Regina v. Penguin Books Ltd
"Regina v. Penguin Books Ltd." was a landmark legal case in the early 1960s centered around the publication of D. H. Lawrence's controversial novel, "Lady Chatterley's Lover." Previously available in abridged editions in the UK, Penguin Books sought to publish the uncensored version to mark the anniversary of Lawrence's death. The case arose after Penguin sent copies of the book to the Director of Public Prosecutions, leading to a prosecution under the Obscene Publications Act of 1959. Central to the trial was whether the novel's content, which included explicit language and sexual themes, had a "tendency to deprave and corrupt" its audience. The trial featured notable arguments about censorship and artistic merit, with thirty-five defense witnesses, including literary experts, advocating for the book's literary value. Ultimately, the jury delivered a not guilty verdict, allowing Penguin to publish the book widely, thereby significantly influencing the availability of literary works in the UK. This case is often viewed as a key moment leading to a more permissive cultural climate in the 1960s, despite subsequent successful prosecutions under the same law.
Regina v. Penguin Books Ltd.
Court: Old Bailey, London
Decided: November 2, 1960
Significance: The court’s decision in this first test of Great Britain’s newest Obscene Publications Act against a work of art was widely interpreted as fulfilling the act’s aim to protect art while clamping down on pornography
This case involved publication of an uncensored paperback edition of D. H. Lawrence’s Lady Chatterley’s Lover (1928) in early 1960. The book had previously been available in Britain only in abridged forms. Penguin Books planned to publish the unexpurgated version in a series marking the thirty years that had passed since Lawrence’s death. In order to test the Obscene Publications Act of 1959, Penguin technically “published” the novel by sending twelve copies to the government’s Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), who announced he would prosecute the novel under the 1959 law. To be guilty under this act a book, recording, film, or other work had to be shown to have a “tendency to deprave and corrupt” its likely audience. The trial that followed thus centered on the question of whether Lawrence’s novel had such a tendency.
The case came to court in November, 1960, and centered on the novel’s profane language and a section in which Lady Chatterley engages in anal intercourse with her husband’s gamekeeper. During the trial the prosecuting counsel, Mervyn Griffiths-Jones, uttered a remark that later became notorious in linking censorship with elitist attitudes: He asked the jurors whether Lady Chatterley’s Lover was a book that they would “wish your wife or servants to read.”
The Obscene Publications Act contained clauses permitting challenged works a “public good” defence, should the works have artistic merit. Thirty-five defense witnesses, including literary scholars, members of the clergy, and an educational psychologist, testified that Lawrence’s novel was of a high artistic standard. The defense also noted that Penguin Books were clearly not pornographers, but publishers of high repute. The prosecution called no witnesses, apparently believing that the book could speak for itself.
After the jury returned a not guilty verdict, Penguin issued 200,000 copies of the book and dedicated its next editions to the jury. There was no appeal. One result of the case was to make available to the general public a wide range of works that had previously been available only in expensive hardbound editions. British publishers were now free to publish works containing obscene language in inexpensive paperbacks. Some people have seen this trial as instrumental in ushering in the so-called permissive era of the 1960’s, although later prosecutions under the 1959 Act were successful.