“Would there be any freedom of press or speech if one must reduce his vocabulary to vapid innocuous euphemisms?”
-Judge Clayton Horn in ruling that Allen Ginsburg’s poem, Howl, was not legally obscene.
“Would there be any freedom of press or speech if one must reduce his vocabulary to vapid innocuous euphemisms?”
-Judge Clayton Horn in ruling that Allen Ginsburg’s poem, Howl, was not legally obscene.
This entry was posted on Saturday, June 23rd, 2012 at 12:30 pm and is filed under misc. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
The Legal Satyricon is run by Randazza Legal Group Staff. Posts written by Marc J. Randazza are signed – MJR.
angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to the
starry dynamo in the machinery of night,
…
who let themselves be fucked in the ass by saintly motorcyclists, and
screamed with joy
This is worth reading for the full story (don’t want to link to it): Howl on Trial: The Battle for Free Expression by Bill Morgan and Nancy Peters (City Lights)