“I would rather give a healthy boy or a healthy girl a phial of prussic acid than this novel. Poison kills the body but moral poison kills the soul”—James Douglas, editor of The Sunday Express.[1]
Censorship signals what is deemed, by those in power, appropriate for public consumption. Recently, the imbalance in censorship laws between countries has been highlighted, with books published in some countries being banned elsewhere. What is deemed inappropriate for publication, however, is not just down to cultural and geographical differences: it is something that has developed over time. Books that were deemed obscene and inappropriate 100 years ago are typically not today. This article considers the example of The Well of Loneliness by Radclyffe Hall, a novel that was first published in 1928 by Jonathan Cape. What follows draws upon the fascinating archival material hosted by British Online Archives, specifically the following collections: American Women's Club Magazine, 1925–1936; The Bystander, 1903–1940; and The Graphic, 1869–1932.
It is believed that the word “censor” originated in Rome, around the year 443 BCE. This witnessed the establishment of the position of Censor.[2] A Censor was a senior magistrate who, amongst other responsibilities, supervised the public morals of citizens.[3] They even had the power to remove an individual’s citizenship. The first serious attempt in the UK to regulate publications came in 1857, with the passing of the Obscene Publications Act.[4] Before this, the definition of obscenity had largely been decided by the Anglican Church. Indeed, the whole issue of obscenity was dealt with through confession or the ecclesiastical courts.[5] In the early eighteenth century, common law courts began to penalise those who circulated so-called obscene publications.[6] Yet the legislation against obscene publications was haphazard. To introduce a more systematic method of preventing the circulation of obscene material, and to give more powers to the police to seize such material, the Obscene Publications Act was passed.[7]
Various cuttings of Radclyffe Hall from The Bystander and The Graphic.[8]
In 1928 Hall’s The Well of Loneliness was banned in the UK under the Obscene Publications Act. This was due to its depiction of lesbianism. Hall (1880–1934) was an English novelist who is best remembered for The Well of Loneliness, mainly due to the commotion that followed its publication. That said, Hall’s literature was widely read and highly regarded before the publication of her infamous novel. In the first extract (above) it is stated that Hall’s books “have a large following” before announcing her as the recipient of the “James Pait Black Memorial literary prize for the best work of fiction in 1926”.[9] This was two years before the publication of The Well of Loneliness.[10] Furthermore, Hall’s works were included on the reading lists and library catalogues of numerous clubs and organisations. The extract below, from 1926, shows three of Hall’s novels being presented to the American Women’s Club—a London-based organisation for female expats from America established in 1899.[11] Hall was also known for her androgynous way of dressing—it was said that Hall “dresses unusually”.[12] Her gender non-conformity was apparent both in her fashion sense and in the fact that she would sign letters as “John”.[13] Hall also described herself as a “congenital invert”, which can either be understood as an individual who is attracted to people of the same sex, or an individual who was assigned the wrong gender at birth.[14] She had two long-term relationships with women. One was with the singer Mabel Batten. The other came in the form of an affair with sculptor Una Troubridge which lasted until Hall’s death in 1943.[15]
British Online Archives, American Women's Club Magazine, 1925–1936, “Books Presented to the Library”, March 1926, image 17.
The Well of Loneliness has been consistently described as semi-autobiographical. The story follows an upper-class lesbian called Stephen Gordon as she grapples with her sexuality and fights for her relationship with Mary Llewellyn to be accepted by society.[16] The novel was revolutionary in its exploration of both sexuality and gender.
It is important to note that lesbianism has never been illegal in the UK. It was, however, the subject of a proposed addition, in 1921, to the Criminal Law Amendment Act, titled “acts of indecency by females”.[17] In 1885, Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act had criminalised homosexuality between men. The proposed amendment aimed to extend criminalisation to women.[18] Yet the bill was not passed, partly because the House of Lords worried that it would give too much visibility to lesbianism and would therefore encourage it.[19] Despite lesbianism not being illegal, it was still deemed deviant by the majority of British society.
British Online Archives, The Bystander, 1903–1940, “Moments with the Great”, 19 Dec. 1928, image 10.
It is therefore unsurprising that Hall’s novel, which centred on a lesbian love story, received significant backlash following its publication. One of the main proponents of banning The Well of Loneliness was James Douglas, editor of The Sunday Express. On 19 August 1928, Douglas published a scathing article entitled “A Book That Must Be Suppressed”. He described Hall’s book as “not fit to be sold by any bookseller or to be borrowed from any library.”[20] He confessed that he “would rather give a healthy boy or a healthy girl a phial of prussic acid than this novel.”[21] Douglas was adamant that Hall’s novel should be censored—he was convinced that the book would corrupt the morality of its readers. He decided that if Hall and her publishers did not cease publication of the novel, then the Home Secretary should ban it.[22] Ultimately, Douglas became well known for his campaign against The Well of Loneliness. In December 1928 The Bystander described him as “the hero who started the hounds which brought down the hare regarding Miss Radclyffe Hall’s alleged naughty work”.[23] Douglas remained committed to the censorship of books which promoted “various poisonous passions”.[24]
Given the utter disgust displayed by Douglas, you might think that Hall’s novel was rather crude and promiscuous. Yet if you read it today, you might struggle to find what Douglas found so offensive. Arguably, the most suggestive that the book gets is when there is a kiss that is "full on the lips, as a lover", and when Stephen and Mary share an evening together, which is described as the "night they were not divided".[25] The book makes no mention of anything more overtly sexual in nature.
In response to Douglas, Hall’s publisher, Jonathan Cape, sent a copy of the book to the Home Secretary, William Joynson-Hicks, colloquially known as “Jix”. Cape hoped that upon reading the book Jix would not only clock the lack of obscenity in it, but also appreciate its literary worth.[26] In the meantime, Cape suspended publication of the novel and licensed the rights to Pegasus Press in France.[27] Copies of the book were seized at the UK border as people tried to import them from France.[28] The Home Secretary decided that publication of the book should cease until an obscenity trial could take place.
British Online Archives, The Graphic, 1869–1932, “The Times We Live In”, 8 Sep. 1928, image 5.
The obscenity trial began on 9 November 1928. During it, arguments were made as to whether The Well of Loneliness fell under the scope of the Obscene Publications Act 1857, which could authorize the destruction of obscene books.[29] The Hicklin test, a piece of case law developed from the case of Regina v Hicklin (1868), helped with the interpretation of the word “obscene”. This case concluded that material intending "to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences" was obscene, and this became the Hicklin test.[30] The Hicklin test also held that literary merit was irrelevant.[31] Despite numerous high-profile authors and artists coming out in support of Hall—figures such as May Sinclair, E. M. Forster, Virginia Woolf, and Leonard Woolf—the novel was judged obscene on 16 November 1928.
Contrary to Douglas’ wishes, censorship of The Well of Loneliness only served to increase its popularity and visibility. The book became sought after and people resorted to smuggling it in from France and the United States. The extract below, from The Graphic, questioned whether “the book itself justified all the fuss that was made about it”, and described how people “tumbled over themselves to get a copy at any price”.[32] Since then, the novel has come to be regarded as a classic of lesbian literature, partly due to the commotion it caused.[33]
British Online Archives, The Graphic, 1869–1932, “The Best Books of the Year”, 29 Dec. 1928, image 23.
Despite being banned, Hall had many ardent supporters who were disgraced at the outcome of the trial. In addition to the 160 potential witnesses that the publisher (Cape) had called upon, thousands wrote letters of support to Hall.[34] Many took comfort in the book’s representation of lesbians, with one supporter writing that the book “has made me want to live and to go on”.[35] Other publications likewise came out in support of Hall. The extracts below, from The Bystander, discuss Jix and his involvement in the censorship of books, including The Well of Loneliness. The article references France’s decision to keep the book in circulation, the author contending that the “French are no more immoral in their private life than we are because the girls of the Folies Bergères are somewhat airily covered, and their bookshops contain pornographic literature”.[36] The author continued by highlighting that what is deemed morally acceptable differs from person to person and that “not all the censorship in the world is going to interfere with their course”.[37] The author argued that opposition to Jix stemmed from the latter’s “suggestion that he had a right to probe into and decide our private code of morals”.[38] Indeed, this author maintained that censorship of lesbianism would not affect whether women engaged in same-sex relationships in their private lives.
British Online Archives, The Bystander, 1903–1940, “Out With the Hounds In the Shires”, 20 Nov. 1929, images 9 and 10.
Hall stood by her controversial novel. The extract below, from The Graphic, includes a quote from her. She stated that “the events in England which followed on its publication have only served to confirm me in my conviction that such a novel was badly needed”.[39] The backlash that greeted The Well of Loneliness certainly highlighted the homophobia that existed amongst large sections of society at the time. Thus, Hall argued that the novel was needed so as to increase the visibility of lesbians and to prove their existence. The book was banned for almost 20 years.[40] It was republished in the UK in 1949, six years after Hall’s death.[41]
British Online Archives, The Graphic, 1869–1932, “Novelists’ Secret Loves”, 27 Dec. 1930, image 16.
The Obscene Publications Act of 1857, along with literary censorship more generally, were popular topics of discussion at the time. Just over a week before The Well of Loneliness was banned the American Women’s Club hosted a lecture on “Literary Censorship” that was delivered by Miss Rose Macaulay.[42] The extract below summarises the lecture and the discussion that followed it. This centred upon the differences between censorship in the United States and the UK. Macaulay's lecture indicates that literary censorship was widely discussed during the late 1920s, and, moreover, that the morality and efficacy of this mode of censorship was being questioned. In 1928 D. H. Lawrence’s novel, Lady Chatterley's Lover, was likewise banned for violating obscenity laws. This ensured that the topic of literary censorship remained under public scrutiny, as two high-profile obscenity trials occurred in quick succession.
British Online Archives, American Women's Club Magazine, 1925–1936, “Club Lectures: ‘Literary Censorship’”, Jan. 1929, image 12.
Hall’s The Well of Loneliness generated an important legacy. The novel, and its reception, continue to be regarded as a key example of literary censorship and of the homophobia that pervaded Britain during the opening decades of the twentieth century. Yet the novel has not remained immune from criticism. Crucially, The Well of Loneliness now makes for uncomfortable reading, given the racism and classism which is pervasive throughout.[43] The novel has been criticised on other fronts: for its narrow representation of lesbianism, its binary representation of gender and sexuality, and the pessimistic way in which it depicts lesbianism.[44] It has also been contended that Hall could only ever have provided a rather limited view of the LGBTQ+ community, given her class status.[45] Her elevated position in society arguably cushioned her from the majority of the backlash against her sexuality, and she lived a relatively open life, whereas others, who were perhaps less privileged at birth, had to keep their sexuality secret.[46] There is also debate as to whether the book is best approached as a lesbian novel or as a trans novel.[47] There is no way of knowing whether The Well of Loneliness is in fact a story about a transgender man instead of a lesbian woman, as the term “transgender” was not coined until the 1970s.[48] It is also unclear whether Hall identified as a man instead of a lesbian woman. Of course, retrospectively labelling someone with modern terminology is problematic.[49]
Despite the novel’s flaws, it remains an important moment in the history of LGBTQ+ culture. The Well of Loneliness served to raise the profile of lesbians in Britain and prompted a change in attitudes towards sexuality and gender.[50] The fact that the novel remains a key example of literary censorship highlights the groundbreaking nature of the text.
[1] James Douglas, “A Book That Must Be Suppressed”, The Sunday Express, 19 Aug. 1928.
[2] Leighton Grey, “A Short History of Censorship”, Frontier Centre for Public Policy, 13 Feb. 2021, available at https://fcpp.org/2021/02/13/a-short-history-of-censorship/.
[3] Mark Cartwright, “Censor”, World History Encyclopaedia, 15 March 2017, available at https://www.worldhistory.org/censor/.
[4] Colin Manchester, “Lord Campbell's Act: England's First Obscenity Statute”, The Journal of Legal History 9, no. 2 (1988): 223–241.
[5] Ibid., 223.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] British Online Archives, The Bystander, 1903–1940, “Who, When and Where by The Bystander in Society”, 4 Jan. 1928, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/39270/4th-january-1928#?xywh=-2234%2C-1%2C6894%2C3406&cv=5, image 6; British Online Archives, The Bystander, 1903–1940, “Literary Lions for the Fireside Season: The Third Cage-ful”, 6 Jan. 1937, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/39758/6th-january-1937#?xywh=-2275%2C-1%2C6949%2C3433&cv=28, image 29; British Online Archives, The Graphic, 1869–1932, “People You Should Know”, 30 April 1927, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/42745/30th-april-1927#?xywh=-2895%2C-1%2C8771%2C4333&cv=8, image 9.
[9] British Online Archives, The Bystander, 1903–1940, “Who, When and Where by The Bystander in Society”, 4 Jan. 1928, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/39270/4th-january-1928#?xywh=-2234%2C-1%2C6894%2C3406&cv=5, image 6.
[10] British Online Archives, The Bystander, 1903–1940, “Who, When and Where by The Bystander in Society”, 4 Jan. 1928, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/39270/4th-january-1928#?xywh=-2234%2C-1%2C6894%2C3406&cv=5, image 6.
[11] British Online Archives, American Women's Club Magazine, 1925–1936, “Books Presented to the Library”, March 1926, available https://microform.digital/boa/documents/43154/march-1926#?xywh=-797%2C0%2C7364%2C3637&cv=16, image 17.
[12] British Online Archives, The Bystander, 1903–1940, “Literary Lions for the Fireside Season: The Third Cage-ful”, 6 Jan. 1937, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/39758/6th-january-1937#?xywh=-2275%2C-1%2C6949%2C3433&cv=28, image 29.
[13] Mollie Clarke, “‘I need never have known existence’: Radclyffe Hall and LGBTQ+ visibility”, The National Archives, 29 April 2021, https://blog.nationalarchives.gov.uk/i-need-never-have-known-existence-radclyffe-hall-and-lgbtq-visibility/.
[14] Ibid.
[15] The National Archives, “Radclyffe Hall”, The National Archives, n.d., https://beta.nationalarchives.gov.uk/explore-the-collection/stories/radclyffe-hall/.
[16] Nava Atlas, “The Well of Loneliness by Radclyffe Hall (1928)”, Literary Ladies Guide, 13 March 2023, https://www.literaryladiesguide.com/book-description/the-well-of-loneliness-by-radclyffe-hall-1928/.
[17] Lily Wakefield, “Absurd but true story of the UK lesbianism ban that never was – and why terrified men scrapped it”, Pink News, 10 Feb. 2022, https://www.thepinknews.com/2022/02/10/uk-lesbian-ban-lgbt-history/.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Douglas, “A Book That Must Be Suppressed”.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Clarke, “‘I need never have known existence’: Radclyffe Hall and LGBTQ+ visibility”.
[23] British Online Archives, The Bystander, 1903–1940, “Moments with the Great”, 19 Dec. 1928, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/39321/19th-december-1928#?xywh=-2262%2C0%2C6923%2C3419&cv=9, image 10.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Hephzibah Anderson, “The Well of Loneliness: The book that could corrupt a nation”, BBC Culture, 22 Nov. 2022, https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20221121-the-well-of-loneliness-the-most-corrosive-book-ever.
[26] Clarke, “‘I need never have known existence’: Radclyffe Hall and LGBTQ+ visibility”.
[27] Anderson, “The Well of Loneliness: The book that could corrupt a nation”.
[28] Ibid.
[29] Clarke, “‘I need never have known existence’: Radclyffe Hall and LGBTQ+ visibility”.
[30] Craig Ducat, Constitutional Interpretation: Rights of the Individual, (London: Cengage Learning, 2008), 540.
[31] Ibid.
[32] British Online Archives, The Graphic, 1869–1932, “The Best Books of the Year,” 29 Dec. 1928, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/42807/29th-december-1928#?xywh=-2986%2C0%2C8856%2C4375&cv=22, image 23.
[33] The National Archives, “Radclyffe Hall”.
[34] Anderson, “The Well of Loneliness: The book that could corrupt a nation”; Alison Flood, “‘It has made me want to live’: public support for lesbian novelist Radclyffe Hall over banned book revealed”, The Guardian, 10 Jan. 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jan/10/it-has-made-me-want-to-live-public-support-for-lesbian-novelist-radclyffe-hall-over-banned-book-revealed.
[35] Flood, “‘It has made me want to live’: public support for lesbian novelist Radclyffe Hall over banned book revealed”.
[36] British Online Archives, The Bystander, 1903–1940, “Out With the Hounds In the Shires”, 20 Nov. 1929, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/39371/20th-november-1929#?xywh=-2308%2C0%2C6975%2C3445&cv=8, images 9 and 10.
[37] Ibid.
[38] Ibid.
[39] British Online Archives, The Graphic, 1869–1932, “Novelists’ Secret Loves”, 27 Dec. 1930, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/42899/27th-december-1930#?xywh=-2884%2C0%2C8625%2C4260&cv=15, image 16.
[40] Clarke, “‘I need never have known existence’: Radclyffe Hall and LGBTQ+ visibility”.
[41] Ibid.
[42] British Online Archives, American Women's Club Magazine, 1925–1936, “Club Lectures: ‘Literary Censorship’”, Jan. 1929, available at https://microform.digital/boa/documents/43188/january-1929#?xywh=-1012%2C0%2C7287%2C3599&cv=11, image 12.
[43] Anderson, “The Well of Loneliness: The book that could corrupt a nation”.
[44] Anderson, “The Well of Loneliness: The book that could corrupt a nation”; Clarke, “‘I need never have known existence’: Radclyffe Hall and LGBTQ+ visibility”.
[45] Clarke, “‘I need never have known existence’: Radclyffe Hall and LGBTQ+ visibility”.
[46] Ibid.
[47] Anderson, “The Well of Loneliness: The book that could corrupt a nation”.
[48] Stephen Whittle, “A brief history of transgender issues”, The Guardian, 2 June 2010, https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/02/brief-history-transgender-issues.
[49] Anderson, “The Well of Loneliness: The book that could corrupt a nation”.
[50] Clarke, “‘I need never have known existence’: Radclyffe Hall and LGBTQ+ visibility”.