Lenny Bruce pardoned

A correspondent writes:
I forgot to mention in my catalogue of New York Republican offensiveness, that now Pataki has issued a PARDON for Lenny Bruce! He was a heroin addict, he helped bring foul language into public discourse, as well as forbidden topics probably better kept forbidden, and now we have to act as if it was a horrible violation of free speech for people of the past to go after him. Even the New York Times is saying this!

What my correspondent means by that last sentence is that the Times, while supporting the pardon, has surprising qualms about Lenny Bruce’s influence on the culture. (Gosh, the Times runs a non-dismissive profile of a George Washington re-enactor one day, and complains about the ubiquity of obscene language in our popular culture on another day. This from the newspaper that has always celebrated the transgression of societal norms. Is there something happening over there? No. It’s just a momentary reflex of an unprincipled exception.)

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 29, 2003 10:06 AM | Send
    
Comments

Writing on the Lenny Bruce farce, Barbara Amiel of the Daily Telegraph has this to say:

“Court decisions give followers a guide book to society’s mental health. Most lunacies and preoccupations are revealed in its legal and supra-legal proceedings. Sometimes, courts express the consensus of a culture; at other times they try to impose their own consensus. The courts can be captured by a small group, whether ayatollahs or feminists, whose goal is to make the majority toe their line.”

Worth reading in full at:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/12/29/do2901.xml&sSheet=/portal/2003/12/29/ixportal.html

Posted by: Charles Copeland on December 29, 2003 12:33 PM

I think that Mr. Auster is being overoptimistic in attributing qualms to author of the Times article about Lenny Bruce. He seemed to be saying that the fuss over what Bruce said was over nothing, not that Bruce’s influence was deplorable. I have never admired Pataki, but after this episode it is hard not to feel contempt for the man.

Posted by: Alan Levine on December 29, 2003 4:42 PM

I’ve replied to Mr. Levine in a new article:

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/002042.html

Posted by: Lawrence Auster on December 29, 2003 6:32 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?





Email entry

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):