H84.8.3

Howl
1956
6 in HIGH x 5 in WIDE
(15.24 cm HIGH x 12.70 cm WIDE)
Museum Purchase
H84.8.3


Book. Description: Ginsberg, Allen: Howl (San Francisco, City Lights, 1956) 2nd ed., 44PP., in black paper cover with printed white overlay. Condition 2. Dimensions: 6 1/4" x 5". History: The entire shipment of the second edition of Howl was impounded by the U.S. Customs service as obscene, when the books were imported from England, where they were printed. In a celebrated court case, based on first amendment freedom of speech grounds, the books were decalred to be of literary and social import, and allowed into the country. From the History Information Station: Object: Howl, and other poems, by Allen Ginsberg. Published in San Francisco by City Lights Books, 1956. History: When Howl was published, poet Allen Ginsberg was known, but not famous. The poem, an angry, at times violent indictment of society, containing some "dirty" words and sexual references, was acclaimed by many critics of modern poetry. However, for its use of so-called "obscenities," Howl was banned shortly after its publication. Publisher Lawrence Ferlinghetti was arrested on obscenity charges. Because the case turned on issues of censorship and free speech, Ferlinghetti was defended free of charge by the American Civil Liberties Union. Ferlinghetti was acquitted and Howl was ruled not obscene, under obscenity laws even stricter than those in force today. The ruling in the case is seen as a landmark in the defense of freedom of speech. To read a portion of it, touch "More Information." Howling about Howl Judge Clayton Horn made the following points in his precedent-setting acquittal of Lawrence Ferlinghetti: The freedoms of speech and press are inherent in a nation of free people... The authors of the First Amendment knew that novel and unconventional ideas might disturb the complacent, but they chose to encourage a freedom which they believed essential if vigorous enlightenment was ever to triumph over slothful ignorance... "Footnote to Howl" seems to be a declamation that everything in the world is holy, including parts of the body by name... The prosecution states that it is not necessary to use such coarse and vulgar words and that others would be more palatable to good taste. The answer is that life is not encased in one formula whereby everyone acts the same or conforms to a particular pattern. Would there be any freedom of press or speech if one must reduce his vocabulary to vapid and innocuous euphemism?..."Howl" is not without redeeming social importance, and I find the book is not obscene. The defendant is found not guilty.

Bookmark and Share