Addendum

Interestingly enough, an article entitled, “British Play Censor Again Uses Veto,” appearing in the August 16 issue of the New York Times (), contains the following naive dialogue which reveals rather pointedly how the conceptions of realism and realization play their subtle “unconscious” rǒle in human evaluation:

Mr. Harcourt—It was noticed in the press, in fact, nearly every newspaper in the Kingdom said that one of the most immoral incidents in “The Devil” was almost identical with one of the incidents in “Monna Vanna”; and yet you considered that “The Devil” was not immoral and “Monna Vanna” was?

Mr. Redford—I should say that there was not the smallest analogy between the two plays. The one is a literary work and the other a flamboyant, lurid piece of stage business.

Mr. Harcourt—The literary work is censored and the flamboyant piece of stage business is passed. Is that your condition? Mr. Redford—(No answer).

“A similar comparison was made between another pair of plays. Both dealt with the problems of prostitution; one was vetoed, the other passed. These two plays were “Mrs. Warren's Profession” by Bernard Shaw, to which a license was refused, and “The Christian,” by Hall Caine, which was passed and played to crowded houses. As with “Monna Vanna” and “The Devil,” Mr. Redford was unable to express in words the method by which he had considered one play to be fit for license and the other unfit.”

The enlightening article from which these excerpts are culled concludes with this paragraph:

“So ‘Damaged Goods’ can pass the censorship [at last] and ‘Desire Under the Elms’ can not. Which goes to prove to the satisfaction of some folk that the Lord Chamberlain may be ranked among those contortionists who, while straining at a gnat, are yet able to swallow a camel.”

O Tempora, O Mores….