Discuss the impacts of censorship in Harold Pinter's typescript of 'The Birthday Party'.
Not only did 2018 celebrate The Birthday Party’s 60’th anniversary, it celebrated 50 years since the Theatres Act 1968 came into force,[1] which, Natasha Tripney claims, was successful in ‘abolishing state censorship of the British stage and enshrining the right of free expression in theatrical works’ [2]. However, this abolition came too late for Pinter as the following analysis of a second of the play typescript found on the British Library website reveals. In keeping with the regulations of The Theatres Act 1843, the religious references in The Birthday Party undergo serious editing in a digitised version of the interrogation scene found on the British Library website. This excerpt was part of the version sent to Lord Chamberlain’s office in 1958 in order to obtain a licence for public performance. The date written on the inside of the digitised cover of this script reads ‘18 April 1958’ [3], ten days before it was staged on the 28th of April 1958 in Lyric Hammersmith theatre. Thus, it is viable to deduce that this was the version in its final draft. The editing of this script exemplifies the inevitable censorship this explicit typescript underwent as just one of many challenges that faced the play.The force of the Theatres Act of 1843 is manifest throughout the digitised interrogation scene. The theme of censoring religious references that may insight public disdain is first apparent on page 61 where the editor has marked a section which includes the lines ‘STANLEY: The Lord’s Prayer […] MAC: An atheist! (p. 61). This religious censorship is carried on to page 65 of the digitised script, where the lines ‘MAC: You pierced the holes! […] You hammered the nails!’ (p. 65) are highlighted for removal and notably, do not appear in any edition of the play preceding the 1958 publication. However, these religious implications were critical to Pinter, as Michael Billington claims:
Having forsaken religion at the age of 13, Pinter represents through Goldberg the patriarchal aspects of Jewish orthodoxy; […] and he makes McCann an example of an oppressive Catholicism […] the oppressors are themselves victims of larger forces.[4]
That there is no attempt within the script to supplement the highlighted lines is troubling since the religious references were clearly important in addressing a social issue, as Billington observes that ‘Pinter subconsciously pours into that scene all his own detestation of the moral pressures of orthodox religion’ [5]. However, as the censored script reveals through the merciless editing by Lord Chamberlain’s office, this important social commentary becomes lost. Further down this page the conversation between Mac, Goldberg accuse Stanley of killing his wife. Seven lines are crossed out, including the reasons of death suggested, including, ‘starvation’, the violent suggestion that he ‘throttled her’ and ‘arsenic’ (pp. 61-2). Thus, it is not only religious censorship that takes place in this edition but simultaneously the language of violence. That this dialogue reappears in the 1996 Faber and Faber version of the play whilst the religious references remain absent, is an intriguing insight into the hold of censorship regarding religious mockery, despite its abolition in 1958. Overall, these examples of censorship in Lord Chamberlain’s typescript amplify the fact that against Billington’s comment that The Birthday Party ‘passed with flying colours’[6], its journey over the past 60 years has in fact been turbulent.
[1] Natasha Tripney ‘It's 50 years since the end of stage censorship in Britain – but how free are artists really?’, The Independent, (2018) <https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/features/censorsed-stage-screen-society-va-censorship-exhibition-theatre-50-years-a8438226.html> [accessed 19/12/18] (subsequent references are taken from this publication and will be provided throughout the parenthesis)[2] Ibid [3] Harold Pinter, and Lord Chamberlain’s Office, ‘Lord Chamberlain’s Play’s: The Birthday Party by Harold Pinter (1958)’, London, British Library, LCP 1958, No. 20, <https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/censored-script-of-the-birthday-party-by-harold-pinter> [accessed 19/12/18] (subsequent references are taken from this publication and will be provided throughout the parenthesis page numbers according to the digitised script) [4] Michael Billington, ‘Fighting Talk’, The Guardian, (2008), <https://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/may/03/theatre.stage> [accessed 19/12/18] [5] Michael Billington, Harold Pinter, p. 137[6] Michael Billington, ‘The Birthday Party review – Pinter's cryptic classic turns 60 with a starry cast’ The Guardian Online, (2018)
