{"id":17847,"date":"2024-12-06T14:08:57","date_gmt":"2024-12-06T14:08:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/penbelarus.org\/?p=17847"},"modified":"2025-05-05T09:38:27","modified_gmt":"2025-05-05T09:38:27","slug":"samaczenzura-yak-nyabachnaya-forma-represij-i-sposab-zahavacz-belaruskuyu-kulturu","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/penbelarus.org\/en\/2024\/12\/06\/samaczenzura-yak-nyabachnaya-forma-represij-i-sposab-zahavacz-belaruskuyu-kulturu.html","title":{"rendered":"Self-censorship: an invisible form of repression (and a way of preserving Belarusian culture)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Foreword<\/strong>: The voices of cultural workers from Belarus<\/strong><\/a>
\nIntroduction<\/strong><\/a>
\nSelf-censorship<\/strong> and creativity<\/strong><\/a>
\nSelf-censorship and repression<\/strong>s<\/strong><\/a>
\nSelf-censorship as a way of preserving Belarusian culture<\/strong><\/a>
\nConclusion<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

FOREWORD: THE VOICES OF CULTURAL WORKERS FROM BELARUS <\/strong>[1]<\/a><\/span><\/h3>\n
\n

We live as if we are inside the books we read in childhood about guerillas and underground resistance fighters […] People live like partisans; they keep a low profile. Some were not jailed, and there were those whom authorities threatened to jail. The rest tried to stay quiet until they were discovered […] Being in Belarus, we follow some information safety rules: don’t share some posts, don’t write posts on serious topics \u2013 light self-censorship, or maybe not so light […] We don’t post <\/em>[potentially dangerous] links […] My French friend, an artist, says: “I see that my publication was viewed, but there are no likes \u2013 \u00a0what happened?” \u2013 Look, our <\/em><<\/em>\u2026<\/em>> was<\/em> arrested for three days for liking a post on the Nexta <\/em>[2]<\/a> channel three years before […] Now we use more private chats with our colleagues, we discuss mainly ordinary things […] People try to keep everything to themselves and reduce talk to a minimum even with their family members, relatives and friends: “I don’t work, I didn’t have my contract renewed” \u2013 that’s it […] I tend not to maintain active ties because ties with me can compromise for someone [3]<\/a> […] Everyone keeps a low profile […] Everything has stood still at the grassroots level, with less publicity […] There are fewer public discussions; people keep everything to themselves […] They try to keep exposure of their names or activities to a minimum […] Communication is only word-of-mouth via recommendation. The events are not for everyone, but only for those you know well […] Many cultural figures deliberately do not show up because, all the same, you must live in Belarus […] You don’t want to get exposed, even if you do some non-political events like a butterflies\u2019 exhibition \u2013 you just don’t want your name mentioned anywhere. A safety threat […] But I’m afraid. I observe safety hygiene […] People who want to work here know their limits; they know what can be shown and what shouldn\u2019t […] Deep down, people have self-censorship, which controls them […] This inner censor does not allow people to do anything; even if there is no external threat today, they either leave the country to avoid this pressure or hide and do nothing in the public space. Otherwise, one can only draw cats and flowers, but people with critical thinking cannot be satisfied with this, and it is not enough for them […] Self-censorship has reached the point when they <\/em>[librarians] would flip through books themselves: if they thought something was wrong with a book, they would remove it from the shelves without waiting to be added to the list [4]<\/a>. However, it might not end up on the list at all… This edition <\/em>[Sviat\u0142ana Aleksijevi\u010d’s 5-volume book published by \u0141ohvina\u016d in 2018] looks defiant in white-red-white colours, so it is safer to put it aside, away from the open collection […] We engaged in self-censorship when we checked the social media accounts of stage directors before sending their names to the Ministry of Culture for approval […] All the time you hear that this or that name should not be mentioned in the state-owned media. Still, now it is self-censorship that does the job. In most cases, employees do not name such people <\/em>[disloyal to the regime] […] Everyone goes underground […] The longer it lasts away, the more cautious people become […] We are getting deeper and deeper […] Many people who stay in Belarus now work under pseudonyms \u2013 it doesn’t matter whether in Belarus or Europe […] People want to participate; they are ready to travel and show some of their projects, but they are not prepared to expose their names even in Europe because it is clear: a European media publishing their name means the game is over […] It’s called a \u2018violation of the right to a name\u2019 when people are forced to operate under pseudonyms: they participate in some projects but don’t reveal their names […] Mimicry is what is going on now. I think this is how self-censorship and fear are manifested; it haunts people and artists in the first place […] <\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Self-censorship, or inner censorship, is the conscious limitation of self-expression, where a person refrains from openly expressing thoughts, ideas, etc. The reasons for this can vary: psychological, economic, legal, ethical, and others.<\/p>\n

On the one hand, it is a necessary tool in professional activity \u2013 concerning reputation and respect, responsibility, adherence to specific standards, and maintaining a balance between freedom of expression and the boundaries accepted in society. On the other hand, self-censorship may not stem from personal choice but rather be a forced adaptation, a response to direct external threats \u2013 this type of self-censorship will be discussed here.<\/p>\n

In the context of political repression, which Belarus has been experiencing for over four years, inner censorship has become a response to changed circumstances, a survival mechanism, and even a reflex. People resort to it out of fear of losing their jobs, threats to personal safety, persecution of family members, and other reasons. Self-censorship has become part of daily life, restricting free expression of thought and creativity and hindering the development and advancement of Belarusian culture and art. Inner censorship is an invisible, non-public form of repression that is challenging to monitor and measure. Understanding its scale and consequences, exploring ways to study and document it, and examining its impact on cultural figures’ self-esteem and moral state are essential for public awareness and solidarity and a foundation for further reflection and analysis.<\/p>\n

This document describes the methods of forced self-restraint employed by cultural figures who have come under the monitoring of the Belarusian PEN group and directly from writers, musicians, and artists. It also touches on the topic of self-censorship in the dilemma of \u201cpublicising versus silence\u201d concerning facts of repression.<\/p>\n

Incidentally, this text itself is, in essence, an example of self-censorship, as it omits several names, titles, and events.<\/p>\n

SELF-CENSORSHIP AND CREATIVITY<\/strong><\/h3>\n

PEN Belarus monitors noted for the first time the trend of self-censorship and anonymity in creativity due to repressions in the monitoring<\/a> report tracking violations of cultural rights and human rights of cultural workers in the third quarter of 2021. By that time [late September], there were 715 political prisoners in Belarus, including over 60 cultural figures convicted, among other things, for their creative work. According to police investigators, the musicians of the Irdorath band [5]<\/a> “used bagpipes to reinforce the protest mood”; artist Ale\u015b Pu\u0161kin [6]<\/a> was sentenced to five years in a penal colony for a portrait of an anti-Soviet underground resistance activist. Mass dismissals of artists disloyal to the regime were in full swing. The “ban lists” of artists had returned. Searches, interrogations, arbitrary detentions, and administrative and criminal prosecution continued, including cases associated with public statements or comments on socio-political events in social media. The campaign to forcibly liquidate non-profit sector organisations was gaining momentum, and pressure on the Polish minority, independent book publishers, art venues and international cultural cooperation organisations, shops with goods bearing national symbols continued. The products of independent culture \u2013 books, songs and articles \u2013 were methodically added to the List of Extremist Materials<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Self-censorship in creativity was the result of this socio-political situation. Some examples from 2021:<\/p>\n