The manuscript in the bottle

Report of the Directorate of Censorship Services, No. 6,664, 10-10-1960: “This is an objectionable book, from political, social and moral points of view. The passages marked on pages 11, 36 to 38, 46, 49, 52, 70, 73, 75, 77, 79, 89, 91, 119 to 121, 123, 125, 126, 133, 134, 141 and 149 reveal its nature. I believe it should not be permitted to circulate in the country.” 

The book’s dedication to Adelino Tavares da Silva, Papiniano Carlos (1918–2012) and Urbano Tavares Rodrigues (1923–2013), journalists and writers affiliated with the Portuguese Communist Party who carried out intense clandestine activity against António de Oliveira Salazar’s regime, may have raised the alarm and alerted censors to the work’s potential “subversive content.”

Distributed for reading on 7 October, three days were enough for the report to be produced and another two for the censors’ verdict: “Prohibited.” The blue pencil was relentless, without appeal or mercy.

An “objectionable book” because

• (i) it contained sacrilegious thoughts and words regarding “a faceless God, terribly just, yet complicit in each person’s animality.” “And God—if there is a God, or whatever it is—is having a great deal of fun with our little tradesmen, watching these wretched beings from Olympus (…). How nauseating it makes me feel!”;
• (ii) it was against morality and good taste, describing nudist scenes: “In the solitude of the dune, Carlos watched her undress, piece by piece…”;
• (iii) it contained explicit references to body parts and sexuality: “He felt a thread of emotion take hold of him and slapped her buttocks to hide it. (…) The game of signs continued.” “And again the room filled with luminous rumours, with moans, with sibilant words….” “Slowly, like someone seeking a forgotten path, Carlos’s mouth pressed against her smooth, dark skin in long, lingering, violent kisses”;
• (iv) it depicted political stances and protest meetings: “A group of democrats supported the candidacy of an active-duty officer, a confessed servant of the Status Quo, as a way of opening a breach in the regime. The bulk of the Opposition disagreed; they wanted a candidate who could give firm guarantees of loyalty to the Republic and democratic ideals,” “The election was a disappointment: the official figures made public showed the government candidate winning by an overwhelming majority of votes”;
• (v) it depicted social and moral degradation, with gambling tables, drinking…

In short, it was a collection of references to acts prohibited or censurable (?!), in the eyes of a society of good taste, morality, or public opinion.