|
Book Reviews on "Singapore's Shame" |
 |
A Small Book Canvassing a Big IdeaBig O Magazine, No. 168, December 1999 By Russell Heng Self-Censorship: Singapore’s Shame by James Gomez, Think Centre, 98 pages, S$18.90 At 92 pages (excluding the list of references), this is a small book canvassing a big idea. Writer James Gomez warns us that censorship in Singapore is more insidious than just a set of rules crafted by a strict government. Sometimes those rules do not have to be implemented by the political leadership and yet the Singapore public ends up with the same censored outcomes. As an illustrative example, he points to the reluctance of bookshops to stock some critical books about Singapore when these titles have not been expressedly banned. He offers two reasons for this. First is the individual’s willingness to self-censor given the nature of the Republic’s political culture. Second is the people in "middle management" positions and others in society who take it upon themselves to be gatekeepers. This is a book written with some passion, At the very least, the advocacy is unmistakable in a chapter which is entitled "Agenda for action: What can we do." The book is concise in what it has to say which is both its strength and its weakness. For those who just want a quick tour of this interesting provocative premise, Gomez’s work provides a good interesting fast read. Others looking to a more rigorous exploration of the idea of self-censorship, what Gomez denounces as Singapore’s shame, will find it wanting. Newcomers to political writings who may want a bit more backgrounding to the censorship regime in Singapore will do well to refer to a 1998 book by Francis T Seow, The Media Enthralled – Singapore Revisited. I have no hesitation recommending Gomez’s book because, whatever its flaws, it offers a new perspective to the censorship debate which tends to be focused on the government and that very familiar term in Singapore: the OB (out-of-bound) markers. This little book is telling us its time to look at the henchmen of the state who often behave as if they are more royal than the king. |
|
|
THINK CENTRE |