but the community will be the better for the stimulus to thought imparted to it by a provocative but refreshing interview.