Affirmed along with the Incomprehensibility of Art: “That numerous long passages in Ulysses contain matter that is obscene under any fair definition of the word cannot be gainsaid; yet they are relevant to the purpose of depicting. Need to read art according to arts standards. Is autonomous and represents normative life. Can’t subject it to obscenity as it is understood, if it is sincere. If its art read for arts sake. Woolsey standards hold, “ It is settled, at least so far as this court is concerned, that works of physiology, medicine, science, and sex instruction are not within the statute, though to some extent and among some persons they may tend to promote lustful thoughts. We think the same immunity should apply to literature as to science,” Commonwealth v. Isenstadt- A book is “obscene, indecent or impure” within the statutory prohibition if it has a substantial tendency to deprave or corrupt its readers by inciting lascivious thoughts or arousing lustful desire. It also violates the statute if it “manifestly tends to corrupt the morals of youth” “defining obscenity is hard so courts should work on a case by case basis” “ flavor the whole and impart to the whole any of the qualities mentioned in the statute, so that the book as a whole can fairly be described by any of the adjectives or descriptive expressions contained in the statute. The problem is to be solved, not by counting pages, but rather by considering the impressions likely to be created. “”Average of every 5th page”” the test of unlawfulness is to be found in the effect of the book upon its probable readers and not in any classification of its subject matter or of
its words as being in themselves innocent or obscene”” That which may give rise to impure thought and action in a highly conventional society may pass almost unnoticed in a society habituated to greater freedom. [. . .] To recognize this is not to change the law. It is merely to acknowledge the facts upon which the application of the law has always depended.” “there is no room for the pleasing fancy that sincerity and art necessarily dispel obscenity. The purpose of the statute is to protect the public from that which is harmful. The public must be taken as it is. “ --Communities must me judged as a whole *** art is not autonomous, art and obscenity are not mutually exclusive “”Indeed, obscenity may sometimes be made even more alluring and suggestive by the zeal which comes from sincerity and by the added force of artistic presentation”” “” beyond a reasonable doubt that it contains much that, even in this post-Victorian era, would tend to promote lascivious thoughts and to arouse lustful desire in the minds of substantial numbers of that public into whose hands this book, “” Strange Fruit is indeed obscene Roth v. United States- utterly without social value, prurient work must be considered in its entirety, appeals to prurient interest, dont crack open the door bitch assessed according to the average person applying contemporary community standards. if a bit of social value found;
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 6 pages?
- Spring '14