It may be said, too, in dismissing him, that it is of no consequence
whether the very unpleasant stories current concerning him are true or
not. It is altogether probable that a man who stands for what he does
and who glories in proclaiming the things he does, will also do things
for which he does not stand and which he does not proclaim. That is a
characteristic of most of us and only proves that, after all, he is not
less than human.
The only point that need be made in regard to the man who is proud of
representing Comstockery is, that if he had not done so, some other lost
soul would. In that sad stage of our social growth when death was the
penalty for most infractions of the law, an executioner could always be
found who took pride in his work and who seemed to be beyond the reach
of the scorn, the abhorrence and the contempt of his fellows.
Comstockery, as we know it, is apparently an organized effort to
regulate the morals of the people. If it were nothing more than this, it
would be absurd and negligible, because futile; for what we call morals
are only the observances which the conditions of life impose upon a
people; and an act depends, for its moral status, upon its relation to
those conditions. As, for example, horse-stealing in a closely settled
community, which has its railroads and other means of communication, is
a crime to be punished by a brief period of imprisonment; while in the
sparsely settled sections of a country, where the horse is an imperative
necessity of life, its theft becomes a hanging matter, whatever the
written law for that section of the country may be as to the punishment
of the crime. And men, brought up in law-abiding communities in the
deepest respect for the law, will, under the changed conditions of life,
not merely condone the infliction of a penalty in excess of that
provided by law, but will themselves assist, virtuously satisfied with
their conduct because the society of which they form a part has decided
that horse-stealing shall be so punished. On the other hand, there are
numerous laws on the statute books, still unrepealed and unenforceable
because the acts treated of are no longer held to be offences against
morality. In other words, the morals of a people can be regulated only
by themselves.
What Comstockery does is bad enough, but its real awfulness lies in the
fact that it seems to fairly enough represent us in our attitude toward
a certain class of ideas and things. It is the expression of our
essential immorality--using that word in its conventional sense--having
its roots deep down in pruriency, hypocrisy and ignorance. Like the
blush on the cheek of the courtesan, it deceives no one, but is none the
less a truthful expression, not of the thing it simulates, but of the
character of the simulator.
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