R v Penguin Books Ltd
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
| Revision as of 06:52, 11 April 2014 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 07:04, 11 April 2014 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
| - | When ''[[Lady Chatterley's Lover]]'' was published in Britain in 1960, the trial of the publishers, [[Penguin Books]], under the [[Obscene Publications Act 1959 |Obscene Publications Act of 1959]] was a major public event and a test of the new [[obscenity]] law. The 1959 act, introduced by [[Roy Jenkins]], had made it possible for publishers to escape conviction if they could show that a work was of [[literary merit]]. One of the objections was to the frequent use of the word "[[fuck]]" and its derivatives. | + | Although first printed in 1928, the release in 1960 of an inexpensive [[Mass marketing|mass-market]] [[paperback]] version of ''[[Lady Chatterley's Lover]]'' prompted a court case. |
| + | |||
| + | The trial of the publishers, [[Penguin Books]], under the [[Obscene Publications Act 1959 |Obscene Publications Act of 1959]] was a major public event and a test of the new [[obscenity]] law. The 1959 act, introduced by [[Roy Jenkins]], had made it possible for publishers to escape conviction if they could show that a work was of [[literary merit]]. One of the objections was to the frequent use of the word "[[fuck]]" and its derivatives. | ||
| Various academic critics, including [[E. M. Forster]], [[Helen Gardner]], [[Richard Hoggart]] and [[Raymond Williams]], [[Norman St John-Stevas]] were called as witnesses, and the verdict, delivered on [[November 2]] [[1960]], was not guilty. This resulted in a far greater degree of freedom for publishing explicit material in the UK. The prosecution was ridiculed for being out of touch with changing social norms when the chief prosecutor, [[Mervyn Griffith-Jones]], asked if it were the kind of book "you would wish your wife or servants to read". | Various academic critics, including [[E. M. Forster]], [[Helen Gardner]], [[Richard Hoggart]] and [[Raymond Williams]], [[Norman St John-Stevas]] were called as witnesses, and the verdict, delivered on [[November 2]] [[1960]], was not guilty. This resulted in a far greater degree of freedom for publishing explicit material in the UK. The prosecution was ridiculed for being out of touch with changing social norms when the chief prosecutor, [[Mervyn Griffith-Jones]], asked if it were the kind of book "you would wish your wife or servants to read". | ||
Revision as of 07:04, 11 April 2014
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
Although first printed in 1928, the release in 1960 of an inexpensive mass-market paperback version of Lady Chatterley's Lover prompted a court case.
The trial of the publishers, Penguin Books, under the Obscene Publications Act of 1959 was a major public event and a test of the new obscenity law. The 1959 act, introduced by Roy Jenkins, had made it possible for publishers to escape conviction if they could show that a work was of literary merit. One of the objections was to the frequent use of the word "fuck" and its derivatives.
Various academic critics, including E. M. Forster, Helen Gardner, Richard Hoggart and Raymond Williams, Norman St John-Stevas were called as witnesses, and the verdict, delivered on November 2 1960, was not guilty. This resulted in a far greater degree of freedom for publishing explicit material in the UK. The prosecution was ridiculed for being out of touch with changing social norms when the chief prosecutor, Mervyn Griffith-Jones, asked if it were the kind of book "you would wish your wife or servants to read".
The trial was described in a book by C.R. Hewitt. In 2006, this was dramatised by BBC Wales as The Chatterley Affair.
See also
- Sexual revolution in England
- Lady Chatterley's Lover
- British obscenity trial
- The Chatterley Affair
- Oz trial
- Irving v Penguin Books and Lipstadt
- Penguin Group (USA) Inc. v. American Buddha
