Irish Film Censorship: A Cultural Journey from Silent Cinema to Internet Pornography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IRISH FILM CENSORSHIP: A CULTURAL JOURNEY FROM SILENT CINEMA TO INTERNET PORNOGRAPHY Kevin Rockett Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2004, 496 pp. Irish Film Censorship is an outstanding example of archival research. Kevin Rockett has painstakingly gone through nearly a century's worth of Censor and Appeal Board Reports, providing a detailed history of governmental film reception in Ireland. He has also viewed hundreds of uncut film versions to compare them with the Reports in order to determine what exactly was cut for Irish viewers. Much of his study is devoted to examining the differences between these versions of films and the decisions made by those in charge of the machinery of censorship; in so doing, Rockett reveals what is considered appropriate for an Irish audience by the Irish state, and what is not. In effect, censorship helps to reify Irish identity as it has been constructed by the state through its legislation and daily functioning. While other works on censorship have been concerned with literary texts and broadcasting, Rockett has brought film into the broader discussion, comparing it to these other media and their forms of censorship. Where Rockett's book surpasses other studies is that he is not merely a historian: he is a scholar of film studies who has undertaken a historical study of film censorship in Ireland. The difference is that whereas historians are wont to create a narrative of censorship legislation, its workings and the forces that brought the legislation about, Rockett has also examined the actual cultural artefacts. He explains how film functions as a medium and therefore how it can work against those who seek to impose an authority upon it; this he does by appealing to the theoretical work of Walter Benjamin, the Frankfurt School, and Susan Sontag. In addition, he examines certain types of films, such as the horror and rebel flicks of the 1950s, film noir, adaptations of Tennessee Williams' plays, and art cinema, in terms of how they might pose a threat to the structure of censorship and the society it seeks to protect. Through these analytical and theoretical processes, he provides a sophisticated study of censorship, film, and the society in which the relationship between them is forged. Rockett is particularly effective at delineating the different forms of censorship to which film was subjected. While films that show or discuss sex come under the Censor's greatest scrutiny, other films are censored because of their politics and the social issues with which they are engaged. This is not to say that these types of censorship are unrelated: the sexual is, of course, political, particularly in the parochially Catholic environment of mid-century Ireland. But Irish censors also removed perceived political threats from films, especially internal threats in the form of Irish Republican Army campaigns and their effects upon political stability in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Any film glamorising these events or terrorists was dutifully cut or banned, as were interviews with anyone belonging to any paramilitary organisation or their affiliated political parties, such as Sinn Fein. Ireland also censored films and newsreels during World War II, fearing that the portrayal of events or nations in any light could inflame public opinion and thus compromise Irish neutrality. And films that were unkind in their treatment of Catholic social teachings and representation of Church officials likewise came under fire; these sorts of films, it was believed, could undermine the political and moral authority of the state. But the most interesting instances of censorship arise when censors take exception to Irish stereotypes and their possible effects upon the national imaginary. By highlighting these cases, Rockett furthers his argument that film censorship works in conjunction with national identity formation as it is enforced and enacted by the state. Most impressive about this study is the historical narrative of film censorship in twentieth-century Ireland that Rockett unfolds; he has left little in the government archives and Ireland's press for future scholars to pick through. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".