The Press WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 1964. Books And The Public Good

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30393, 18 March 1964, Page 16

The Press WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 1964. Books And The Public Good

The Indecent Publications Tribunal, in its first decision, has demonstrated the major improvements made to the law by the Indecent Publications Act. Its judgment on “ Another Country by James Baldwin has emphasised the merits of the act, though the tribunal found it possible to avoid ruling on some difficult issues. It is more important that the tribunal has revealed the healthy frame of mind in which it interprets the act and the emphasis it lays on the crucial definition of indecency as it affects the “ public *• good The tribunal has given a useful guide to librarians, booksellers, and importers, who have been waiting for an indication of the application of the law.

The tribunal has found that words in themselves are not indecent. Its doubt whether words used in this book and commonly regarded as obscene are not already familiar to young persons is supported by authoritative opinion that the spoken word, not literature, is the source of a vocabulary rated as offensive in polite company. That goes to the heart of the matter. The assessment of what is indecent depends not so much on the subject or the language as on the motive for communication, on the audience, and on the circumstances.

Lack of understanding and communication on subjects such as sex and its deviations has left society ill-equipped to deal with many social problems. Suppression of knowledge and opinion will not remedy this inadequacy. “Another Country”, in the opinion of the tribunal a “ sincere, powerful and “ effective ” portrayal of life in a Negro community in New York, may add to the sum of human understanding of social problems. Unequivocally, the tribunal declared that the public good was the prime consideration; the possibility that the book’s main purpose would be misunderstood or overlooked by immature minds was of secondary importance. It concluded, howeyer, that, if there had been a sound case for not permitting young persons to have access to the book, it would have been prepared to make an appropriate order. That is a power to be used with caution, for how can anyone make valid distinctions between sections who would or would not be corrupted by a book? It was not demonstrated during all the debate on the Indecent Publications Bill that reading a book had ever corrupted anyone.

Discussing the question of young readers, the tribunal added that had the price of “ Another “ Country ” been lower, a different decision might have been made. The act does require the tribunal to take the price into account, the reasoning, as explained by the Minister of Justice (Mr Hanan) and as adopted by the tribunal, being that cheap books are more accessible to young persons. But books should be accessible to young persons at a reasonable price. Some of the most controversial books might well be useful or prescribed reading for students of literature, sociology, or other disciplines.