We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
fork AtttPrinm lEbttotal Pag?
1 FRIDAY— JANUARY U, 1924 ======
Something to Think About
By Bruno Lessing
Morality and Hypocrisy.
THE moral vultures were quick to pounce upon the California screen actress who happened to be present at a drinking party when a man was shot. In various States, immaculate boards of censors barred her films from theatres because they had the power to do so and because they believed that the exercise of this power would meet with popular approval.
Perhaps they, were right. Perhaps not. But all fair-minded people will agree that they were rather indecent in taking such harsh action upon the mere ground of newspaper reports. They might, at least, have waited until the trial was over and then consulted the authentic records of the court.
POPULAR opinion is a fickle jade, who changes her mind without rhyme or reason, and frequently regrets the damage she did. She always acts hastily because she is emotional and more or less ignorant. Those who always cater to her are, sooner or later, thrown into a ditch.
SUPPOSING this actress had really accepted some drinks from her host without inquiring whether he had bought them from a bootlegger or had owned them for five years. And then supposing some one, without her connivance or consent, had shot her host. What evil effect can her pictures have upon the public mind?
Oh, the hypocrisy of this whole censorship idea!
WHY not bar the music of Chopin? Were he living in Oklahoma today the Ku Klux Klan would drive him out of town for his immorality. Why not bar the writings of Edgar Allan Poe and Robert Burns? They were habitual drunkards.
If you were to make a study of the private lives of many of the world's greatest geniuses, painters, poets, musicians, philosophers, whose thoughts and creations are the greatest adornments of civilization, it would make every hair of your head stand on end. Yet, supposing some hypocritical censor had suppressed their work because they killed or stole or drank or had a dozen irregular households — what would the world have gained?
And why not suppress all their works today?
THE work of Benvenuto Cellini has for centuries been, and will for centuries be, an inspiration to all lovers of the beautiful. Yet, if there was a crime that Cellini did not commit, it was merely because he had overlooked it.
WHY not let the California actress alone? She has her living to make. She is not strong enough to cope either with boards of censors or with public opinion.'
If her pictures are bad bar them. That would be doing the public a good turn. Bar all bad pictures — if you're sure they are bad. If they are good, go to see them. Above all —
"Let him who is without sin among you — "
(Copyright, 1924, by King Features Syndicate, Inc.)