Newspaper Page Text
The Cruxade Ad
British Clergymen Warn Against
Indecent Dances and Plays Which
Bernard Shaw Del ends
titular license unless the dance were
modified.
Protests against other theatres fol
lowed, and immediately London became
divided into rival camps, one claiming the
f ullest liberty for the stage, the other
clamoring for a fuller censorship and re-
triction.
Great folk and little folk alike have
taken part in the discussion. Among the
former is George Bernard Shaw, the dis
tinguished playwright and essayist, who
has unlimbered his needle guns of satire
and logic against the Bishops. His inter
esting explanation of his attitude is
printed upon this page.
A VIGOROUS campaign to suppress
what they consider indecent dis
plays in the theatres and music
halls is now being led by the Bishop of
London, aided bj the Bishop of Kensing
ton and other prominent English clergy
men.
The movement began with a protest to
the Lord Chamberlain by the Bishop of
Kensington against a dance at one of the
larger London theatres. The Lord Cham
berlain, who has control of all theatre
licenses, threatened to withdraw this par-
A Pose of the Famous
English Dancers Oy-ra
and Phyllis Monkman in
“Keep Smiling,” Objected
to as Offensive in Its
Intimacy.
And Below—
The “Hello, Honey”
Scene from the Same
Entertainment, Which
Was Declared “Inde
cent” by the Bishop of
London.
rounds
e “Hod,
itch AM. 1
Another Suggestive London
Music Hall Dance That Met
Objection.
Saturda;
Bernard Shaw’s
Curious Plea
for Tolerance
tor a m«
efense Ds
•dgopodge
ties the aj
tried by
e and Jury
ieya will I
before th]
ay at 9 o .
e made J
tension of j
ly Is giv<
to the it j
likely th i
asked in
tty Bernard Shaw
A S a working playwright, I wish to
ask the Bishop of Kensington a few
questions concerning the criticism he
has published of the music hall perform
ance. So far he has begged the question
' e is dealing with—that is, he has as
sumed that there can be no possible dif
ference among good citizens concerning
them. He has used ^
the word “sugges- MH|.
five” without any A
apparent sense of *"
the fact that the
common thoughtless
use of.it by vulgar people has made it intol
erably offensive. And he uses the word “ob
jectionable” as if it were a general agree
ment as to what is objectionable and what
is not. In spite of the fact that the very
entertainments to which he himself ob
jected had proved highly attractive to large
numbers of people whose taste is entitled
to the same consideration as his own.
On the face of it, the Bishop of Kensing
ton is demanding that the plays that he
like shall be tolerated and
The “X-’Ray Ballet” at the London Alhambra, the Largest London Music Hall. This
Parody of a Freakish Fashion Has Been Denounced by the Campaigners, Who
Assert That the Display Is Most Indecent.
finicality.”
sf erring to
demon*: ral
>wd wer>
intlmld
rank’s 1, w
vers lay. er*
a on wi
tching at e
nted lt*clf.
ransel to i
eetators bd
the trial, srl
now being 4
re antic ipaJ
i little inco
and t*chnil
lowered,
lplatn, becl
affirmative!
rd show '8
lat they ca
t for the |
me action.'
hey show j
ourt some \
rer had any)
>n he gave
th the rcqii
Palace Theatre with his episcopal bene
diction, and implore the lady to whose
performances he now objects to return to
the stage even at the sacrifice of the last
rag of her clothing.
I venture to suggest that when the
Bishop heard that there was an objection
able (to him) entertainment at the Palace
Theatre the simple and natural course for
him was not to have gone there. That is
how sensible people act. And the result
is that if a manager offers a widely ob
jectionable entertainment to the public he
very soon finds out his mistake and with
draws it.
it is my own custom as a playwright
fo make my plays “suggestive” of relig
ious emotion. This makes them extremely
objectionable to irreligious people. But
they have the remedy in their own hands.
They stay away. The Bishop will be glad
to hear that there are not many of them,
but it is a significant fact that they, fre
quently express a wish that the censor
would suppress religious plays that that he
occasionally complies.
In short, the Bishop and his friends are
not alone in proposing their own tastes and
convictions at the measure of what is per
missible in the theatre. But if such indi
vidual and sectarian standards were toler
ated we should have no plays at all, for
there never yet was a play that did not
offend somebody’s taste.
1 must remind the Bishop that if the
taste for voluptuous entertainment is some
times morbid, the taste for religious edi
fication is open to precisely the same ob
jection. If I had a rneurotic daughter I
would much rather risk taking.her to the
Palaec Theatre than to a revival meeting.
Nobody has yet counted the homes and
characters wrecked by intemperance in re
ligious emotion. When we begin to keep
such statistics the chapel may find ita
attitude of moral superiority to the the
atre, and even to the public house, nard
to maintain, and may learn a little need
ed charity.
We all need to be reminded of the need
for temperance and toleration in religious
emotion and in political emotion, as well
as in sexual emotion. But the Bishop must
not conclude that I want to close up all
places of worship; on the contrary, I preach
in them. I do not even clamor for the sup
pression of political party meetings, though
nothing more foolish and demoralizing ex
ists in England to-day. I live and let live.
As long as I am not compelled to attc’/l
revival meetings or party meetings, or the
atres at which the sexual emotions iir ■ i -
uored or reviled, I am prepared to tob
them on reciprocal terms; for, though •' :■ ■
unable to conceive any good coming to a::?
human being as a set-off to their by .-;
their rancoroffs bigotry, and their dullm .
and falsehood, I know that those who like
the mare equally unable to conceive a.\y
good coming of the sort of assemblies I
frequent; so I mind my own business an J
obey the old precept: “He that is unright
eous let him do unrighteousness still; and
he that is filthy, let him be made lilthy ;tiil;
and he that is righteous, let him do right
eousness still; and he that is uoly let him
be made holy still.”
For none of us can feel quite sure im
which category the final judgment may
place us; and, in the meantime, the music
hall is as much entitled to the benefit of
the doubt as the Bishop of Kensing
ton.
happens to
those which he happens not to like shall
be banned. He is assuming that what he
approves of is right, and what he disap
proves of wrong. Now, I have not seen
the particular play which he so much dis
likes; but suppose I go to see it to-night
and write a letter to you to-morrow to say
that 1 approve of it, what will the Bishop
have to say?
He will have either to admit that his
epithet of objectionable means simply dis
liked by the Bishop of Kensington, or he
will have to declare boldly that he and 1
stand in the relation ot' God and the Devil.
And, however his courtesy and his mod
esty may recoil from this extremity, when
it is stated in plain English, I think ae
has got there without noticing it. At al!
events, he is clearly proceeding on the
assumption that his conscience is more
enlightened than that of the people who
go to the Palace Theatre and enjoy what
they see there. If the Bishop may shut
up the Palace Theatre on this assumption,
then the Noncoinformist patrons of the
Palace Theatre (and it lias many of them)
may shut up the Church of England by
turning the assumption inside out. The
sword of persecution always has two
edges.
By “suggestive” the Bishop means sug
gestive of sexual emotion. Now, a Bishop
who goes into a theatre and declares that
the performances there must not suggest
sexual emotion is in the position of a play
wright going into a church and declaring
that the services there musi not suggest
religious emotion. The suggestion,
gratification and education of sexual emo
tion is one of the main uses and glones
of the theatre. It shares that function with
all the fine arts. The sculpture courts ot
the Victoria and Albert Museum m tne
Bishop's diocese are crowded with naked
„r small extraordinary beauty, re-
The “Corsetiere Parade”—These Girls, Attired as Shown Here, Marched Through the Audi
ence of One of the English Theatres at Each Performance. The Feature Was Strong
ly Objected to by the “Purity Campaigners” and Has Now Been Withdrawn.
sion which exalted them was in its abuse
capable also of degrading sinners.
Now let us turn to the results of cut
ting off young people—not to mention old
ones—from voluptuous art. We have fam
ilies who bring up their children in the
belief that an undraped statue is an abom
ination; that a girl or a youth who looks
at a picture by Paul Veronese is corrupted
forever; that the theatre in which “Tris
tan and Isolde” or “Romeo and Juliet” is
performed is the gate of hell, and that the
contemplation of a figure attractively
dressed or revealing more of its outline
than a Chinaman’s dress does is an act of
the most profligate indecency. Of Chi
nese sex morality I must note write in the
pages of a newspaper.
Of the English and Scottish sex moral
ity, that Is produced by this starvation
and blasphemous vilification of vital emo
tions, I will say only this: that it is so
morbid and abominable, so hatefully ob
sessed by the things that tempt It, so mer
ciless in its persecution of all the dine
grace which grows in the soil of our sex
instincts when they are not deliberately
perverted and poisoned, that if it could be
imposed, as some people would impose it
if they could, on th% whole community, for
a single generation, the Bishop, even at
the risk of martyrdom, would reopen the
finement and expres
sion of the higher hu
man qualities that our
young people, contem
plating them, will find
•toroc :• objects of de-
pulsive.
In the National Gallery body and soul
are impartially catered for; men have wor
shipped Venuses and fallen in love with
virgins. There it a voluptuous side to
religious ecstasy, and a religious side to
voluptuous ecstasy, the notion that one is
less sacred than the other is the opportu
nity of the psyciatrist who seeks to dis
credit the saints by showing that the pas-
3ompfalnt.
ther T»si-n
aoth*r trial,
Judg* Rnsi
r Dorsey
sire
»<1 that F:
d these o
elr real 1m -
t th* fae,
the motif n
nclustvoly f:
t he did net
to th* den:
laid oa the
that th*'
rations r«f ;
John Armstrong Chaloner’s Queer Sonnets
THE SLIT-SKIRT.
Tho’ some—if truth be told must be so penned,
Altho’ the penning grieve me grievously.
Purse-proud conceit, and coldness- hearts of flint,
Mean-birth—by fortune’s wheel made sudden rich-
Are on their faces stamped by Nature’s mint,
Whilst of charity show they less than witch!
The daughters of the poor do stand aghast
As o’er their doings their pure eyes are cast.”
This fashion is a nasty, shameless trick,
Tis nothing less—'tis simply scandalous!
'Twouid make a pirate blush to th’ very quick,
Or eke a Turk—Turk Pachydermatous!
Twouid make the ghost of Nero yelp with fright
\ud hie bur to the shades of blackest Hell
And once got back, shout out—“I’ve seen a sight
That in this company I’m ’shamed to tell!”
The vilest days of dark Imperial Rome,
the most debauched ei>ochs of the East
Kept naked women closely hid at home—
In the Slave-Quarter, or, to grace a feast
’Twas left unto the present century
To bare female beauty to the passer : by!
THE DEVIL’S HORSESHOE.
"A fecund sight for a philosopher—
Rich as Goleonda's mine in lessons rare—
That gem-bedizend ‘horse-shoe’ at th’ Opera,
Replete with costly hags and matrons fair!
His votaresses doth Mammon there array,
His Amazonian Phalanx dread to face!
To .Mammon there do they their homage pay.
Spaug’ld with jewels, satins, silks and lace,
Crones whose old bosoms in their corsets creak;
Beldam:; whose slightest glance would fright a horse;
Ghouls—when they speak one hears the grave-mole
squeak—
Their escorts parvenus of feature coarse.
A rich array of Luxury and Vice!
But in spite of them, the music’s very nice.'
Evidene*.
brief ar* gr
m the adruii
s te*tlmor
ot Frank 1
m in hie sti
rnmitted in
In the reel
ourta of Ami
ich greater 8
this sort tr
and extend
ot, appreiiat:
in order to i
A PRUDE-TERMAGANT.
As thy smug features, Madam, we do scan—
Tip-tilted nose and bony, horse-like jaw—
We say, “Nature surely meant her for a man—
Here catch we Nature in a fatal flaw.”
But then think we: “No. Nature kuoweth deep.
Her ways pass finding out in many things.
Such hags as these are built for husbands weak
For whiffling, piffling, little mannikins.”
Your husband’s weak as water in a ditch;
Ask his opinion—he will say—“See May!”
So Nature made thee, Madam, near-male-witch
Who, “Hubby’s” part in politics might play.
As spiteful and hard-hearted as you’re rude
HisP-ry says “Part termagant. Part prude.”
THE FEMALE FACE OF THE N. Y. “400.”
Hard’s a “pelter’s” is its physiognomy!
And just about as bad as "pelter”—some.
At this some critics may cry out, “Oh! my!
How can he, ‘The 400,’ so sore sum!”
To which I swift reply, “Not all, my friend,
Are thus intended to be limned by me,
Copyright, 191J, by -he Star Company. Great Britain Rights Reserved
■ 4 1
f / V r 1
ml
\J3t 31
* u
:
Y
)t
( if
1 »s*.
5