The Jocks vs. the Pretty People” (1901), a story of sexual rivalry at a girls’ school in the 1880s. The film was banned after only a week in London, and “it did not enter the United States until two years after it was seen in London.”2 But by that time, it had been denounced by the New York Times as “the most iniquitous and disgusting film ever seen on the screen.”3 Even more so, no less an authority than the U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Luther H. Noble, branded the film “offensive to every instinct of decency and morality.”4 By the early twentieth century, the public had embraced films that openly depicted sex, even if they still fell far short of showing the act itself. Nudity, even to this day, does not automatically cause a film to be classified R. When Gone with the Wind was released, there were cries of “disgust” for the actress Hattie McDaniel who appeared nude on screen. Even still, it would seem it would be quite difficult to make a film that did not contain nudity. From the dawn of the silent film, filmmakers have taken advantage of the ability to cut away from even the most risqué moments in a film to obscure the image, and at one point, for good reason. As early as 1920, the Supreme Court declared that films depicting nudity could not be exhibited in U.S. theaters without a cutout of the offending part being made by the filmmaker.5 A “French kissing” scene, no less, did not even get past the censors in 1927, but it can be viewed here: http://archive.org/details/FrenchKissing Scene#start=0 Some historians have argued that it was common at this time for censorship to be used by studios and exhibitors to prevent filmmakers from making films that might be popular with audiences. Other scholars of cinema have noted that censorship became the norm in order to protect the business interests of exhibitors and to protect the studios from competition. What has rarely been noted is that all of these arguments are merely opinions. No one knows exactly why the studios and exhibitors acted as they did. That being said, however, these same experts also agreed that censorship in the early film years tended to be done more permissively, in a way, than the censorship of other mediums. For example, the same censors who viewed stag films and dirty jokes favorably during this time also approved of films that featured nudity. These were the standards set forth by The Catholic Church which was responsible for censoring the film industry. This same Church condemned the same films as indecent as those deemed unsuitable for children on Sunday mornings. This was also a time where it was deemed that films with the most erotic content, be it by depicting the male organ or a sexual act, were most likely to do well at the box office. As a result, studios took advantage of this opportunity to make films that dealt with sexual topics. Of course, even if no one was censoring the films made by the studios, or passing them for distribution, there were still other forces acting on the filmmakers themselves. It has long been debated in film circles whether or not censorship is just and proper. If we were to take a look at these other forces acting on filmmakers, then we would likely see films that show sex, nudity, and “immoral” content that would cause some to be scandalized and perhaps cause one to wonder if censorship is perhaps something we should return to. This topic is something I have been contemplating for years. As a film studies scholar, I always wondered about what was considered censorship and immoral or unacceptable at any given time. This is a constant issue to consider because of course as a scholar we are studying films and there should be a place for censorship. That being said, there are many films where I wonder if censorship was at work because I don’t want to see certain things. For example, I was just watching an early silent film from 1901 of a film that takes place in a girls’ school called What Happened on 23rd St. It was pretty gruesome as it showed a girl being murdered. I had to stop it because I wasn’t interested in seeing the actual murder, so I wonder how long those films were allowed to be shown in theaters? This was a pre-censored film in many ways. Yet, this is a topic that still resonates today because we see censors acting in a very strict manner. I would rather see this type of film only to realize that it was only allowed in the first place because a woman was actually killed in the scene. This is where film can be more interesting than other media. With television and film, there is such an opportunity to show what people really think about, feel about and want to express, especially in the way we express ourselves. One of the things that have been great about watching films in university is being exposed to controversial topics and having the ability to consider a variety of opinions. I wonder if when we consider censorship, it’s just a way to keep people from seeing something they aren’t ready for? A lot of people feel very strongly about sexuality and nudity and so, I do wonder if censorship keeps people from watching films with those themes just because they feel it isn’t appropriate? Do you think it’s okay that our schools are censoring certain films? Or do you think that we need to just keep it all in? Well first off, film censorship at any level is un-American and un-democratic. There’s no room in our country for that type of control from the government. As soon as it starts to happen, the country loses it’s way. I also agree with the comment about nudity. It’s the type of censoring that should take place. I understand the desire to avoid disturbing imagery, but this is a film, or a book for that matter, and to take away things because you’re offended by them shows a lack of sensitivity. When this happens in a school setting, it shows that there is little respect for students’ rights to know about or be exposed to different ideas, and if that’s what is happening, maybe you should look closer to home instead of to Washington. In my view, it is not the government’s job to decide what can or cannot be shown. However, we are all human and the nature is to be curious and I think that there are some things that have to be left alone because that is how it is with any human’s life. We are born naked; we die naked. It is how it is. I don’t think that anything is censored but there are certain things that it’s just not necessary to show on TV. There is no need to show certain actions or nudity as there are some things which shouldn’t be seen. I remember a movie that was shown during my school days. It was a western which had some nudity in it and to see it shocked me for some time. Now, I can’t even remember the name of the film. All I know is that I am happy we didn’t show it in the time I was at school. At school, we had the option of having certain movies or TV shows censored for my own benefit, but not many students requested it, I don’t know if it was because of my high school or the way my classmates looked at films, I’m not too sure. I think that censorship can be really great. It keeps things from happening in people’s personal lives. In school we should only be showing things that can be accepted by the general public. And even in school I think it is OK to show nudity and some actions. But there should always be some sort of rating that allows us to know if we are supposed to see it or not. I have seen films that have been banned because of what they depict and I still think it is bad because what they have shown or what has been shown is disgusting and the people who made them should have been punished and not the film. I agree that censorship is one of the reasons that films tend to take in more sexual subject matter and nudity. These things are supposed to be viewed by everyone. I do not find it to be immoral or indecent to show nudity as long as it is not being done for prurient interests. Nudity and sexual encounters should always be portrayed in films for artistic purposes and not for the sole intention of sexually objectifying someone or doing away with sex entirely. I do believe that films in general should have the rating on them and anyone is allowed to choose what he/she wants to see in the film. I, myself, think that censoring certain movies is okay if it is done in a sense to prevent someone from doing something bad and to keep someone else from doing the same thing. For example, “Animal House” was censored when it came out in the theaters in order to prevent it from getting banned from being shown in theaters. I have never understood the need to censor anything in movies or television. Of course, there will always be people who are offended by everything and anything, so we have to let everyone see what they like and get