ABSTRACT
The first half of this essay deals with Literature as a tool for social change and Literature as a time capsule. It also deals with how Literature makes certain historical horrors easier to read about, creating a sense of empathy among the readers and making them aware of the issue at hand. We then see the intersection at which Law and Literature meet through the analysis of three Indian cases and how the judges deciding the cases connected the case to a piece of Literature they could relate it most to.
The second half of this essay deals with how Literature is at the cornerstone of every social movement globally, making it the first of the lot to come under fire, through the mode of censorship. We then analyze the reasons why censorship takes place, how it is executed and then we take a magnified view into how Literature has been censored historically in three separate jurisdictions, i.e., the United Kingdom, the United States and finally, India. We then conclude on a futuristic note, understanding how Literature censorship can be a more streamlined and unbiased process, considering the Indian Legal System.
INTRODUCTION
As a dynamic art form, literature has blossomed along with civilisation; from scribbling on stone tablets to digital ones, man’s dependence on writing has never ceased. The journey from rudimentary agricultural settlements to the rise and fall of majestic empires and the eventual creation of modern metropolitans can be traced transparently through the literary lens. Millennia have flown by in this endeavour, each hosting either a singular dominant value system or a wide variety of ideologies that moulded and continue to shape the lives of inhabitants. While the progress that society has made is remarkable beyond any shadow of a doubt, what must be appreciated is the pivotal, nay, crucial role played by literature in not only documenting – but also pioneering these epochal shifts. The behemoth body of literature has served as an instrument for the transition of ideas from one era to the next.
This movement can be understood by accounting for the fact that words, the building blocks of literature, are not apolitical. They cannot be interpreted in a static sense and must be considered along with the context in which they are used. This signifies that they reflect the culture of the times in which they were conceived, a concept that was spread through the Linguistic Turn, where the majoritarian principles and prevailing propaganda of the age can be identified with ease. Literature thus becomes not a simple product of societal imagination, but an intertwined phenomenon bringing to the forefront the morality governing the behaviour of people. And the enrapturing beauty of this medium of expression is that these ideologies may be represented in myriad ways. They may be superficially seen in the plot of a novel or play as seen in most Shakespearean works (for example, the evidently patriarchal and questionably misogynistic storyline of ‘The Taming of the Shrew’ or the Christian theme of mercy that forms the iconic climax of the equally celebrated ‘The Merchant of Venice’ ). These values may also be depicted in the form of an analogy, like the delightful satire that is George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm.’ This popular novella is Orwell’s brazen and scathing commentary on the Soviet Union; where the literary tool of allegory highlights the scenario of the time. A similar yet altogether distinct experience of context would be ‘Maus’ by Art Spiegelman. A graphic novel and retelling of first-hand accounts of the horror that was the Holocaust, this visual form of literature is often underappreciated, but immensely impactful, leaving a lasting impression on the reader. This kind of representation makes it more inviting to the masses, and a distinctive portrayal of the tragedy is accessible. Thus, the sheer innovation of the discipline of literature cannot be ignored in the slightest either.
LITERARY LAW: A LOOK AT THE INTERDISCIPLINARY LINK
A rather undermined yet direct link between literature and the legal field can be seen when the latter relies on the former in the pursuit of justice. It has been observed in recent cases, the Indian judiciary has opted to include certain literary references in their judgements. From invoking Shakespearean villains as specimens of the extent of human cruelty to the use of renowned couplets as introductions to landmark human rights judgements, the presence of literature as a robust foundation on which law can be built is undeniable. This sentiment is reflected in the words of Mr. Jerry Pinto, where he labels law itself as an exercise in literature. The very fact that it involves constant interpretation and reiteration according to the context and situation the lawmakers are faced with makes law a realistic and essential form of literature.
This essay shall consider three landmark cases to highlight the interdependency between the disciplines of law and literature: Jolly George Verghese v Bank of Cochin, Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug v Union of India and Budhadev Karmaskar v State of West Bengal. Each judgement is an earnest attempt to bring about a social revolution through the assertion of rights in various instances to vulnerable sections of the community. Each is a representation of how the legal sphere undertakes such societal revolution, and when supplemented by the behemoth body of literature, succeeds in its aspirations to catalyse progress in society.
Consider first the Jolly Verghese case. The simplified facts are as follows: The appellants were debtors who were unable to repay their creditors on time. This resulted in an arrest warrant being issued against them, and the subsequent restriction on their personal freedom until said loan was repaid. The question before the court was whether this would constitute a violation of Fundamental Rights under Article 21. While the court answered this in the affirmative, its reference to the ‘Bard upon Avon’ was a particularly intriguing one. A comparison of the respondents has been made to the infamous character of Shylock from the celebrated ‘The Merchant of Venice’ The court seemed to adopt a stance where they likened the bank’s merciless actions to the heartless cruelty of Shylock. This invocation is used to emphasise the judicial shift in the approach to human dignity – the ushering in of an era where brutish acts like denying freedom to another shall not be tolerated; a change from an age where vicious demands like demand for a pound of flesh could be made (figuratively), to a period where the regard for individual liberty is paramount. It signifies the relevance of dated literature to today’s date.
Secondly, a look at the order in Budhadev Karmaskar provides a varnished picture of how seamlessly literature and law blend into each other’s rich colours. Dotted with references from various reputed works, the order relates to the dignity of sex workers under Article 21. Drawing from celebrated novels like the intricate Crime and Punishment and the poignant Devdas, the judges have elaborated on the recognition and subsequent protection of the humanitarian rights of prostitutes; and how they must not be scorned upon for their occupation. Though noble, this ideology goes against what is described as societal morality. Well-known examples of prostitutes, such as ‘Chandramukhi’ in Devdas and ‘Sonya Marmelodov’ from Dostoevsky’s oeuvre have been used by the judges to underline how their depiction in literature is often one of respect, and how a similarly humane treatment should be meted out to them even in reality. The mention of these characters is to highlight the need for guaranteeing basic dignity to all under the Constitution, irrespective of their profession; an attempt at providing momentum to the wheel of social change through its judgement. This serves as another instance of the two disciplines working in tandem to encourage progress.
The case of Aruna Shanbaug is a well-known, harrowing incident of a barbaric crime that captured the masses in its fight for human rights. This critical judgement was focused on passive euthanasia and was instrumental in cementing the courses of action to be followed for the same. A notable fact of the case is that the judgement begins with a quote by Mirza Ghalib, a lovely couplet signifying agonising wait for death, and its elusiveness. The poetry was an apt choice for it; it set the tone for a judgement dealing with the ‘Right to Life’ under Article 21. The succinct yet powerful couplet represents the pressing need for recognition of issues of a human nature. Judges often employ such Urdu ‘shayri’ to convey raw emotion, demonstrate compassion and connect to the heart of the matter raised in the proceedings in the purest sense. . Ghalib’s mastery in the Aruna Shanbaug case is particularly relevant and heart-wrenching; it talks about a certain feeling of despondency that emerges from human condition when confronted with tragedy and the sense of isolation and alienation it carries with it. This is pertinent to the judgement itself and communicates the emotion behind it beautifully.
Multiple others exist, all defining, in a unique manner, the bond between Literature and Law. The connection has, for aeons, propelled society towards development, and been the metaphorical wind beneath the wings of societal evolution. Having functioned as an instrument of change, it continues to aid in the metamorphosis of civilisation into a more tolerant and inclusive society, welcoming all. From eloquent and poignant poetry to passionate stories elucidating affection and feelings of fraternity, it has spurred moral revolutions. Despite its significance, Literature has unfortunately been the subject of unscrupulous censorship. Banning books, forbidding poems and prohibiting prose is an issue that requires serious and extensive discussion, especially in a society riddled with moral concerns. The next part of this essay deals in depth with precisely this aspect of Literature; an analysis of its censorship in the past, present and potential future.
CENSORSHIP AND LITERATURE
Literature is arguably the most distinct discipline of all. Rooted in all kinds of different subjects, it serves as an intersection of all these different schools and disciplines. Literature’s ability to create imaginative dimensions inspired by a plethora of different disciplines owes it the title of the most powerful tool to inspire generations. Historically, Literature and literary scholars have been at the forefront of multiple protests and movements. Texts such as The Color Purple by Alice Walker, Funny Boy by Shyam Selvadurai, To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, Little Women by Lousia May Alcott and others addressing topics of women’s rights, civil rights, LGBTQIA+ rights, etc., have made significant impact in the protest for change. Words, sentences, and pages are so beautifully bound together that they ignite a sense of empathy and a fire for action in those who come across it.
Literature censorship has been a practice since time immemorial, as far back as 1536, when William Tyndale’s translated copies of the New Testament were destroyed, him executed. Historically, censorship has not only resulted in the fatality of thought but also the fatality of man, with 460 scholars being scorched to death by the Chinese emperor Qin Shi Huang, which later inspired Mao Zedong to destine 46000 scholars to the same fate. The history of censorship is riddled with ruthlessness and brutality, in an attempt to extinguish the fire of curiosity, to numb the mind and to limit freedom of thought. Censorship is not always unilaterally imposed by the state but is also exercised by individuals, once internalized by communities, making it a societal issue as well. Censorship has the potential to give rise to a sheep that follow the herd rather than formulating their own thoughts and opinions. Literature censorship looks different as we move from one jurisdiction to another. In China, books which do not align with values and morals of the Chinese socialist government indicate deviancy and are taken of the shelves before it can reach more of its population. Same goes for the Soviet Union where the government kept tabs on the books circulated within the population.
CENSORSHIP IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Let us start by laying down the basic foundations upon which the UK laws of freedom of speech and censorship have been built. Article 10 of the Human Rights Act, which applies to the UK, Scotland and Wales, deals with protection of freedom of speech and opinion, which includes thoughts put down on articles, pamphlets, books, television, art, and on social media sites, and also includes protection of rights which allow us to look for and make note of information from other people, allowing one to formulate their own opinions.
The UK has been the torchbearer of censorship in many aspects, starting with the ban on translated copies of the Bible, to making sure that only people of the Church may translate the Bible and share its meaning with the general public, limiting their access to the original source and exercising their power as the most supreme organization in the kingdom, allowing the Bible to conform to their translated version of it. Most censorship in the UK revolves around Literature detailing sexual obscenity. Sex not only involves mentions of activities such as masturbation, sex, and other similar acts considered “vulgar”, they also include topics surrounding sexual identity, expression, and Literature addressing the LGBTQIA+ community. This poses a threat to the rights conferred upon citizens of the UK, by Article 9 of the Human Rights Act, which includes ‘Protection of Freedom of Thought, Belief and Religion’. Having said that, it is nothing compared to the protests undertaken in the United States by conservative parents who rally against school boards to remove certain texts from the courses of their children, something we will unpack in the next segment.
CENSORSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES
For a country that celebrates their right of freedom of speech and expression, as enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, Literature censorship in the US has been rampant and one of the most debated topics in contemporary times. The land of dreams offers hordes of parents, patiently waiting and rallying against content they find inappropriate. Children’s books are often the first to be targeted, owing to children’s quality of impressionability, fearing such books will influence children to pursue a strain of thought different for the majoritarian or dominant view. Essentially, Literature is restricted by someone who simply does not like the view expressed in the type of Literature they wish to ban. This has significant impact on young readers, who are supposed to consume diverse forms of Literature made keeping in mind diverse lived experiences, equipping children with multiple lenses and schools of thought to look at the world from, making them more empathetic to the protest and struggles of others. The spirit of community amongst the censors does not stop them from claiming that the novel The Fixer by Jewish Author Bernard Malamud to be “Anti-Jewish and Anti-Christian” or even trying to ban texts depicting sexual abuse against children, making Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye one of the most targeted books of them all. From teachers losing their jobs for teaching JD Salinger’s the Catcher in the Rye to young adults being robbed of their experience of feeling seen and recognized through texts such as Perks of being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky and Looking for Alaska by John Green, the US is the perfect specimen for a case study surrounding the impact of book bans and Literature censorship on actors involved in the writing and reading of said books, and the impact it has on the upcoming generation, who lose out on the chance of reading such books and developing a sense of empathy for those who may identify with it. Governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, has been an influential figure in the book ban protests, having signed a law that restricts materials which contain “sexual conduct” from the shelves of the classrooms of Florida, leading to a school district being sued for taking down encyclopedias and dictionaries with descriptions of sexual conduct.
CENSORSHIP IN INDIA
Freedom of Speech and Expression is protected under Article 19 of Part III of the Indian Constitution, however, there is has been a history of contradictory approaches to the same in India. With India’s mosaic-like diversity, coupled with its communal, collectivist societies, books that come under fire in India are often met with raging protests by not just individuals but entire communities of people, making it hard to make a book appealing to the entirety of the Indian population. Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verse, a book dealing with loss of identity and belongingness, ironically caused such an uprising amongst the masses he wrote for. Rushdie worldwide became sensational overnight, predominantly amongst people who had not even read the book. Riots and 14 casualties in the city of Bombay led to the Rajiv Gandhi, then Prime Minister of India to ban the book for the sake of “communal harmony”. Internationally, a fatwa was issued by the Ayatollah of Iran, demanding Rushdie’s assassination.
On a similar, yet less violent note, Aubrey Menen’s Rama Retold, a more secular take on the original Ramayana, resulted in its banned, fueled by Jawaharlal Nehru’s uncertainty and fear of criticism. In an attempt to prevent riots, a fear that Nehru developed when a group of Brahmin priests burned the book as a sign of protest, the book was banned before it could cause an upheaval.
In contemporary times, the movie Maharaj by Siddarth P. Malhotra, based on a an 1862 case involving libel, led to a petition being filed worshippers of Lord Krishna and Vallabhacharya in the Gujarat High Court, contending insult to the Hindu religion, blasphemy, and criticism of the God and hymns, leading the Justice Sangeeta Vishen to issue a temporary stay order on the movie, after the court came to a final conclusion with regards to the fate of the film, lifting the stay order. Mini Chandran aptly titles such mob censorship as “Democratization of Censorship”, which, in our view, is an eerily dystopian fate on this conquest that Literature undertakes at the start every significant social change movement. With minority views voted out, it strips texts and media of their individuality and curates a collection of books, all subscribing to the majoritarian ideals, leading to an imbalance in the marketplace of thoughts, ideas and opinions. A similarity noted in all three countries is that of mob censorship, making censorship not just a unilateral imposition by the State but also something fueled by the masses.
CONCLUSION: THE WAY AHEAD?
It is essential that we take cognizance of the matter at hand: our thoughts are being taken away from us, our opinions are being taken away from us, our voices are being taken away from us. Without the vessels of wisdom that allow us to look at the world in a different light from one book to another, from a poem to another, from a movie to another, we are bound to a world where we walk a path not carved by us but a path we are forced to tread, and without even realizing it. Today, people in Kolkata and all over the world protest the rape and murder of a 31-year-old doctor within the confines of her own workspace and the way we express our rage is not just through protests and riots but also through words. Words flood the internet. Shame. Fear. Disgust. Anger. Sadness. All expressed in poems, snippets, and posts sprinkled across the internet like rain, rallying for people to join the movement and make a difference. This is the power of words. If we started banning Literature, nothing but photos will remain in the end. Every text banned, burned and turned to ashes. We must rise from these ashes rather than adding fuel to the fire and create more of it.
To create an inclusive society is to create a tolerant society and Literature is the way ahead. We must power through and fight for our thirst for knowledge, or let our brains rot and turn to cheese. One way we can implement this is to set up a tribunal, solely for the purpose of addressing petitions and PILs filed concerning Literature, which would include books, poems, any form of publication, and media. This would be in collaboration with the Central Board of Film Certification, a few prolific writers on board, people from the media community as well as judges specializing in media law. Legal provisions for protecting Literature is highly essential as it is the cornerstone of our development at any point in time, be it childhood, adulthood or old age. This is what makes Literature an essential force for social progress.
