Saul Stavanger
Five Islands Secondary College
2024
Chapter 1: America's New Church 2
Chapter 2: The Sanctity of Sunday and the Creation of Leisure 5
Chapter 3: Early Censorship From the Protestant Worldview 8
Chapter 4: “Good Moral Character” and the Public Welfare 9
Introduction
The dawn of cinema in the early 20th century introduced a revolutionary medium that quickly captivated audiences and transformed the landscape of American entertainment. However, this newfound cultural phenomenon also sparked significant concern and controversy. As motion pictures began to reflect and shape public perceptions, they encountered resistance from various societal factions concerned about their potential impact on moral values and cultural norms. This paper examines the historical context and ideological motivations behind early film censorship efforts, shedding light on the enduring struggle over cultural and moral authority in America.
The roots of film censorship can be traced back to the early 1900s, when the rapid proliferation of movies led to widespread anxiety among religious, political, and social groups. These stakeholders feared that unregulated content could undermine societal morals, corrupt youth, and challenge the existing social order. In response, they advocated for stringent controls over what could be depicted on screen. The resulting efforts to censor films were driven by a complex interplay of ideological motivations, reflecting the broader cultural and moral anxieties of the era.
At the heart of this struggle was the tension between the burgeoning film industry's desire for creative freedom and the censors' determination to enforce moral standards. Organisations such as the National Board of Review and, later, the Motion Picture Production Code, also known as the Hays Code, emerged as key players in this battleground. These entities sought to impose a code of conduct on filmmakers, dictating what was deemed acceptable for public consumption.
By exploring the historical background and ideological underpinnings of early film censorship, this paper aims to examine the broader cultural and moral conflicts that have shaped American media and indeed the global entertainment landscape. Through case studies and analysis of key censorship mechanisms, this research will demonstrate how the battle over film content in the early 20th century laid the groundwork for ongoing debates about cultural and moral authority in the media. Ultimately, this examination reveals that the struggle over what should be shown on screen is not just a relic of the past but a continuing discourse that reflects the evolving values and priorities of American society.
Chapter 1: America's New Church
In 1905, America witnessed the birth of a new cultural phenomenon: the nickelodeon. These small, street-front theatres quickly became the primary venues for the public to experience motion pictures. The first motion picture house emerged in Pittsburgh, but the concept soon spread beyond the city's streets, dominating the East Coast. Nickelodeons popped up on every street and corner, welcoming thousands of people daily, all captivated by this revolutionary form of entertainment. By the end of the decade, an estimated eight to ten thousand nickelodeons existed across the country, with a significant concentration in New York City's boroughs. This surge marked the beginning of a cultural shift and sparked a class struggle over control of this new media, public welfare, and the lucrative profits it promised.
The low cost of entry made these theatres widely appealing and accessible, reaching audiences that no other art form had previously catered to. Cinema, or at least the moving pictures which would soon become known as cinema, was the people's art. It was an institution in American culture, a combination of vaudeville performances and short pictures that dominated the country. However, this institution was not received well by some religious, political and social sections of the community and the nickelodeons soon became a contentious issue of the time.
The buildings themselves were densely packed standing cinemas, often smoky with little airflow. Inside, a pianist would shift from jaunty tunes to violent screeches, to match the flickering images on the screen. It captivated something raw and untapped in the American subconscious, the pictures themselves portrayed the reality of 20th century working life, in contrast to the Protestant Victorian ideals that those in power wanted to maintain. An art for the people, an art that could cut across culture, race and language barriers to unify the masses was a threat. With a rapid and meteoric rise, these theatres quickly caught the attention of powerful figures. Soon, a wave of harsh regulations, growing concerns from religious leaders, and threats of censorship began to take shape, leading this meteoric ascent to be met with an equally swift decline.
Two major concerns emerged during the rise of nickelodeons. Firstly, there was a genuine worry about the safety of these crowded, often highly flammable standing cinemas. However, a more prominent issue was the perceived threat to the Victorian ideals of Protestant America. This concern centred around the shift from Sunday worship to a culture of consumption and the growing influence of ethnic minorities, particularly the Jewish population. As Jewish immigrants fled worsening conditions in Europe during the late 19th century, they found new opportunities in the emerging nickelodeon industry, which had not yet been monopolised. This shift was met with suspicion and distrust by many who feared that these newcomers would not uphold the Victorian sanctity of America's religious and cultural values.
Chapter 2: The Sanctity of Sunday and the Creation of Leisure
“We are dealing with the amusement of the mass of the people and the mass of the people are not going to church these days.”-w.d mcguire
The Industrial Revolution was a turning point that transformed almost every aspect of society, from the emergence of the middle class to the rapid increase in pollution and the escalation of direct action movements. This era is crucial for understanding the modern world. One subtle but profound shift was the gradual decline in religious practice and the way people connected with God. With the standardisation of the six-day workweek, Sunday began to be seen more as a day of leisure rather than a day devoted to God. This societal change set the stage for a new cultural battleground—the debate over cinema as the "new church."
Leisure time became the birthplace of modern American culture, giving rise to early forms of entertainment such as bars, sports, vaudeville, and puppet shows that began to flood the cities. Workers, constrained by the long hours of factory life, often found that their only free time fell on Sundays. With the concentration of the lower class in cities, a workers' culture that centred around leisure time in universal spaces began to evolve.
In stark contrast, up until this point and post ‘The Second Great Awakening’, America was Protestant by nature. The Second Great Awakening was core in shaping the Victorian mindset of the protestant elite, and the resulting emergence of proto-evangelicals. It marked a return to fundamentalist beliefs, and the emergence of protestantism as the forefront for American culture. However, after the 1850s the dominance of the church started to wane as culture became more concentrated.
This set up the clash for American modernity with “Sunday Leisure” the target. Whether it be early calls for prohibition or the termination of cinema just as it had begun, Sunday pictures were the threat of the day. Protestant groups argued for independent censorship and this push resulted in a decision that still shapes cinema today. It allowed for monopolies to form on the basis of controlling the output of “immoral” media. This changed the course of how the film industry would be structured, especially during the golden age of Hollywood.
Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. There are no real statistics, at least none that are accessible to the public, that support the argument that cinema killed Sunday worship. This argument is no different to any modern day Conservative discourse. Core to understanding the mindset of the rising censors, is understanding both the financial monopolisation and the moral monopolisation of the time.
Just as now there are calls to ban films that are too sexual, influencing gender of the ‘susceptible’, or that there is a secret Jewish plot to undermine American values, we see that Conservatism is based on regression, a need to hold tight to the status quo. Sometimes that regression is loosely based on a single fact: like there are more queer representations in the mainstream now. Regardless if this perceived regression is real or even a valid concern, it is core to Conservative policy. Regression and nostalgia are rooted in institutions. The loss of Sundays, the decline in church attendance, the rise of nickelodeon's and Jewish immigration, were all considered an active attempt to destroy the sanctity of Sunday, and the good moral character of the American people.
But the stage was set, church attendance was declining as Nickelodeons were on the rise. Film therefore must be the cause. Then there was the increase of Jewish immigrants, along with other minorities in Hollywood, making and profiting from film. We have a culture of anti Semitic Protestants who believe Jewish people are actively using film to destroy America's good moral character through the destruction of Sunday worship and filling that void with film. And finally we have nostalgia for the past, all of which are rooted in the Conservative institutions of this story and the Conservative policy of the time.
Chapter 3: Early Censorship From the Protestant Worldview
In the belly of the hazy cities of America, a restlessness grew, and film was beginning to express it. As the working week became universal, leisure bloomed and a bigger question for those in power arose - how do we control the proletariat through these new mediums?
Discontent and revolutions were at an all-time high, those in power were fearful of anything which could disrupt that power, and yet soon entered the medium to harness that discontent. With film being so accessible, whether it be by its ability to cross language barriers, or its miniscule cost of entry, it became necessary for those in power to discredit it as an art form. A prime example is the Ohio case of 1905, where it was ruled film was “a business, pure and simple,” opening up the possibility of litigation against films deemed ‘intolerable’. So they treated it as a commercial good and nothing more. Like alcohol or drugs - “The commission’s task corresponded to that of the Food and Drug Administration: protecting consumers from harm.”(William Sheafe chase catechism on motion pictures) It should be kept to the current day Protestant standards, only of course, if it could be controlled by those in power.
Chapter 4: “Good Moral Character” and the Public Welfare
Key to understanding these early attempts at censorship is the concept of public welfare - the utmost duty of any American is to protect the morality of God's country. First we must be cognizant of what public welfare means in a Protestant sense. It aims to edify the perceived inherit good moral character of the nation and punish those who would damage the future of that federation.
The people of America didn’t just need Victorian media in their life but they wanted it; in a true unrestricted market, capital is democracy, your dollars are your votes, and the moral character of the nation would vote for good media. Only when an outsider force, whether immigrants or a restrictive government did the people's democracy falter. Furthermore, the demand for exploitative content (sexual, violent etc) was artificial. Protestant reformers truly believed in the “good moral character” of America, and that given the chance, would always remain true to Victorian ideals, as this was ‘God determined’.
Protestantism is deeply entangled within the American dream. Core to the heart of America is the belief of self-determinism. A thought that acts as a self preservation, an ideal, that any man with the character; a man with god's truth, can with his own hands craft something out of nothing. Because of this ideal, government regulation is viewed as problematic. It is believed that State affairs should not meddle with the free market. These concepts and ideals formed the approach taken with cinema.
God, market and destiny, formed the basis of much antisemitism. If the natural uncontaminated American subconscious is pure then what is tainting it? The answer came readily - who was running the first cinemas? and later - who would go on to found Hollywood? If we can’t have faith in them, and we can’t have faith in market forces or the Government, who can we place our faith in? The answer was simple, Thomas Edison's Film Trust. The trust owned the majority of the industry and with a stated goal to maintain control of their monopoly through a self-regulated censorship board and Patent abuse and control, presented the perfect justification for monopolistic practices (The Edison Movie Monopoly, The Motion Picture Patents Company vs. the Independent Outlaws, by J. A. Aberdeen and Combination and Litigation: Structures of U.S. Film Distribution, 1896-1917).
Every censorship board worked with industry, not against it. It was utilised as a tool, punishing pictures deemed of ‘bad character’, although typically for different reasons then stated. This power was only possible because of the Protestants' deep hatred of regulation, and the belief that in an untainted free market, purity would flow. This is truly the most important part of understanding the history of film censorship. For the most part, government regulation was hated and there was a fundamental trust in the American market, a religious fervour for the preservation of its integrity. Throughout the years since, many boards have formed and fallen, whether the Catholic League of Decency, the MPPDA or in its current iteration the MPAA. One thing is true for all, they didn’t just work with industry, they were industry. They were producers, friends of executives and even owners of film companies. Even today our rating system is built off the back of the original MPPDA, the same private industry owned organisation which for a century has been used to dictate what has received commercial success. We leave it in the hands of private equity to decide what is seen and what is forgotten, at first by making it criminal, then by punishing the artists with no work and banning them from industry, or now subtly financially influencing certain stories through the rating system. The methods change, but the motives stay the same. It is the same exact companies as a century ago, serving the exact same fiscal interest. Regulation of these companies is still seen as negative by the public, even when it is in their best interest. Because it is a contradiction within the American dream, if we buy enough, if we consume enough, our voices will be heard.
On the eve of Hanukkah, 1908, three hundred and thirty nickelodeons were shut down. In a statement from the incumbent mayor: “Because of the serious opposition presented by the rectors and pastors or practically all the christian denominations in the city, and because of the further objections of the society for the prevention of cruelty to children and the society for the prevention of crime. I have decided licences for moving picture shows shall only be issued hereafter on the written agreement that the licence will not operate the same on Sundays. And I do further declare that I will revoke any of these moving-picture show licences on evidence that pictures have been exhibited by the licences which tend to degrade or injure the morals of the community.”(New York Times, 25/12/1908) Their licences were revoked and the cinemas closed. The few that remained slowly lost out to buy outs and the loss of their main income, Sundays. They were seen as a passing fad, and have been all but forgotten today, remembered by the namesake of a children's media company. On the eve of Hanukkah 1908, three hundred and thirty nickelodeons were shut down, and so were the hopes of an art form to transcend the barriers of class and language.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the early battle for control of the American film industry and its content was driven by a complex web of ideological, moral, and economic motivations. As cinema emerged as a powerful medium of mass communication in the early 20th century, it sparked deep anxieties among various societal factions, particularly religious and political groups, who feared its potential to undermine traditional moral values. This led to the imposition of censorship frameworks that sought to regulate film content according to conservative notions of morality, public welfare, and Victorian ideals.
The rise of the nickelodeon and early cinema's accessibility to diverse audiences challenged the Protestant establishment's grip on American culture, particularly its emphasis on the sanctity of Sunday worship and moral purity. As Jewish immigrants and other marginalised groups began to influence the film industry, this further fueled anti-Semitic and xenophobic sentiments, contributing to the push for censorship. Protestant reformers and industry monopolists alike saw an opportunity to regulate cinema, not only to protect moral character but also to consolidate power and control within the entertainment sector.
The early film censorship efforts, exemplified by the shutdown of nickelodeons and the eventual establishment of the Motion Picture Production Code, were not merely reactions to specific moral concerns but part of a broader struggle to maintain cultural dominance. By shaping the parameters of what was deemed acceptable in media, these censorship frameworks laid the foundation for future debates about creative freedom, media regulation, and cultural authority. It is through this cultural domination they built monopolies that have lasted a century, Metro Goldwyn Mayer (MGM), RKO, 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros, and Paramount Pictures. Self censorship serves one purpose, control.
Today, the legacy of these early censorship battles continues to influence the film industry. While the methods of control have evolved, the underlying tensions between creative expression and societal values persist. The history of film censorship in America reveals that the fight over what appears on screen is, at its core, a reflection of deeper conflicts about identity, power, and the shifting moral landscape of the nation. As new forms of media continue to emerge, this struggle will undoubtedly remain a defining feature of the American cultural experience.
Bibliography
https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,722522,00.html
Article, 1926, on william h hays and his background, before he would reach the crux of his power in the 30s.
https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,842279,00.html
Article, 1965, on the history and ever changing tactics of the catholic league of decency.
Church declaration, 1955, statements from the church about how the new forms of media should be viewed and approached.
https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1908/12/25/105016765.pdf
Article, 1908, the mayor's declaration on nickelodeon and his reasoning why.
Reforming Hollywood: How American Protestants Fought for Freedom atScreening out the past : the birth of mass culture and the motion picture industry the Movies
Book, 2012, amazing source of information which a lot of this paper is built on. Lot’s of great sources.
In Defense of the Moving Pictures: The People's Institute, The National Board of Censorship and the Problem of Leisure in Urban America
Book, 1992, interesting different perspectives.
The People’s Institute: Working-Class Immigrant Political Participation, 1897-1917
Thesis, 2018, Interesting thesis on the americanization of immigrants and the control of lower classes to prevent real change
Screening out the past : the birth of mass culture and the motion picture industry
Book, 1980, Pages 81-84, Useful in relation to the birth of the nation and its impact on censorship
Between reform and regulation
Book, 1987, Looks at the power struggles over the “progressive” era in what way censorship would take
The crisis in the motion picture industry
1931 about the death of the motion picture and the nationalization of film.
Massachusetts state censorship of movies
Event, 1922, In Massachusetts there was a referendum in 1922 about whether official state legislation of the censorship of film would pass, through the mppda headed by will h hays they managed to instead gain self censorship, and the beginning of an industry control that would last for the following decades.
The “Fatty” Arbuckle Scandal, Will Hays, and Negotiated Morality in 1920s America
Examining the forced controversies of the will hays censor era, and how it was utilised to instil fear and control creatives.
Combination and Litigation: Structures of U.S. Film Distribution, 1896-1917 Thesis, 1984, Very useful marxist examination of the edison monopoly