{"title":"达尔文在切割室的地板上:","authors":"D. Kirby","doi":"10.1086/703953","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the mid-twentieth century, film studios sent their screenplays to the Hays Office, Hollywood’s official censorship body, and to the Catholic Church’s Legion of Decency for approval and recommendations for revision. This essay examines how filmmakers crafted stories involving evolutionary biology and how religiously motivated movie censorship groups modified these cinematic narratives in order to depict what they considered to be more appropriate visions of humanity’s origins. I find that censorship groups were concerned about the perceived impact of science fiction cinema on the public’s belief systems and on the wider cultural meanings of evolution. By controlling the stories told about evolution in science fiction cinema, censorship organizations believed that they could regulate the broader cultural meanings of evolution itself. But this is not a straightforward story of “science” versus “religion.” There were significant differences among these groups as to how to censor evolution, as well as changes in their attitudes toward evolutionary content over time. As a result, I show how censorship groups adopted diverse perspectives, depending on their perception of what constituted a morally appropriate science fiction story about evolution.","PeriodicalId":54659,"journal":{"name":"Osiris","volume":"34 1","pages":"55 - 80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/703953","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Darwin on the Cutting-Room Floor:\",\"authors\":\"D. Kirby\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/703953\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the mid-twentieth century, film studios sent their screenplays to the Hays Office, Hollywood’s official censorship body, and to the Catholic Church’s Legion of Decency for approval and recommendations for revision. This essay examines how filmmakers crafted stories involving evolutionary biology and how religiously motivated movie censorship groups modified these cinematic narratives in order to depict what they considered to be more appropriate visions of humanity’s origins. I find that censorship groups were concerned about the perceived impact of science fiction cinema on the public’s belief systems and on the wider cultural meanings of evolution. By controlling the stories told about evolution in science fiction cinema, censorship organizations believed that they could regulate the broader cultural meanings of evolution itself. But this is not a straightforward story of “science” versus “religion.” There were significant differences among these groups as to how to censor evolution, as well as changes in their attitudes toward evolutionary content over time. As a result, I show how censorship groups adopted diverse perspectives, depending on their perception of what constituted a morally appropriate science fiction story about evolution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54659,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Osiris\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"55 - 80\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/703953\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Osiris\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/703953\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osiris","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/703953","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
在20世纪中期,电影制片厂将他们的剧本送到好莱坞的官方审查机构海斯办公室(Hays Office)和天主教会的道德军团(Legion of Decency),以获得批准和修改建议。本文考察了电影制作人如何精心制作涉及进化生物学的故事,以及出于宗教动机的电影审查机构如何修改这些电影叙事,以描绘他们认为更合适的人类起源。我发现,审查机构关心的是科幻电影对公众信仰体系和更广泛的进化文化意义的影响。通过控制科幻电影中关于进化的故事,审查机构相信他们可以控制进化本身更广泛的文化意义。但这并不是一个简单的“科学”与“宗教”的故事。在如何审查进化的问题上,这些群体之间存在着显著的差异,同时随着时间的推移,他们对进化内容的态度也发生了变化。因此,我展示了审查机构是如何采用不同的观点的,这取决于他们对道德上合适的关于进化的科幻故事的看法。
In the mid-twentieth century, film studios sent their screenplays to the Hays Office, Hollywood’s official censorship body, and to the Catholic Church’s Legion of Decency for approval and recommendations for revision. This essay examines how filmmakers crafted stories involving evolutionary biology and how religiously motivated movie censorship groups modified these cinematic narratives in order to depict what they considered to be more appropriate visions of humanity’s origins. I find that censorship groups were concerned about the perceived impact of science fiction cinema on the public’s belief systems and on the wider cultural meanings of evolution. By controlling the stories told about evolution in science fiction cinema, censorship organizations believed that they could regulate the broader cultural meanings of evolution itself. But this is not a straightforward story of “science” versus “religion.” There were significant differences among these groups as to how to censor evolution, as well as changes in their attitudes toward evolutionary content over time. As a result, I show how censorship groups adopted diverse perspectives, depending on their perception of what constituted a morally appropriate science fiction story about evolution.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1936 by George Sarton, and relaunched by the History of Science Society in 1985, Osiris is an annual thematic journal that highlights research on significant themes in the history of science. Recent volumes have included Scientific Masculinities, History of Science and the Emotions, and Data Histories.