Rt. 3, Box 722
        Albany, Kentucky  42602
        July 29, 1990

        John Ed Pearce
        c/o The Courier Journal Magazine
        The Courier Journal
        Louisville, Kentucky  40202

        Dear Mr. Pearce:

        I often read your articles in the Courier Journal Magazine and 
        usually am in agreement with you.  I think your article in the 
        July 29, Magazine concerning censorship including 2 Live Crew 
        was simply common sense.  I do, however, have a couple of 
        comments brought to mind by a couple of things you wrote.

        You wrote "We rate movies according to the extent to which they 
        show sexual activity and employ vulgar language."  This is true 
        but incomplete.  We actually rate movies according to the amount 
        of sex, vulgar language and violence they contain and there is 
        no indication from the ratings used whether the rating was 
        assigned due to sexual content or to violence or to both.  To 
        me, this has always indicated that we Americans consider sex and 
        violence to be synonymous.  I am not sure about the rest of 
        Americans, but in my life at least, sex and violence are two 
        entirely different things.  Sex is a beautiful thing denoting 
        pleasure.  I associate neither beauty nor pleasure with 
        violence.  I think love and sex often have a very proper place 
        in many of the movies I enjoy.  I think violence can be 
        necessary in many movies to get a point across or to set a mood 
        or for other reasons.  Nevertheless, while I often enjoy sex in 
        movies, I can't say that I ever enjoy violence.  I do feel that 
        sex, violence, vulgar language, music, color, actors, and many 
        other things are often misused in movies, but I try not to watch 
        those.   Perhaps this attitude makes me weird or preverted or 
        out of step with the rest of America. 

        Your other comment that made me think was "... historically, 
        great art has survived (the censors) to inspire new generations 
        of artists."  Yes, we think, great art has survived.  But how do 
        we know that the greatest art did not fall prey to the censors 
        and was never experienced by mankind.  If this is true, and it 
        could very well be, then we would have no way of knowing and the 
        world we live in today may very well be impoverished without us 
        being aware that this has occurred.  Of course, philosophically, 
        we could ask, "If we don't know the difference, is there any 
        difference?".  If we conclude that there is not, then maybe 
        censorship is inconsequential.

        Anyway, thank you for stimulating my thought processes.  May 
        your life be long, healthy, and filled with ideas. 


        Sincerely,


        _________________________
        Duane Bristow