Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 
 

Files

File List


case1054735922.pdf (8.05 MB)

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

Obscenity law: Politics, morality, free speech, and the struggle to define obscenity

Lillie, Richard George
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=case1054735922

Abstract Details

1990, Doctor of Philosophy, Case Western Reserve University, Political Science.
The struggle to define obscenity has engaged the great institutions and passions of Anglo/American democratic society. Legislatures, courts, religious groups, and free speech absolutists have all participated in the battle from time to time. This struggle, sometimes contentious, occasionally reasonable, has revolved around four main elements of obscenity: (1) the nature of the work; (2) the community or class to be protected; (3) the work as a whole; and (4) the purpose of the work. Regina v. Hicklin, the first major obscenity case in Anglo/American law, established the first two of the four elements of obscenity. The Hicklin definition of obscenity dealt with the nature of the work ("The tendency of the matter ... to deprave and corrupt ... ") and the community or class to be protected (" ... those whose minds are open to such influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall"), while United States v. Bennett, the first major American obscenity case, added the elements of the work as a whole (the jury "may confine (its) attention to the marked passages"), and the purpose of the work (" ... the object with which this book is written is not material, nor is the motive wh ich led the defendant to mail the book material"). Subsequent cases then brought these four elements together and set the course which other courts would follow, in one form or another, for the next one hundred years. Indeed, the modern definition of obscenity, as established first by Roth v. United States, and refined by Miller v. California, embraces all four elements of obscenity. The modern definition of obscenity is set forth in Miller in three prongs: (a) Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (b) whether the work depicts or describes patently offensive sexual conduct; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole lacks serious value. This paper represents an effort to answer the question: What is the definition of obscenity and how did we arrive at it.
McHale McHale (Advisor)
312 p.
Obscenity law Politics morality; free speech; struggle

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Lillie, R. G. (1990). Obscenity law: Politics, morality, free speech, and the struggle to define obscenity [Doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=case1054735922

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Lillie, Richard. Obscenity law: Politics, morality, free speech, and the struggle to define obscenity. 1990. Case Western Reserve University, Doctoral dissertation. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=case1054735922.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Lillie, Richard. "Obscenity law: Politics, morality, free speech, and the struggle to define obscenity." Doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, 1990. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=case1054735922

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)

case1054735922
761
© 1990, all rights reserved.
This open access ETD is published by Case Western Reserve University School of Graduate Studies and OhioLINK.