are no moral connotations at all, since individual conduct remains unaffected. Even for those persons to whom erotic themes in literature and the arts are an aphrodisiac (in direct proportion to their emphasis upon sex) the moral component can be described only in terms of behavior which results from this kind of stimulation. If a man indulges in erotic literature, art, or fantasy before going to sleep, and the only result of this is a nocturnal emission, he surely cannot be accused of moral turpitude. Of course, if merely entertaining erotic thoughts is, in itself, immoral, then we are all guilty to varying degrees.

in

It is by no means being suggested that "obscenity" in literature and the arts should cease altogether to be an object of criminal statutes; but it would seem that the degree and kind of censorship and punishment ought to bear some relation to the public or non-public circumstances which the alleged offense is to be proved. Actions or speech portrayed in open public (for example, in advertising, whether on billboards or over radio or televison) should be expected to conform to general conventions concerning what people actually may do, say, or wear in public places, for the simple reason that such displays may be stumbled upon accidentally by all and sundry. But in semi-private places, such as art galleries, theatres or cabarets, where people go to see and hear what they are willing, or at least prepared, to see and hear, the degree of permissiveness ought logically to be extended. And as for material enclosed within covers not exposed to public view, and intended for the private consumption of the individual, it would seem that legal permissiveness ought to be virtually unlimited. It is precisely with this last category that postal censorship of "obscenity" in literature and the arts is most closely

one

involved, and it is for the very reason that present postal regulations on this subject violate the principle of freedom in private communications that they have come under widespread criticism on both pholosophical and constitutional grounds.

Morals and morality are not to be found in the environment of individuals, but only in the mode of individual response to this environment; and since there is no proof that alleged obscenity in literature and the arts actually "depraves or corrupts" a person's standards of behavior, it appears that the moral aspects of "obscenity" in this field are mythical rather than actual, and do not form a realistic foundation for present legal interpretations. These, in effect, require the public at large to subscribe to the neurotic and capricious susceptibilities of a few, and surround the whole subject with unwholesome temptations and implications.

Obscenity in Esthetics

The subject of "obscenity" as an esthetic category raises questions of a much different kind. some of them much more realistic than those involved with morality. A brief quotation from the World's Best Seller, is not inappropriate here, and should be read bearing in mind that "obscenity," as an esthetic term, is that which tends to "shock, or disgust."

"How fair and how pleasant art thou, O love, for delights! This thy stature is like a palm tree, and thy breasts to clusters of grapes. I said, I will go up to the palm tree, I will take hold of the boughs thereof; now also thy breasts shall be as clusters of the vine, and the smell of thy nose like apples; and the roof of thy mouth like the best wine for my beloved, that goeth down sweetly. (Song of Solomon, 7:6-9).

Although some may be shocked or

14