or

'tis context 

 

 

In The Friends of Voltaire, Evelyn Hall wrote the phrase: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

 

Say whatever you want - but

prepare to be the subject

of reprisal.

 

There is NO such thing

as complete freedom,

not in life; art nor in postings.

So- as we are all subject

to discretion or compromise

it is best understood

that 'your words' may be posted-

then someone may remove them-

freedom and oppression

go hand in hand in this case.

 

It would be madness

to assert that one is

allowed to

'express whatever

one wants'

and not be

subject to censure.

 

So ** has expressed his

'right' to post a poem

(I have not read it)

and someone has

expressed

thier 'right' to remove it-

as have others in

condemming

or supporting it.

 

A matter of taste

is another thing,

and those that censure

have the ability to

express thier 'right'

to be offended.

 

I would not support

anyones 'right' to be

obnoxious and

remain 'free'

from reprisals,

such as censure.

 

Does a poem have 'merit'

that out-weighs 'offence'?

the reader must judge

for themselves and

the writer may suffer

the consequences

of a poorly judged cynical

attempt to shock...so be it.

I myself would oppose

the freedom to offend

on the grounds of race

or gender

or disability

to name but three.

 

Words and foto  Tommy Carroll

Rough second draft.