SWINDON AND BOCCACCIO Stn,—Are the unfortunate magistrates of Swindon never
to be allowed to forget their banning of Boccaccio? Pharos had a side-swipe at them last week, and I would like to ask him what he thinks the magistrates should have done.
They did not prowl round the Latin quarter of Swindon looking for books to destroy. If I remember the case rightly, the police seized a quantity of cheap and gaudy pornographic trash. They also seized copies of the Decameron which were offered for sale by the same bookseller, obviously for the same rea- son as the trash was offered for sale. The magistrates were not asked to say whether or not the Decameron was a work of high quality but whether or not it was pornographic. Would Pharos deny that the Decameron in parts is pornographic by the standards normally applied to erotic trash? If he does not deny it, then, I repeat, what does he think the magistrates should have done? I know of nothing in the law which says that pornography is legitimate so long as it is well written. I am no enthusiast for banning anything, but as the law stands, it seems to me that
COLM BROGAN
17 Monkhams ,4 venue, Woodford Green, Essex [Pharos writes : 'The answer to the first question is yes, so the second does not arise.'—Editor, Spectator.]
Previous page
