Fancies Versus FadsChesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
General
Fancies Versus Fads
Chesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
English essays -- 20th century
Suppose I come forward with this great reform of the Prohibition of the
Press. Suppose I suggest that the police should forcibly shut up all the
newspaper-offices, as the other reformers wish to shut up all the
public-houses. What answer will the Puritan moralists make to me, or on
what principle do they distinguish between the one reform and the other?
There is no kind of doubt about the harm that journalism does; and their
own line of argument precludes them from appealing merely to the good
that it does. As a matter of fact, far better poems have been written in
taverns than are ever likely to appear in daily papers. And, from
Pantagruel to Pickwick, this form of festivity has a roll of literary
glory to its credit which is never likely to be found in the back files
of any newspaper that I know of. But the Puritans do not discuss the
healthier tradition of wine; they consider their argument sufficiently
supported by the unhealthy effects of gin and bad beer in the slums. And
if we adopt that principle of judging by the worst, then the worst
effects of the press are far wider than the worst effects of the
public-house. What exactly is the principle by which they distinguish
between lawful and unlawful liberty, or mixed and unmixed licence? I
have a rough-and-ready test, which may be right or wrong, but which I
can at least state; but where has their test been stated? I say that the
simplest form of freedom is that which distinguishes the free man from
the slave--the ownership of his own body and his own bodily activities.
That there is a risk in allowing him this ownership is obvious, and has
always been obvious. The risk is not confined to the question of drink,
but covers the whole question of health. But surely the other forms of
freedom, such as freedom to print, are very much more indirect and
disputable. A newspaper may be made the instrument of the vilest sort of
swindling or starving of a whole people. Why are we to grant the remote
right, and deny the intimate right? Moreover, a newspaper is a new
thing; if our fathers had the right to it, they never knew it. Fermented
liquor is as old as civilization, or older. But what I have asked for
again and again is simply the principle of the Prohibitionists: and I am
asking still.
The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account