Abstract

Censorship operated at two very different registers—the everyday and the spectacular—in inter-war Britain. Spectacular censorship allowed the state to prove its commitment to open debate, to clear process, and to free speech—critical practices during the inter-war years. In contrast, everyday censorship practices allowed the state to confront immorality and social disorder with little public notice. In using spectacular censorship cases to stand in for everyday censorship, scholars have allowed theatricality to pose as history. Only by incorporating everyday cases into our accounts, can we begin to assess the real impact of censorship and come to terms with liberalism as a persuasive technique at a critical moment in European history.

pdf

Share