Tribunal Rules Book Not Indecent (Press, 17 March 1964)

On 16 March 1964, the Indecent Publications Tribunal in Wellington, New Zealand, released its decision regarding the book “Another Country” by James Baldwin. The tribunal, chaired by Sir Kenneth Gresson, ruled that the book does not qualify as indecent under Section 10 (a) of the Indecent Publications Act, 1963. The tribunal also declined to impose any distribution restrictions for young people, noting that the book had been available for several months without incident and features a simple, dignified dust cover. This decision marks a significant first application of the Indecent Publications Act of 1963. The tribunal analysed submissions from various parties, including counsel for the Secretary for Justice, represented by Solicitor-General Mr H. R. C. Wild, Q.C., who argued for a classification review. The tribunal allowed a representative from the New Zealand Library Association to present a submission. The book was defended by the publisher's representatives, including Mr L. M. Greig, and expert witnesses such as Dr. M. C. Groves and Professor T. Crawford also provided evidence, stating that the work offers a serious and accurate depiction of life in the African American community in New York. They argued that while it deals with themes of sexual relations and social indignities, it serves a humanitarian purpose and provides valuable insights into the experiences of Black individuals. The overall assessment praised the novel for its sincerity and moral weight, despite acknowledging that certain passages may be viewed as offensive. Sir Kenneth Gresson pointed out that the tribunal must evaluate the book as a whole rather than isolating explicit passages from their context. While conceding that some language and themes could be deemed inappropriate for younger audiences, the tribunal concluded that the book's social commentary and representation of race relations hold significant merit for mature readers. They identified that a young adolescent might perceive the book merely as a crude narrative of sexual conduct, which may not be in their best interest to read. Despite these considerations, the tribunal ultimately concluded that imposing any sales restrictions at this stage was unnecessary, given the book's established presence in the market. They emphasised that it did not possess the attributes of a publication likely to corrupt or deprave readers, particularly noting its dignified presentation. Sir Kenneth Gresson’s remarks suggest that while they recognised potential concerns regarding youth exposure to such content, they believed it was too late to implement restrictions on its sale. In summary, the tribunal's decision reinforced the notion that valuable literary works, even with challenging content, should be accessible, especially once they have already been circulating in society without complaint.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand