Thank you, Anu; I did not know this. I also think at least part of the letter you linked to in today's Word is worth quoting here (or anywhere):
... I went back and read the founders' early writings about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. What a fascinating time to be alive! What astonishing minds! Here's what I learned: our whole system of government was based on the idea that the purpose of the state was to preserve individual liberties, not to dictate them. The founders uniformly despised many practices in England that compromised matters of individual conscience by restricting freedom of speech. Freedom of speech – the right to talk, write, publish, discuss – was so important to the founders that it was the first amendment to the Constitution ...

I am facinated by this. I checked the Banned Book List on the American Library Association link and the first on on the list was The Great Gatsby. I am now living in the house in which I grew up located in Port Washington, NY which is in reality East Egg. My mother had moved there in the 1920's and this book was banned, not for the content but that the parents did not want the kids figuring out who Fitzgerald had based the characters upon. No comstockery there; as it was more about the airing of dirty linens.

Imprimatur, this is still used today. It's companion is Nihil Obstat; literally means nothing hinders. The Catholic Church uses it as nothing objectionable in content.

Welcome kah454, I found a nice Nihil Obstat logo somewhere, but lost it in the proces of searching. If I can retrace it I'll edit this post.

There is another way in which the word 'imprimatur' is used. In
oil painting, from the days of the Flemish Primitives till the second half of the 19th century when the impressionists adopted a more direct "a la prima" technique ( e.i. started directly from the white gesso coated linnen), it means a varnish mixed with brownish or greenish-grey transparant layer applied to take off the blatant gesso-covered white of the panel or canvas.

( about Rembrandt)
"The primer for the panels is white, probably glue-chalk gesso, covered with a transparent brown imprimatur of Burnt Umber mixed with varnish, which creates the golden glow characteristic of his work. His canvases are primed with a warm grey made from 'loodwit'(lead white with chalk, ground in linseed oil) and Raw Umber, or sometimes with white lead alone, with a transparent brown imprimatur."

How interesting to here this about painting. I was a theatre student eventually receiving a Master's in Fine Art. I have heard of this technique. As a design student I worked with many scenic artists who would always use after "sizing" canvas a coat of either raw or brunt umber or raw or brunt sienna as a base layer prior to inking in the designs. Thank you

Just yesterday I found this link to a very famous, and controversial, book by Charles Darwin that is a prime example of today's word "bowdlerize." Origin of Species BOWDLERIZED

Can we burn Cameron's book?

They are distributing this Bowdlerized version at the top schools in the U.S. While there may be a few who take it seriously, I anticipate most of the students are going to laugh themselves delirious.

I fear, however, they will begin to pass it out at medium-ranked and lower-ranked schools where they might find recruiting easier.

I'm sorry, but i do not think imprimatur belongs in a discussion of words about censorship or banning books. An imprimatur is an endorsement of a book by the local bishop. A book can be published without the endorsement of a bishop. There are many books on the Catholic fiath without an imprimatur.

Associating the word "imprimatur" with censorship reinforces a prejudiced stereotype that the Catholic Church tries to withhold knowledge. In reality, it was the Catholic Church that started the university system.

welcome, Sid!

in re-reading this thread, I didn't see that anyone had specifically targeted the Catholic Church as censorial, but in reading Anu's definition again, I see that he used the word "censor" in the 2nd definition. there's interesting reading at Wikipedia, and also this short item at American Catholic.

nearly any organization that edits books is using some form of censorship to make sure that the content fits with what they are putting forward.

Websters gives the following definition for censor: an official who examines materials (as publications or films) for objectionable matter

Websters gives the following definition for editor: a person who alters, adapts, or refines especially to bring about conformity to a standard or to suit a particular purpose

These two definitions are very similar, but the word censor carries a lot of negative connotation. In the case of Catholic publications, the "objectionable matter" is opinions or facts that are contrary to the Catholic faith.

I agree with the previous comment that it is not really correct to connect Imprimatur with censorship in the sense of halting publication. It really applies to content. I would rather have seen Mr Cameron's book published separately as a point by point commentary. I guess we are all searching for the "truth"; but as Pilate said to Christ...Quid est Veritas.

I do not think Mr. Cameron is honest enough to publish a book refuting Darwin's theory on it's own. He has to resort to trickery by publishing an edition of the book with a very biased introduction.

Hopefully, most people will skip over the introduction.

My first job was working in a library. One of my duties was to repair books that had pages removed or damaged by patrons. This was particularly difficult if the book was out of print. We would obtain a copy from another library and proceed to photocopy the missing pages or material and then glue in the replacement pages to the spine of the book. Mind you this was in the day photocopies were negative images. The books did look strange. I guess you could say we were grangerizing that which had been grangerized.

I guess it was, sort of. I'm really amazed that there ís a word for this complex mutilation/illumination of books. It is an verbed eponym, is it? Eponyms are very handy words in this that they can contain so much in one word. Does English make more use of eponyms than other languages?

verbed eponym Now, that is interesting (she said, after someone else pointed it out). I wonder how it came to be that, instead of (to be) grangered?

I wonder how it came to be that, instead of (to be) grangered?

Luck of the draw. They who coin a word get to coin it as they see fit.

Of COURSE "nihil obstat" and "imprimatur" refer to censorship! Have you never heard of Galileo?? Better yet, have you never heard of The Enlightenment? The essence of Catholism is the denial of opposing thought! DO recall the old joke about St Peter tiptoeing by the room filled with Catholics, explaining that "They think they're the only ones here!" As soon as I saw that the topic was censorship, I expected "nihil obstat" and "imprimatur"!

There must have been some difference between how the word "imprimatur" is used today and how it was used in the past. I was just rereading the section of "The Wealth and Poverty of Nations," by David Landes wherein he discusses the use of the term during the inquisition and times thereabout - and his description agrees with that of KNiZ.

P. 180
'Any thoughts of ending the Inquisition were shelved, and Church and civil authorities joined to control thought, knowledge, and belief. In 1558, the death penalty was introduced for importing foreign books without permission and for inlicensed printing. Universities reduced to centers of indoctrination; unorthodox and dngerous books were placed on an Index Librorum Prohibitorum (1557 in Rom, 1559 in Spain), and safe books appeared with an official Imprimatur ("Let it be printed").'

Also,
"Nor were Spaniards allowed to study abroad, lest they ingest subversive doctrine. That same year (1559), the crown forbade attendance at foreign universities except for such safe centers are Rome, Bologna, and Naples."

Censorship is really government activity. Four Hundred and Fifty years ago, the temporal authorities used churches and religion to secure their own power over the population. I believe it was Henry VIII that said " why should I listen to the Pope quoting me Deuteronomy while the King of Spain has a knife at his throat." Thank God for the wisdom of the writers of the first amendment to the US Constitution. Interestingly enough freedom of religion before the press..."Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

It is amazing what all sorts of restrictions the old days had in petto. I'm reading "Odd Tom Coryate", The English Marco Polo" . He travels from 1608 till 1617 ( when he dies on a dusty road somewhere in the North of India) across Europe, the Ottoman Empire, the Holy Land, Iran, Afghanistan.
Incredible to read about all the formalities he had to respect as far as customs and paper work and passes to get sometimes only from one town to the next. Standing in line to pass customs in our days is peanuts compared to his troubles.