- City suspends liquor license for downtown Cape bar; owners say they want to fix problems (3/26/17)5
- Mall aboard: Future requires evolution at West Park Mall (3/24/17)24
- Legal discrimination complaint, ethics complaint filed in Scott City government (3/22/17)13
- Business notebook: Cape native goes from farm to mobile-food operation (3/20/17)1
- Former Southeast softball coach sues Board of Regents; seeks damages and her job back (3/23/17)15
- Former Scott City administrator: 'I was forced to resign' (3/21/17)6
- Triplett manslaughter case set for July 2018 (3/21/17)2
- Two people found dead in Advance house fire (3/21/17)
- Two Cape men charged with second-degree murder of Grandi (3/21/17)2
- Two local lawmakers back charter school bill; Perryville lawmaker objects to measure (3/19/17)24
Censorship must be challenged
To the editor:
"Sister Mary Ignatius" was first performed on Dec. 14, 1979. Since that performance it has been read and performed in hundreds (if not thousands) of venues from high schools to public theaters and was made into a major motion picture staring Diane Keaton in 2001. This play is a satire.
We do not all agree on all issues, but we all do have the constitutional right to express (or sample) diverse views. When those who have a particular viewpoint or who have administrative or financial power attempt to restrict or restrain the choice of others, we should all be greatly concerned.
Any patron has the right to express any opinion of a play or event using any accepted medium (e.g. letter in a newspaper, direct communication with someone). Those rights are not in question, and, in the case of the satirical play "Sister Mary Ignatius," the expressions of condemnation by individuals were appropriate and may very well not have had the intention of censorship.
The issue of importance is the subsequent response by the administration of Southeast Missouri State University. As discussed in the Faculty Senate and in other public meetings by various administrators, the explicit pressures and apparent intimidation applied by the administration to control the nature of productions organized by the Department of Theatre and Dance constitute censorship. This cannot pass unchallenged.
RICHARD A. SEBBY, Professor, Department of Psychology, Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau