[Lalwendë]

I think censorship is about two things: power and fear.

Power because it is such a strong tool to be used by those in control. If we are denied the knowledge of something then we are being controlled. A good example of this I have seen in the real world is where school children who are streamed according to ability are sometimes denied the chance to study Shakespeare, as it is deemed 'too difficult' for them. In this example, the only difficulty lies in the ability or inclination of the teacher to make the effort to teach such kids Shakespeare. In the same way, much knowledge is denied children by dint of their age, blanket fashion. This takes no account of the emotional or intellectual maturity of that child. I was lucky in that few teachers denied me the chance to learn something that was 'beyond my age' - my Chemistry teacher told me about fission and fusion because I wanted to know; others might have told me to wait two years.

I also see this in the workplace - censorship of information is often confined to the higher echelons because it would not do for junior staff to know that x number of jobs are under the axe lest 'morale' slip. This is merely control as we are given the information as and when it is deemed fit by those in power.

Fear comes in because anything which we do not automatically understand can provoke a fear based reaction. There is much controversy over certain video games, and the arguments often fail to recognise that such games are marketed at adults who spend a lot more money on these products than do children. The existence of age certificates is again a use of power in controlling who uses such products - but it is hard to argue against it.

In the same way, many people are afraid of things as diverse as the internet, tarot cards, young men in trenchcoats, and Harry Potter. So they automatically turn that fear into the control of restriction and censorship. It's a case of "I don't understand it, so it's obviously bad". Take the film Battle Royale - it's a veritable bloodbath, and I've heard many criticisms of it, but it makes a valid point. If I understand it, and want to watch it, why should someone else's fear deny me from watching it? But it could do quite easily.

Luckily in the UK censorship is not as pervasive as in other countries, many of them in the west. I think that culture produces only those products which result from its nature - so if we have a violent culture, we will naturally have violent products. In many cases, there are 18 cert films I would far rather a child watch than the negativity of Eastenders or Popstars (where, exactly is the fun in seeing someone's dreams ripped apart on national TV?). It is the context which is important.

Some from of censorship is inevitable where the state is in strong control, as it then has the power to do this; the same goes for micro-states such as school boards, right down to families. It is intriguing that schools still ask permission for children to do sex education - this shows that the home itself is still an important hotbed of control in society, and begs the question of whether we need any state directed censorship. This brings the whole thing full circle, and if we have parents who are knowledgeable enough to identify what is and what is not appropriate for their children, then we would not need such censorship, but as they were probably denied the knowledge to make these choices, they cannot do this.