THE TRIALS OF PORTNOY

An illuminating tale about book censorship in Australia.

Canberra-based writer Mullins begins dramatically with two anonymous men entering a Sydney bookstore to purchase a book. We learn later they were policemen. This “simple purchase,” writes the author, “helped to set in train events that would lead to the collapse of a system that was, for many Australians, a simple and immutable fact of life.” He first provides a wealth of historical background about book censorship in Australia. In 1941, Ulysses was banned because it ridiculed no less than the “whole of moral standards of civilisation, citizenship, and decency.” The furor over Lady Chatterly’s Lover resulted in some loosening of restrictions, and Lolita and The Ginger Man became available in 1965 and 1967, respectively. “Defying censorship,” writes Mullins, “would require courage, boldness, and skill—and a good bit of ammunition.” Enter Philip Roth’s Portnoy’s Complaint, a “radical piece of literature” about a boy’s “adolescent compulsion to masturbate.” The novel was a huge success, and its popularity “spread like the cold.” Jonathan Cape, the U.K. publisher, sent the book to Australian censors, who prohibited its distribution. Graham C. Greene, Cape’s managing director, was “determined to see it published in Australia.” John Michie, the alternately “charming” and “ruthless” managing director of Penguin Books Australia, was able to secure the rights to the book and find a printer willing to risk arrest. In 1970, thousands of copies were printed and distributed to stores. They sold quickly, and numerous copies were seized. In excessive detail, too much for some readers, Mullins chronicles the many censorship trials that took place, beginning in October 1970 in Melbourne. Despite Patrick White’s witty defense of the book, Penguin lost and was fined $100. In a later trial in Western Australia, they were victorious. After two years of more trials, the government relented. The book had finally won.

Publishers and bookstores are the heroes in this overlong but entertaining account of a “hard-won” battle.