A “censorship war” broke out in the country 150 years ago, in the spring of 1862. Emperor Alexander II signed the Senate’s decree on the abolition of the main censorship directorate and the division of its functions between the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of the Interior. Concurrently a commission led by prince Obolensky was to establish new principles for oversight of printed materials.
Discussion in public media on this topic was provoked by progressively minded education minister Golovnin. The response was fantastic, with more than 200 solid publications on the censorship subject appearing over a period of several months. Such authorities as Ivan Aksakov, Dostoyevsky and Chernyshevsky got involved in the public debate.
Three years later a law was adopted that cancelled preliminary censorship but strictly regulated the activities of publishing houses. Fines and criminal persecution for a number of violations were introduced. For instance, obscene language on the pages of newspapers, magazines and books was punished with a six-month imprisonment or a fine of 300 rubles – a rather decent amount in those days, tantamount to a monthly salary of the army lieutenant.
Today tsarist censors would have a happy hunting ground, especially given that the adage that “the severity of Russian laws is balanced by their lax enforcement” did not quite hold true in those years! Chernyshevsky arrested in the summer of 1862 could feel it to the full extent.
On the other hand, a question arises: would the tsarist censors be adequate to their task today? Supply and demand on the media and literary market were much lower in the mid 19th century. And the controllers always have to fight both those who offer and those who crave; furthermore things are exacerbated by scientific progress…
It seems to me that even such a philosophically savvy censor as Fyodor Tyutchev would not be able to determine where the egg is and where the hen is in this tandem.
In internet resources there is the galaxy of historical and calendar sites specializing in chronologies, memorial dates, festivals, birthdays and death dates…
Like it or not, a hoard of insights has gradually evolved into a new quality of thoughts. We’ll not climb too high, but dwell on the first level of this information tower – the “Born Today” section.
Born today, or April 9, according to one of the most extensive portals, were the king of Scotland, a British silversmith, a German inventor, an Italian singer (soprano), a Finnish researcher of national epic, in addition to a French poet who wrote The Flowers of Evil, a great German WWI general, to metropolitans, writers, artists, academics, scholars, theatre directors. All these people belong to the bygone age. While the Scottish king lived back in the beginning of the XVI century, the rest are representatives of the newer times, down to the mid twentieth century.
And this is what happens next. Among those born after 1950 and mentioned in the internet is a drummer, a chef, a TV presenter, a coach, a golf player, a model, an actor, an actress, a couturier, a racecar driver, a soccer player… Believe me, this is almost a full-length list.
The nearer we draw to the present age, the more the list is dominated by actors and actresses, mainly American, along with singers. There are so many of them! Standing apart is a certain Pichuzhkin born in 1974 and the Bitsevsky Park serial killer.
And how can we sort it all out? Are we force-fed with rubbish and junk, or maybe we open our beaks wide and press for information junk food ourselves?
A short time ago a well-known public figure and historian, former MP, put forward a curious proposal: to establish an advisory panel for historical cinematograph – a sort of sift to filter the scripts which might be used by directors of historic movies. Because script writers with film directors occupying the past have driven crazy not only the former MP, I dare assume.
In this way the gulf of historic cinematography could be at least partly cleansed from litter. And what shall we do with information seas and pop-oceans contaminated with vulgarity, stupidity, cynicism and bad taste?
It’s not difficult to guess why the “creativity” of the punk group Pussy Riot is so readily applauded by the media and art crowd – they are doing the same business!
The cumulative print-run of 12 national periodicals 150 years ago was 85,000 copies; now the cumulative annual print-run of only printed media nears 10 billion copies. And is it possible to count TV and radio broadcasts or internet clicks?
Saltykov-Shchedrin who once participated in the debates on censorship named the latter a “muzzle” and compared the men of letters and journalists to a chained gypsy bear with filed teeth.
In 2007 Valentin Rasputin said, “We now need censorship for art and moral quality, rather than for political content… this flow of rubbish must somehow be checked.”
Now as 150 years have gone by, the problems remain the same but the public attitude seems to have changed. In the reign of Alexander II most people did not care much about censorship.
Now, according to some recent surveys, up to 60% of our population share Rasputin’s view. It’s easy to see why: pop singers and maniacs are far more annoying than King Jacob, poet Charles Baudelaire and even general Erich Ludendorff.
Mikhail Bykov
