The Astérix Series: High Comic Art with a Few Dark Shadows

Creative Writing, Leisure activities, Literary & Linguistics, Media & Communications, Memorabilia, Popular Culture, Public health,

“The year is 50BC. Gaul is entirely occupied by the Romans. Well, not entirely . . . One small village of indomitable Gauls still holds out against the invaders.”

𓆸 𓆸

The “indomitable Gauls” in question are the tribe of Astérix, pint-sized Gallic hero of the long-running eponymous French comic strip with its legion of dedicated fans. Like all classic literary modes, be they of a pop cultural kind or more highbrow, the Astérix comic can be read on more than one level. On the surface the impossible but highly comical escapades of its principal cartoon characters (Astérix and his sidekick Obélix) are much loved and savoured by aficionados across the globe. On another level some observers have detected various allegorical meanings delving within the cartoon series.

Astérix’s debut, 1959

The Astérix comic strip (in France known as a bande dessinée – literally “drawn strip”) made its debut in 1959 in the Franco-Belgian comic magazine Pilote under the the strip title Les aventures d’astérix. The Astérix phenomenon that followed that unassuming beginning was the result of a long and harmonious collaboration between writer René Goscinny and illustrator Albert Uderzo.

Getafix, Druid & grandmaven

What a Gaul!
The basic plot of the comic is that Astérix and his XXL-sized friend Obelix reside in the sole remaining village in Gaul which has not been conquered by the might of the Roman war machine. The reason enabling its continued freedom is that Astérix has access to a magic potion supplied by the village’s Druid Panoramix (in English translations: Getafix) which gives him temporary, superhuman strength (Obelix is already endowed with extraordinary strength courtesy of having fallen into the cauldron of magic potion as a baby). The two companions, usually accompanied by Obelix’s little dog, Idéfix (English: Dogmatix), spend their time roaming around the countryside of Armorica (modern-day Brittany) bashing countless numbers of heads, mostly of the hapless and unsuspecting Roman legionnaires. In many of the books the magic potion-fuelled duo venture out on escapades to lands both far and near from Gaul.

Dubbleosix in ‘The Black Gold’

Undisguised punnery
Much of the humour in Astérix revolves around Goscinny’s and translator Bell’s (see below) use of puns and in-jokes which abound in the character names, Astérix, the comic’s central protagonist is of course “the star” (for which “asterisk” is another word); the monolithic-like Obelix is a carter and shaper of menhirs which are also known as “obelisks”; Bell translated Obelix’s dog’s name as…Dogmatix – what else! A spy Druid in Astérix and the Black Gold with more than a passing resemblance to Sean Connery is given the name Dubbelosix.

Nomenclature of the dramatis personae
When sketching out the framework of their fictional First century BC Gaul Goscinny and Uderzo decided on a formula for the names of each of the groups of characters. The Gauls’ men’s names would end in -ix (the inspiration for this was the real-life Gallic chieftain Vercingetorix who revolted against Julius Caesar’s Rome in 52BC), so we have Vitalstatistix (chief of Astérix’s tribe) and his brother Doublehelix; Assurancetourix (English: Cacofonix) (bard and scapegoat of the village); Geriatrix (oldest member of the village); Unhygienix (village fishmonger); Cétautomatix (village smith) (Eng: Fulliautomatix); Saingésix (wine merchant) (Eng: Alcoholix), etc. etc. The Romans mostly are identified by names with the suffix “-us” (although “Julius Caesar” (Fr: Jules César) appears as a fictional character under his own name)…as the “bad guys” the Romans all tend to have derogatory or demeaning names, eg, Pamplemus (Arteriosclerosus); Cadaverus; Caius Fatuous; Caius Flebitus …you get the idea!

‘Astérix and the Normans’

Goscinny employed suffix-identifiers for other national groups in the books. For instance, the names of the fearsome Norman tribesmen were all given -af endings, so we get lots of joke names like Psychopaf, Riffraf, Autograf, Nescaf and Toocleverbyhaf, ad tedium…basically anything preposterous enough Goscinny and Bell could think of that would raise a laugh. The device extends to Britons (-ax)(usually puns on taxation, eg, “Valueaddedtax”), Germans (-ic), Greeks (-os) and Egyptians (-is).

‘Astérix and Cleopatra‘

Stereotyping and racial tropes
One of the preoccupations of the Astérix comics and the source of much of its humour is ethnic stereotyping. Uderzo and Goscinny delight in lampooning the perceived national traits of different groups of Europeans. The English are depicted as phlegmatic, love to drink lukewarm beer and tend to speak in a chipper, upper-class way. The Iberians (Spanish) are displayed as being full of pride and tend to have choleric tempers. The Normans (Vikings) drink endlessly and fear nothing. Goths (the Germanic tribes) are disciplined and militaristic, but are not unified and fight among themselves. This all reads as a bit problematic especially in this age of political correctness. In the case of the Spanish the generalisations are compounded by Uderzo’s unflattering drawings of them. But the most disturbing element of the books’ stereotyping of races exposing the creators to
considerable criticism relates to the bigoted portrayal of Black Africans. Slaves in the series are always Black and sometimes they have have bones through their hair and other cliches (eg, Astérix and Cleopatra). Uderzo also introduced the character of a caricatured Black pirate (Baba)—notoriously depicted with exaggerated racial features, enormous, full red lips—who appears in several books including Astérix in Corsica and Astérix and Obélix All At Sea. For this reason American cartoonist Ronald Wimberly has described the Astérix comics as “blatantly white supremacist” in nature and thus unsuitable for children (’Race and Representation: Relaunching Astérix in America’, Brigid Alverson & Calvin Reid, PW, 19-Aug-2020, www.publishersweekly.com). In recent versions of the comic edited for the US market the overt racialist profiling has been toned down a bit (‘Asterix Comes to America‘, Jo Livingstone, Critical Mass, 17-Jun-2020, www.newrepublic.com).

Black pirate lookout in ‘Astérix in Corsica’
Bravura and the village women in revolt

Uderzo v feminism
Similarly, Astérix has attracted criticism for its negative portrayal of women in the strips. Asterix and the Secret Weapon for instance introduces a female bard Bravura from Lutetia (Paris) who incites the women of the village to revolt against their husbands and the patriarchy. ’Secret Weapon’ unsubtly parodies feminism and gender equality. By 1991 when the album was published it might have been hoped that Uderzo would have expressed a more enlightened and nuanced perspective on sexual politics, but he and Goscinny were very much products of their time so it probably shouldn’t surprise that the artist/storyteller was still implacably fastened on to his old ideals of male chauvinism and hegemony.

The ludicrous amount of violence dished out in Astérix—the heroic Gallic duo are constantly bashing Roman skulls senseless—has also opened the comic strips up to criticism from some quarters. In 2007 the Swiss-based organisation Defence for Children International echoed Wimberly’s sentiments, saying that Astérix, Obélix & Co set a bad example for the young by constantly fighting with everyone, never at peace with their neighbours…adding that the comic series was “too monocultural” in its obsession with “invaders” (The Guardian).

‘Astérix and the Great Crossing’: Astérix & Obélix tango with native Americans – more sterotyping of ”the other”

With Goscinny’s untimely early death in 1977 Uderzo took on responsibility for the Astérix scripts as well as the artwork. Uderzo solo added another nine comic books to the Asterix oeuvre, although he retained the late M Goscinny’s name on the covers as co-creator. The Astérix‘s scripts written by Uderzo were not in the same class of storytelling as Goscinny’s—lacking René’s incisive wit and punchiness—but even so, the Uderzo-penned comic albums still proved bestsellers, such was the lustre of the Astérix brand.

Enter the new generation of Astérix comic artists
By 2011 Uderzo in his eighties was ready to pass the Astérix baton on to two cartoonists who he had been mentoring. The new team, Jean-Yves Ferri (writer) and Didier Conrad (illustrator), having got the master’s nod of approval, produced Astérix and the Picts in 2013, followed by four more Astérix albums thus far. Ferri and Conrad have even introduced new characters with contemporary and topical resonance, eg, Confoundtheirpolitix, a muckraking journalist, spoofing Julian Assange (Astérix and the Missing Scroll). Unfortunately, since becoming custodians of the world’s most famous cartoon Gaul, Messieurs Conrad and Ferri have missed the opportunity to redress the earlier derogatory depiction of Africans drawn by Uderzo. Instead Conrad tactlessly reprised Uderzo’s Black pirate lookout character in 2015 in ‘Missing Scroll’) with the same racist depiction of Baba with bulbous red lips.

‘Astérix en Bretagne‘

Astérix for Anglos
Translations into English of the iconic comic books began in 1969. Anthea Bell, in collaboration with Derek Hockridge, was the gifted translator who worked with the full sequence of Astérix creators. Bell’s distinctly English expressions and puns as translated won much praise “for keeping the original French spirit intact” (‘Anthea Bell’, Wikipedia, http://en.m.wikipedia.org). Bell also shared with Goscinny a delight in the humour of historical anachronisms which filter through the various books.

The Astérix industry
As at 2021, with the publication of the 38th Astérix comic book Astérix and the Griffin, the books have sold a staggering combined total of 385 million copies worldwide. They have been translated into 111 languages and dialects including Afrikaans, Welsh, Hebrew, Occitan, Arabic, Urdu and even Latin. Astérix adaptation to the screen comprise 10 animated films and four live action films (of which only Mission Cleopatra merits any accolades at all). There’s the usual accompaniment of merchandising of course and even a theme park, Le Parc Astérix, north of Paris. The comic books’ following spans the globe, in their heartland, France and Belgium, in Germany, Britain, just about everywhere they have been in vogue with the notable exception of the US.

What’s the secret of the Asterix comics’ success?
To M Uderzo the endearing nature of Astérix’s popularity remained a puzzle that he couldn’t fathom, best left to others of which there has been no shortage of opinions aired over the years. Clearly, the character of Astérix is deeply rooted in French popular culture. Two-thirds of the French population had read at least one Astérix books according to a 1969 national survey (‘Going for Gaul: Mary Beard on 40 years of Astérix’, The Guardian, 15-Feb-2002, www.amp.theguardian.com . Some observers put the appeal down to the escapism the comics represented – providing “a world of joyful innocence born in the aftermath of (world) war” ‘My hero: Asterix by Tom Holland‘, The Guardian, 26-Oct-2013, www.amp.theguardian.com . This sentiment is echoed by those who have called the series ”the most brilliant antidote to (the catastrophe of) Vichy in French literature”. Many French people identify with the petit Gaul as a symbol of rebellion, standing up for the “little guy“ against Goliath. To them Astérix’s steely determination to defy the juggernaut of Roman power mirrors the impulse in the hearts of many modern-day French citizens to hold out and not succumb to the all-conquering globalisation driven by the United States. While the French feel an inextinguishable pride in Astérix (“simply French”), to many outsiders the comics personify what they take to be the French character, such as the trait of “infuriating, occasionally endearing contradictions” (John Thornhill, Lunch with the FT: Asterix the national treasure’, Financial Times, 24-Dec-2005, www.financialtimes.com). Another take on Astérix’s popularity beyond the borders of France is that the idea of an heroic “native freedom-fighter” defying Rome struck a resonant tone in countries which had once been subjected to the tyranny of the Roman Empire (Beard).

Footnote: In Astérix in Belgium, the 24th volume in the series, village chief Vitalstatistix, Astérix and Obélix head off to Belgae to tangle with an equally fierce tribe of Belgian Gauls. As usual, the comic is saturated with cultural references, Goscinny weaves in a series of gently digs at the Belgians, spoofing famous national celebrities like Walloon actress/singer Annie Cordy and cyclist Eddie Merckx. The comic’s battle scene is a riff on the historical Battle of Waterloo and Uderzo draws in a cameo appearance by fictional detectives Thomson and Thompson from Belgium’s most honoured cartoon strip Tintin (‘Asterix v24: “ Asterix in Belgium”’, Augie De Blieck Jr, Pipeline Comics , 25-Jul-2018, www.pipelinecomics.com).

◔◡◔◔◡◔◔◡◔◔◡◔◔◡◔◔◡◔◔◡◔◔◡◔
some sort of pun on “insurance”
although it should be noted that no one is actually killed in the comics
shared by Uderzo himself who said in 2005, “the more we are under the sway of globalisation, the more people feel the need to rediscover their roots”, which is what he hoped connecting with France’s ancient Gallic past via his cartoon creation might help achieve
Goscinny died during the comic’s production and this was also the last Astérix that Albert Uderzo’s artist brother, Marcel, worked on

Sydney’s Long-vanished Iconic Boxing Stadiums

Inter-ethnic relations, Leisure activities, Local history, Memorabilia, Music history, Popular Culture, Sport, Sports history
𝔉𝔦𝔤𝔥𝔱 𝔭𝔬𝔰𝔱𝔢𝔯 ~ 𝔭𝔯𝔢𝔰𝔞𝔤𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔞 𝔰𝔶𝔪𝔟𝔬𝔩𝔦𝔠 𝔭𝔬𝔴𝔢𝔯 𝔰𝔥𝔦𝔣𝔱

Any Sydneysiders born in or prior to the 1890s would have been aware of the opening of Sydney Stadium. 1908 was the year this iconic boxing arena on the eastern outskirts of the city’s CBD first saw the light of day…literally saw the light of day as it was originally built as an open air stadium. The brainchild of promoter Hugh D McIntosh who constructed a ‘temporary’ outdoor boxing ring on the site of a former Chinese market garden in Rushcutters Bay to hold the world heavyweight boxing contest featuring Canadian title-holder Tommy Burns and Australian challenger “Boshter Bill” Squires. The fight was however just a warm-up for a legendary pugilistic bout in the same arena four months later between Burns and African-American fighter Jack Johnson. The fight garnered a lot of attention in Australia and internationally as Johnson was the first black boxer to contest (and win) a world title… and the heavyweight title at that!

⚔️ 𝒮𝒸𝓇𝑒𝑒𝓃 𝓈𝒽𝑜𝓉 𝒻𝓇𝑜𝓂 𝒻𝒾𝓁𝓂 𝑜𝒻 𝐵𝓊𝓇𝓃𝓈 𝓋 𝒥𝑜𝒽𝓃𝓈𝑜𝓃 𝒷𝑜𝓊𝓉 (𝒩𝐹𝒮𝒜/𝒜𝒮𝒪 𝑀𝑜𝒷𝒾𝓁𝑒) ⚔️

The Australian press of the day predictably invoked the race card in the lead-up to the fight, racist descriptions of Johnson abounded, “coloured pugilist” was one of the few politer characterisations of Johnson (Bush Advocate, 28th December 1908). Burns’s thrashing at the hands of his much bigger black opponent—physically it was a real “David and Goliath” mismatch—prompted a backlash from white supremacists. Writer Jack London (ringside at the fight) put out the call for a “Great White Hope” to restore the white man to his ‘rightful’ place atop the professional boxing tree. The decisiveness of Jack Johnson’s triumph tapped into the prevailing currents of eugenic belief of the day, doing nothing to soothe anxieties about the “moral decay and decline” of the white race.

𝔖𝔶𝔡𝔫𝔢𝔶 𝔖𝔱𝔞𝔡𝔦𝔲𝔪 (𝔓𝔥𝔬𝔱𝔬: 𝔑𝔞𝔱𝔦𝔬𝔫𝔞𝔩 𝔏𝔦𝔟𝔯𝔞𝔯𝔶 𝔬𝔣 𝔄𝔲𝔰𝔱𝔯𝔞𝔩𝔦𝔞)

Stadiums Ltd
For almost its entire lifespan (from 1915 to its closure) Sydney Stadium was owned by Melbourne entrepreneur and gambling identity John Wren’s Stadiums Ltd…during that epoch the company enticed most of the top Australian professional boxers including Vic Patrick, Fred Henneberry, Dave Sands, Jimmy Carruthers and Tommy Burns (not the Canadian heavyweight champion) as well as renowned international prize-fighters such as Emile Griffith, Freddie Dawson and ‘Fighting’ Harada, to Sydney Stadium (‘The Wild Ones: Sydney Stadium 1908-1970’, Sydney Living Museums, www.sydneylivingmuseums.com).

𝔍𝔬𝔥𝔫𝔫𝔶 𝔞𝔶 𝔠𝔬𝔫𝔠𝔢𝔯𝔱 𝔞𝔱 𝔱𝔥𝔢 𝔖𝔱𝔞𝔡𝔦𝔲𝔪, 1957 (𝔓𝔥𝔬𝔱𝔬: 𝔉𝔞𝔦𝔯𝔣𝔞𝔵 𝔄𝔯𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔳𝔢𝔰)

“The old tin shed”
In 1912 the stadium was given a lid, an octagonal shaped roof of corrugated iron, and equiped for a capacity of 12,000 seated patrons. As the decades passed, hosting countless boxing and wrestling matches (in operation several nights a week at one point), it acquired the affectionate sobriquet “the old tin shed”. From the 1950s while boxing was still its core entertainment, the Sydney Stadium became a venue for popular music entertainers and television stars (eg, Frank Sinatra, Little Richard, Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly and the Crickets, Walt Disney’s Mouseketeers, and so on⚘. This continued into the Sixties with “The Samurai” star Koichi Ose, and perhaps its pinnacle, the Beatles performing there on their 1964 Australian tour (‘Sydney Stadium’, Milesago – Venues, www.milesago.com; ‘World Heavyweight Boxing Championship Title Fight 1908’, Woollahra Municipal Council), www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au).

𓂀 𝓣𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓪𝓫 𝓕𝓸𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓽 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓸𝓵𝓭 𝓽𝓲𝓷 𝓼𝓱𝓮𝓭 1964

Leichhardt Stadium in Sydney’s inner west never managed to capture the limelight of Rushcutters Bay but was still very popular in its time, it’s Thursday night boxing events regularly ”packed to capacity” (‘Packing a punch’, James Cockington, 01-Jul-2009, SMH, www.smh.com.au). Leichhardt was Sydney pro boxing’s ‘Medina’ to Sydney Stadiums’ ‘Mecca’, together, this brace of stadiums was the home of professional pugilism in Sydney in the early to middle part of the 20th century. The suburban stadium on Balmain Road, Leichhardt, first opened its doors in 1922. The two Sydney stadiums featured many of the popular active Aboriginal fighters, typically stepping up from the touring boxing tents to try to earn their livelihoods inside their square rings, including Ron Richards, Jack Hassen, George Bracken, the Sands brothers and many more. Other names regularly featuring on Leichhardt Stadium’s draw cards included Jack Carroll, Jimmy Kelso, ‘Kid’ Rooney and Hockey Bennell.

𝒱𝒶𝓊𝒹𝑒𝓋𝒾𝓁𝓁𝑒 + 𝒶 𝒮𝒾𝓃𝑜𝐼𝓇𝒾𝓈𝒽 𝒹𝓇𝒶𝓌 𝒸𝒶𝓇𝒹?
𝔚𝔯𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔩𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔞𝔱 𝔏𝔢𝔦𝔠𝔥𝔥𝔞𝔯𝔡𝔱 𝔖𝔱𝔞𝔡𝔦𝔲𝔪, 1936 (𝔖𝔬𝔲𝔯𝔠𝔢: 𝔖𝔱𝔞𝔱𝔢 𝔏𝔦𝔟 𝔬𝔣 𝔑𝔖𝔚

‘Blood’ sports and ”show biz” mash-up
Like it’s older relative at Rushcutters Bay, Leichhardt Stadium’s “bread-and-butter” remained pro-boxing and wrestling. However, during the Depression, the suburban stadium, perhaps anticipating Lee Gordon, innovated by incorporating the prevailing popular form of stage entertainment…Saturday night featured a program of boxing contests intermixed with “Vaudeville entertainment” acts (‘Leichhardt Stadium. 1922.’, Sydney Morning Herald, 08-Dec-1930 (Trove); Milesago).

𝔖𝔬𝔲𝔯𝔠𝔢: 𝔉𝔞𝔠𝔢𝔟𝔬𝔬𝔨

By the mid to late 1960s Australian professional boxing was in the doldrums and the stadium itself at Rushcutters Bay closed in 1970. Three years later the complex was demolished to make way for the Eastern Suburbs Railway. Leichhardt Stadium’s demise as a boxing venue occurred not long after in 1975.

𝐹o𝓇𝓂𝑒𝓇 𝒷o𝓍𝒾𝓃𝑔 𝓈𝓉𝒶𝓇𝓈 𝒷𝑒𝒾𝓃𝑔 𝒾𝓃𝓉𝓇o𝒹𝓊𝒸𝑒𝒹 o𝓃 𝒮𝓎𝒹𝓃𝑒𝓎 𝒮𝓉𝒶𝒹𝒾𝓊𝓂𝓈 𝒻𝒾𝓃𝒶𝓁 𝒻𝒾𝑔𝒽𝓉 𝓃𝒾𝑔𝒽𝓉, 𝟫th June 𝟣𝟫𝟩0 (𝒫𝒽o𝓉o: 𝒮𝑀𝐻)

𝓦𝓱𝓲𝓽𝓮 𝓒𝓲𝓽𝔂 𝓯𝓾𝓷 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓴 (𝓢𝓸𝓾𝓻𝓬𝓮: 𝓦𝓸𝓸𝓵𝓵𝓪𝓱𝓻𝓪 𝓜𝓾𝓷. 𝓒𝓸𝓾𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓵)

Footnote: White City’s fleeting existence
In 1913 another landmark was erected in Rushcutters Bay, a 9-iron’s distance from Sydney Stadium. The White City Amusement Park, also built on former Chinese market gardens, was a precursor of Sydney’s better known Luna Park. White City offered pleasure-seekers a smorgasbord of lakes, canals, river caves, “pleasure palaces”, “fun factories”, the city’s first roller coaster and it’s pièce de résistance, a gigantic (Pennsylvanian-constructed) carousel. White City lasted less than four years before being burnt to the ground after a lightning strike in 1917 (‘Lost Sydney : White City Amusement Park’, Pocket Oz, www.visitsydneyaustralia.com.au). In the early 1920’s the White City tennis complex was erected on the site.

𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬𓇬

also known as ” the old barn”

⚘ expat American promoter Lee Gordon was the brains behind this move into pop music, bringing out big US bands, singers and duos for concerts at Rushcutters Bay, backed by Australian support acts

Britain’s Tradition of Stage Censorship: The Lord Chamberlain and the Examiner of Plays, Arbiters of the Peoples’ Taste

Creative Writing, Leisure activities, Literary & Linguistics, Regional History, Society & Culture
Current Lord Chamberlain Andrew Parker (fmr MI5 head) (Source: The Times)

The Lord Chamberlain (LC) is the most senior member of Queen Elizabeth II’s Royal Household retinue. The office has been around in Britain for over 600 years, the incumbent is usually a peer and traditionally has always been male. Today, the LC handles the organisation for the Queen’s attendances at garden parties, state visits, looks after HM’s thoroughbred horses and he supervises the annual upping of the Royal swans. For much of its history though the LC had another, controversial role, censor of the British Theatre with virtual dictatorial powers — he “was answerable to no-one, not even parliament, and was not obliged to justify his decision to playwrights or theatre managers” [NICHOLSON, Steve. Theatre Censorship in Britain (1909-1968) In: Les censures dans le monde: xixe-xxie siècle[online]. Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2016 (generated 17 novembre 2021). Available on the Internet: . ISBN: 9782753555495. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/books.pur.45008.] A much aggrieved George Bernard Shaw characterised the LC as the “Malvolio of St James’ Palace” [‘The Censorship of the Stage in England’, G. Bernard Shaw, North American Review, August 1899, Vol 69, No 513, pp.251-262, www.jstor.org/stable/25104865].


Walpole, the first PM (Source: History Today)


The politics of early Georgian drama
Theatre censorship had existed in England since the 16th century but institutionalising its practice as a function of the Lord Chamberlain’s Office (LCO) was a political manoeuvre by the ”First Minster“ Robert Walpole in the 1730s to blunt the weapon of satire which was being effectively used theatrically against his government. The 1737 Licensing Act handed the LC the “power of god” over the English theatre, remarkably this legislative arrangement stayed in force until as recently as 1968. Hitherto to the crackdown critics🄰 of the ruling Whig Party were relatively free to make satirical attacks through the theatre of the day to expose the political corruption of Walpole’s government. The LC’s new carte blanche powers were designed to silence a theatre increasingly hostile to Walpole and the Whigs🄱 [‘The Licensing Act of 1737’, Eliza Hay, www.ericsimpson.sites.grinnell.edu].

1737 Licensing Act


Examiner of Plays
The LC was provided with two officers to put the spadework, a Examiner of Plays🄲 and a Deputy Examiner of Plays (the offices remunerated by yearly stipends of £400 and £200 respectively). The examiners’ task, assisted by secretaries and other auxiliary staff, was to read the plays that came before them (the LC himself did precious little of the actual reading of the plays) and write “Reader’s Reports” for the LC. They were also required to visit theatres to check on their safety and comfort and to ensure that the LC’s licensing rules were being observed. Theatres without a licence were liable for prosecution and financial penalties [‘Licensing Act 1737’, Wikipedia, http://en.m.wikipedia.org]. Although the ultimate decision on a license rested with the LC, the recommendations to make or break a new play came from the examiners, little wonder then that Bernard Shaw called the examiner “the most powerful man in England or America”.

Above and beyond the spoken word and the text
Censorship was not confined to bowdlerising the texts and banning plays outright🄳, the scope of the Royal censors extended to the actors’ gestures, the costumes, the sound and lighting effects, the set and the stage directions (Nicholson).

Osborne’s 1965 play ‘A Patriot for Me’, the controversy of the dramatist’s refusal to make cuts helped end the LC’s censorship

The view from within the Lord Chamberlain’s Office bubble
The LCO saw themselves as licensors rather than censors. They never really grasped why any reasonable dramatist or manager could object to their control, concluding that playwrights who did so were just trying “to exploit an unsavoury incident or fact”. In the LCO’s Pollyanna-like world view authors of “ordinary decent plays” on the other hand had nothing to fear. The LCO took a disparaging and contemptuous view of the modern playwrights who would rail against their invervention (such as John Osborne and Edward Bond🄴). The LCO tended to justify its censoring role in patronising terms, seeing itself as a moral watchdog, protecting the average playgoer from unsavoury plays, custodians of good taste on the English stage (Nicholson).

Theatre Royal Drury Lane (Source: architectsjournal.co.uk)

Zero guidance for the artist
The Act’s vagueness placed playwrights in an additional dilemma, the office of the LC never really spelt out explicitly what constituted a play’s suitability or unsuitability for a licence, leaving dramatists and the actor-managers of theatres guessing as to the basis of the objection. Plays rejected for a licence or having their manuscripts blue-pencilled for wholesale cuts were usually generically herded under a non-specific catch-all of being either ”immoral or improper for the stage”.

St James’ Palace, home of the Lord Chamberlain (Source: Pinterest)

An effort at codifying
The 1843 Theatres Act made a partial effort at codifying and limiting the LC’s powers, stipulating that a play could only be prohibited if “it is fitting for the preservation of good manners, decorum or of the public peace”. A joint select committee in 1909 advising the LC provided further clarification of the powers, the following were said to be “no-nos” in plays: indecent subject matter; (if a play contains) “offensive personalities”; (if it infers) “violence to sentiments of religious reverence”; “represents invidious manner of living persons”; “calculated to conduce crime and vice”; “impairs friendly relations with foreign powers”🄵 [‘The Lord Chamberlain’s Plays with British Library Curator Dr Alexander Lock’, People of Theatre, (Vlog, 2021), www.peopleoftheatre.com].

‘Mrs Warren’s Profession’ (Photo: V & A Museum)

Plays that dealt seriously with contemporary issues especially sexuality were severely blue-pencilled, eg, prostitution in Shaw’s Mrs Warren’s Profession. The continuing influence of religion saw the LC come down heavily on blasphemy, the portrayal of biblical figures were taboo (eg, Oscar Wilde’s Salome. Obscene language in plays was a serious infraction of the code. Into the 20th century the censorship of the LC maintained its prescriptive role, plays that earned the ire of the examiners included such classics of the modern theatre as Waiting for Godot (bodily functions or parts, even mere sexual suggestiveness) and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (homosexuality) which had already had a successful run on Broadway in the US. Increasingly as a result the LC was seen to be out of touch with modern concerns and realities.

Source: WNYC

Self-censorship and censorship by proxy
The LC held such control over theatrical performances in Britain that it even prompted an element of censorship by proxy. Rudolf Weiss has noted that fear of the LC‘s wrath led some playwrights to self-censor their work to secure a license and thus a hearing in Britain. Some of the autocratic actor-managers—fearful of financial losses arising from an aborted production—have done the LC’s work for them [‘“Unsuitable for theatrical presentation”: Mechanisms of censorship in later Victorian and Edwardian London Theatre’, Rudolf Weiss, www.ler.letras.up.pt].

Lord Chamberlain in 1960s, Baron Cobbold, resisted calls to abolish censorship (Artist: George JD Bruce)

End of the Lord Chamberlain’s censorship authority
Opposition to censorship was in the air in the 1960s with the emergence of a permissive society…a new generation of young playwrights like Osborne, Pinter and Bond were exploring increasingly polemical subjects in modern society. The Arts Council of Great Britain described the LC’s veto power as having “a contraceptive effect on the development of British drama” (Nicholson). The coup de grâce for theatre censorship came from the reformist Wilson Labour government🄶. The 1968 Theatres Act was part of a broad sweep of modernising legislation during the Sixties, along with the end of capital punishment, the decriminalisation of homosexuality, the introduction of the pill and the legalisation of abortion [‘50 years after Theatres Act, censorship has evolved’, Sandra Osei-Frimpong, Index on Censorship, 14-Aug-2018, www.indexoncensorship.org]. The repeal of stage censorship opened the floodgates for creativity and bold innovation – just one day after the ban ended, the controversial US counterculture musical Hair (New Age nudity, drug-taking) opened on London’s West End.

G Bernard Shaw (Source: thefamouspeople.com)


Footnote: Loophole in the system
The LCO’s net was wide but there were ways to get round the expurgator’s ban…when one Shaw play was banned in Britain for perceived profanity, the Irish playwright simply resorted to staging it in Liverpool and then Dublin. Later on some playwrights avoided the public theatre circuit altogether and put on their work exclusively at (private member) club theatres around the country. Even British drama institutions, the Royal Shakespeare Company and the Royal Court Theatre, frustrated by the LCO’s persistent interference, “threatened to turn themselves into private clubs for specific productions to evade the LC’s rulings” (Nicholson), which contributed to the groundswell of groups and individuals campaigning to end theatrical censorship.

Arts Theatre Club production, 1955 (Photo: V & A Museum)

…………………………………………………………….
🄰 with dramatist Henry Fielding in the forefront along with the Jacobite opponents of the Whigs
🄱 in theory the LC’s authority was limited to Westminster but effectively its jurisdiction applied to all Theatre Royal playhouses [‘Theatrical Oligarchies: The Role of the Examiner of Plays’, Oxford Scholarship Online, www.oxford.universitypressscholarship.com]
🄲 sometimes called ‘Comptroller’, in the 20th century they have mainly been military men-turned courtiers
🄳 each year relative few plays actually got banned, expurgation was the common recourse
🄴 whose play Saved was one of the last to be banned
🄵 these grounds would prove very controversial in the 1930 when the LC Lord Cromer banned a number of English plays which were hostile towards Nazi Germany (a manifestation of London’s appeasement approach to relations with Berlin). Cromer even send some scripts to the German Embassy for their ‘approval’! [‘Theatre of War: how the monarchy suppressed anti-Nazi drama in the 1930s’, Steve Nicholson, The Guardian, 22-Jul-2015, www.theguardian.com]
🄶 the previous Labour (Attlee) government had unsuccessfully tried to pass an anti-censorship bill in 1949

𓂀 𝕒𝕓𝕔𝕕𝕖𝕗𝕘𝕙𝕚𝕛𝕜 𓂀 𝓪𝓫𝓬𝓭𝓮𝓯𝓰𝓱𝓲 ⓐⓑⓒⓓⓔⓕⓖⓗⓘ ǟɮƈɖɛʄɢɦɨ

Imperial Games of Cricket and War: South Africa v England, 1901

International Relations, Leisure activities, Military history, Social History, Society & Culture, Sport, Sports history
1900 map of SA (Source: fruugoaustralia.com)

Between 1899 and 1902 Britain and the Afrikaner republics of Transvaal and Orange Free State were locked in conflict in the Second South African War, more commonly known as the Boer War (or more accurately the Second Anglo-Boer War). With the overconfident British failing to secure the expected quick victory over the Boers’ “citizen army”, the war dragged on into a long guerrilla engagement. In 1901, in the middle of the conflict in South Africa, of all things a cricket team from South Africa visited England and Ireland to take part in a series of international matches. How did this sporting incongruity take place while the two countries were engaged in a controversial, bitterly fought and increasingly divisive war?

Lord Hawke’s MCC tourists to SA 1898-99

Making it happen: JD Logan, the “Squire of the Southern Karoo”
In fact, the tour of Britain had been originally meant to occur in 1900ⓐ, but was cancelled due to the outbreak of hostilities, understandably enough. At this point in stepped Cape Province-based expat entrepreneur and cricket patron James Douglas Logan with his (long-cherished) plan to organise a new tour. Logan negotiated with the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) through the highly influential Lord Hawke, who managed to persuade the MCC to give the tour the green light. Despite the war still very much raging and the outcome far from decided, it was rescheduled for the following year. The announcement for the tour to take place in 1901 unleased opposition and misgivings from within both countries.

Newspaper cartoon of James Logan (Source: hermanus-history-society.co.za)

The South African press lambasted the team chosen–a mix of “socialite-gentleman” cricketers (including Logan’s own son who had never played first-class cricket!) and more skilful players—for being overall well below par. Moreover, the press criticised the private venture by the “Laird of Matjiesfontein” as being not legitimate because the touring players predominantly from the Cape Colony had not been officially selected by the South African Cricket Union (which had suspended the Currie Cup and disbanded with the onset of war) {Sport Past and Present in South Africa: Trans(forming) the Nation, Scarlett Cornelissen, Albert Grindingh (Eds.), (contributor Dean Allen) 2013; Peter Wynn Thomas, The Complete History of Cricket Tours At Home and Abroad, 1989}.

Sherlock’s creator: make war, not cricket
From the host country, probably the most vociferous critic was world renowned author (and cricket fan and amateur player) Arthur Conan Doyle. Conan Doyle, in the forefront of countering the anti-war propaganda within the British homeland with his own pro-war propaganda, was incensed that a team of predominantly English-speaking cricketers should be coming to Britain to play when they should be stay in South Africa and fight the Boers. The vexed author of Sherlock Holmes called it “a stain on their manhood” (Cornelissen, Grindingh).

Conan Doyle in cricket gear (Source: arthur-conan-doyle.com)

Despite the dissenting voices, what ultimately clinched it for Logan’s private tour was the MCC and the major English county clubs’ agreeing to give the tour matches first-class status. Even then there were second thoughts on the South Africa side and a suggestion made that the tour should not go ahead…this was scotched by the MCC who insisted it proceed to prevent the dislocation of the 1901 English season (Cornelissen, Grindingh).

Jimmy Sinclair (Photo: Cricket Weekly Record)

The cricket tour 🏏
Logan’s 14-man team was predominantly Uitlanders (‘foreigners’, immigrants, mainly British in composition but from other countries as well)…it included one Afrikaner cricketer Johannes Kotze who proved one of the more accomplished performers. The South Africans’ ‘gun’ batsman coming in to the tour was JH Sinclair, however his batting never really got going on the tour (unlike his bowling which was quite effective). Sinclair had been captured by the Boers but escaped in time to make the trip to Britain. Maitland Hathorn was the most successful “willow-wielder” on the tour (827 runs, average 35.95). Overall the team performed moderately though it did beat five of the major counties and tied one. Financially, Logan lost a substantial sum on the venture.

1901 Sth African tourists (Source: ebay.com)

Cricket’s special role serving the Empire
To the English, cricket, the game they invented, was the quintessential sport, and an essential companion of empire building. This was the “golden age“ of cricket (1895-1914) with WG Grace’s shadow still very much dominating the sportⓑ. The Victorians revered cricket as an established institution, it was integral to the ethos of the English gentleman and a sign of his cultural supremacy. Moreover cricket was considered educative, part of an Englishman’s training. Spreading the game to the Empire, to Australasia, the West Indies, the Indian Sub-continent and Southern Africa, symbolised the “civilising mission of the Englishman abroad”. Participation in cricket was equated with the civility of English Victorian society and an endorsement of Anglo-Saxon values. Cricket tours by the MCC, the sport’s governing body in England, stimulated the colonies‘ interest in the English game, but its deeper purpose was to “promote imperial ideology”, extolling the virtues of allegiance to Britain, Empire and patriotic duty {Dean Allen, Empire, War and Cricket in South Africa, Logan of Matjiesfontein, 2015}. Allen’s thesis is that cricket was injected by the English ruling classes into South Africa “as much for political and propagandistic reasons as for sporting ones”

War an instrument of empire with cricket the mentor
The late Victorians affirmed that “manly games” were integral to training for life. Above all the ‘school’ of cricket taught lessons of “discipline, self-abnegation, a sense of fair play and team-work”, it built character. Britain’s willingness to engage in the 1899 War to enlarge the Empire—the scramble for colonies in Africa in competition with Germany and France—brought the cricketing fraternity squarely into the frame. Cricketers, to the English mind, were “made of the right stuff” for mortal combat, they were up for martial challenges (Donaldson, Peter (2017) ‘We are having a very enjoyable game’: Britain, sport and the South African War, 1899-1902. War in History, 25(1). ISSN 0968-3445). Many cricketers enlisted in the South African War (some former teammates found themselves on opposing sides), and there were cricketing casualties in the conflict {Dean Allen (2005) ‘Bats and Bayonets’: Cricket and the Anglo-Boer War, 1899–1902, Sport in History, 25:1, 17-40, DOI: 10.1080/17460260500073033}, including some fine players of the day like Anglo-Australian test bowling ace JJ Ferris.

Australian troops playing cricket at the front in SA (Photo: awm.org.au)

Endnote: Pioneering South African XI on the Sub-continent
An unintended co-occurrence of the Boer War was that it led to the staging of the first cricket match between South Africans and local cricketers on Sub-continent soil, 90 years before Apartheid sport ended in South Africa. ‘Representing’ South Africa were Afrikaner POWs incarcerated in Ceylon…Diyatalawa Camp v Colts XI, Nondescripts Club ground, Colombo 1901. The local XI won! {‘The First South Africa. side to play in the sub-continent: Boer Prisoners of War in 1901’, CricketMash, 4-Jul-2020, www.cricmash.com}.

Mafeking reported in cricketing terms (source: independentaustralia.net)

Postscript: 1899 South African War, cricket as antidote to physical and moral degeneration
The poor health of many Boer War recruits and Britain’s early reversals in the war added weight to prevailing concerns about national and ‘racial’ degeneration {Robb, George. “The Way of All Flesh: Degeneration, Eugenics, and the Gospel of Free Love.” Journal of the History of Sexuality, vol. 6, no. 4, University of Texas Press, 1996, pp. 589–603, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4617222.} Some commentators of the day, bemoaning the ”neglect of an active athleticism“, called for more playing fields as an antidote to the decline of young working class men, so that they could be the beneficiaries of the ”cricket way of making honest and healthy Englishmen” {Anthony Bateman, Cricket, Literature and Culture: Symbolising the Nation, Destabilising Empire, 2016}.

𓁾𓁽𓁾𓁽𓁾𓁽𓁾𓁽𓁾𓁽𓁾𓁽𓁾𓁽

ⓐ the English MCC side had just concluded their own tour of South Africa in April 1899, just six months before the war commenced
ⓑ Dr Grace loomed larger than life in cricket during this period as the sport’s first genuine superstar