Evil to him who evil thinks.

************這篇影評可能有雷************

吸引我看下去的是 Jon Hamm。
給我印象最深的是法官的結案陳詞。
There are a number of words used in "Howl" that are presently considered coarse and vulgar in some circles of the community, and in other circles, such words are in everyday use. The author of "Howl" has used those words because he believed that his portrayal required them as being in character. The People state that such words are not necessary and that others would be more palatable for good taste. The answer is that life is not encased in one formula whereby everyone acts the same and conforms to a particular pattern. No two persons think alike. We were all made from the same form but in different patterns. Would there be any freedoms of press or speech if one must reduce his vocabulary to vapid, innocuous euphemism? An author should be real in treating his subject and be allowed to express his thoughts and ideas in his own words. In considering material claimed to be obscene, it is well to remember the motto, "Honi soit qui mal y pense" "Evil to him who evil thinks." The freedoms of speech and press are inherent in a nation of free people. These freedoms must be protected if we are to remain free, both individually and as a nation. Therefore, I conclude that the book "Howl and OOther Poems" does have some redeeming social importance, and I find the book is not obscene. The defendant is found not guilty.