Sir: David Holbrook's article on pornography confirmed my mixed feelings.
Where does one draw the line between liberalism and libertinarianism? If we must have censors do we give them any guidelines or do we let them infer what is socially acceptable? Why does sex rear its ugly head far more often than violence in the protests of the comparative puritans? Perhaps because it hits us harder in a more vulnerable area of our minds: so often social brutality and sexual bestiality bear a closer resemblance to each other than a casual glance might suggest. Again, if television advertising is so effective, surely we must study the mesmeric impact of possibly pornographic scenes in between the commercially venal and visually repetitive open invitations to purchase perfection.
However, what worries me more than its influence on filmgoers is the effect on the actors — and especially the actresses. As simulation and stimulation reach what I cannot avoid describing as a natural climax, is there not a more than faint .chance that protracted physical clenches, clinches and clutches might degrade far more those whom the camera has caught in the act? Why doesn't Women's Lib demonstrate about that and even make it their primary sex objective?
Eric Hermes Hill View House, 20 Kayte Lane, Bishops Cleeve, Cheltenham