The robust, highly stylized work of TORRO seems to evoke strong reaction from almost everyone-either to praise it or condemn it, but in no case, indifference. In addition to this studio and the one across the page, Torro also did the back cover for us. Set of a dozen Torro drawings in 8x10 size only $10.00. Single prints $1.50 each.
ORRO
GINSBERG AND MISHKIN DECISIONS--THEIR EFFECT ON PHYSIQUE PHOTOGRAPHY! WHAT'S "LEGAL" NOW?
On March 21, 1966 the Supreme Court of the United States passed down two decisions which for years to come may strongly affect every collector or customer of photographs of the human body. For from delineating exactly what factors would make on item "obscene", or setting down precise standards that would make it possible for a photographer or a publisher to know when he was staying well within the safety border so as not to unduly stimulate the impure-minded censors, the court has instead muddied the waters even more than ever, and has given persecution-happy prosecutors the encouragment they needed to bring on on exhaustive roster of obscenity indictments to clutter up our already overcrowded court schedules while important crimes are ignored.
However, they may have had no other choice. Shortly after the earlier liberal decisions of the court (Roth, Smith, etc) some merchants began to interpret the liberality of the court to be an open license for outright sexval pornography. Indeed, some of the judges have stated that if the first ommendment of the constitution of the United States is to be honestly interpreted, no form of thought expressed by word or picture can be legally restrained. However, other members of the court are willing to grant such "fres.lom of expression" only in-so-for as it does not conflict with
community interests and standards.
Too, the attitude of the public must also be considered. Whereas many expressions e now accepted which would never have been tolerated in Victorian times, and each generation demands increasingly greater freedom and less hipocracy, there still exists in almost all of us a tribal totem belief (regardless of our surface blase' disclaimers) that sex is most sacred and must not be held up to ridicule or otherwise desecrated--and of course these prohibitions may extend also to sexual fetisches including the organs of reproduction and nurture.
The high court's negative rulings in Ginsberg and in Mishkin were based almost exclusively on the fact that in advertising their material these men tended to "pander" to the erotic natures of their customers, and to flaunt the tribal taboos of our society. Apparently the most damning factor Justice Brennan could spell out. against publishers Ginsberg was his "obvious.. salacious (intent)" evidenced by his unsuccessful attempt to have his books mailed from the Pennsylvania hamlets of Intercourse and Blue Ball.
Interestingly enough, just before the March 21st decisions, the bookstore pornograply business in the United States was reaching a crisis and had almost destroyed itself. Nothing was sold "under the counter"-indeed it was all out in the open for everyone to see. Prices were falling faster than the Deutschmark after the first world war. Pornographers were
hard put to think up something dirtier than their competitors.
Many collectors who at first thought they would be delighted at such open and unrestrained availability of whatever they might choose to buy, found instead that they were disgusted with the complete lack of artistic taste in much of the product offered, and the merchants who thought they could sell sex per-se, found that they also had to offer quality to survive this new trend was just about to unfold when the March 21st bombshell hit.
In many areas bookstore proprietors wiped their shelves clean (including many legitimate physique books which they feared might be "controversial" The photo "bootleggers" were delighted because now a potential customer could not walk to the corner drug store and find himself tempted by thousands of openly displayed e ed erotic studies, but rather would have to do some exhaustive sleuthing to find out where he could purchase his naughty material (a-la-the-prohibition-era).
Unfortunately y in some areas, some of the "more advanced" physique photographers may suffer from local jurisdictions application of the Ginsberg and Mishkin decisions, but in the long run the court edicts may prove to be beneficial in that their very vagueness will hold in check those who might otherwise tend to push too rapidly forward beyond the degree of candor our "progressive" society will tolerate.
Letters from readers: AVAILABILITY OF MODELS
"Do any of your models do work for private parties or do you permit them to do this. I use models for sketching." QK Burbank Califomia. Editor's reply: Many of the models do no professional work whatsoever, and have pictures taken for their own interest. Most have regular jobs and are far too busy to take on any additional work. However, letters written to the models. will always be given to them if they are in touch with us. BOTTOMLESS BATHING SUITS "We understand that in your area many of their waitresses wear topless bathing suits. Do any of the waiters wear bottomless ones?
Editor's reply: Haven't heard of any at public places, except for a bar called the Apache where they used to wear only a loin cloth front and back. However, understand that at some private parties the practice is in vogue..