(1969) The Seven Minutes (75 page)

- some jurors may be resentful of police trickery, bullying, because they’ve been so illused and fooled themselves - Fremont acknowledges his part of verbal exchange on police reel of tape - now adds to it - thinks Minutes in no way obscene - thinks book magnificent ‘X-ray of female mind’ and its social importance is that it will teach women of selves, and men about opposite sex - Fremont says knows local community standards and interests, because his business caters to comunity, average person who reads - yes, has heard people use four-letter words such as in Jadway book - yes, women also - says his customers, mostly women, have bought heavily other books with same words and describing acts similar to Jadway’s book - cites how many times he reordered Fanny Hill, My Secret Life, Chatterly, Life and Loves by Frank Harris -believes Minutes more artful, has more redeeming social importance than others - no, not many of his customers offended by such a book, few ever bring books back for a refund - oh, yes, are a few rare exceptions because after all, a work of art can’t please everyone - as someone said, even the Venus de Milo might be found offensive by every flat-chested woman in the world - so someone might find Jadway’s book offensive, but most readers will consider it pure art, as he, Fremont, does.

Duncan’s cross - oh geez - bastard has Fremont on the ropes right off -Was defendant ever arrested before for violating obscene section of California Penal Code ? - but Fremont’s ‘yes’ not enough for prosecution, dammit - should have known that if Duncan mentioned it in opening statement, he’d hit it again - should have forestalled him by introducing details ourselves, but now the bastard’s bringing out the whole thing -Fremont arrested dozen years ago, not in Oakwood, small shop on Hill Street, downtown LA - it was not for books but magazines - not his kind of magazines, but stuff wholesaler dumped on him - just sold, paid no attention to contents - DA roughs him up - Did he plead not guilty ? - no

- He pleaded guilty of purveying obscene material? - yes, but only on advice of attorney to get lighter sentence - But admitted guilt ? - yes -Since first offense, guilty of misdemeanor, did he pay a fine? - yes - Go to jail ? - no, sentence suspended.- Aware that second offense is not misdemeanor but felony ? - yes - Aware second time can go to jail for year, be fined up to f 25,000 - yes - Did he know publisher advertised Jadway book as dirtiest book in history of literature? - well, it was a quote on posters, so yes, but also on posters that it was a distinguished work of art

- Did witness know that until now, excepting original underground publication, no publisher in any nation dared bring it out? - yes, but -Nevertheless, Fremont ordered book and sold it? - yes - And ten minutes more of the same.

Score - Duncan on points. Made mincemeat of Fremont.

PHIL SANFORD:

Zelkin’s exam - Elicits details Sanford’s background, good family, Harvard, always in publishing - When contracted for Minutes, was he worried about obscenity ? No, not really, because book beautiful, touching, truthful, too honest and well-done to appeal to prurient interest -Beyond customary limits of candor by contemporary community . standards? - certainly not - Sanford discourses on how times change. Funny story. Once, in the pages of Godey’s Lady’s Book, the eager-to-be-correct hostess was admonished to see that ‘the works of male and female authors be properly separated on her bookshelves.’ Also, at one time neither piano nor chicken mentioned as having legs, only limbs. Sanford says in 1929 U.S. Customs barred Rousseau’s Confessions as immoral, and same year banned de Sade’s Justine as smut, and in 1927 Sinclair Lewis’ Elmer Gantry banned in Boston as obscene, and two years later Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front banned for same reason, but now everyone considers those works mild, accepts them, because times change - today perfume ads, in magazines, on television, lingerie and soap ads,- brassiere ads, show females nude or semi-nude and sell seduction - today movies and stage plays parade nudity, copulation, oral-genital love, masturbation, homosexuality, lesbianism - today the age of the Pill, unmarried youngsters live together openly - community standards changed. Sanford says Minutes not beyond such standards. Starts to cite several good reviews - Duncan objects. Reviews hearsay, besides reviews can’t be crossexamined. Objection overruled, reviews discussed. Abe helps witness develop point that Sanford House has highest literary repute - Sanford recounts older and modern classics they’ve published, also works by Nobel Prize winners - would never put imprint on anything lacking literary merit, as past record proves - and Minutes meets this standard.
Etc.

Duncan’s cross - How did Sanford acquire Minutes ? From whom ? -dammit, expected this - Quandt’s name comes up. Also, Quandt’s unsavory record as pornographer - So Sanford had to go to professional pornographer to acquire book? - Sanford valiant here. Says Quandt felt book too tame and literary for him to publish, and so Quandt never ‘ published it - Duncan discusses reputation of Sanford House, reels off a selection of firm’s best titles - Were you the head and publisher of Sanford House when those books were brought out? - no, but I was working in the firm then - Were you responsible for buying, publishing them ? - no - Who was ? - my father, Wesley R. Sanford - But today you are the head of firm? - yes - Since when? - two years ago, almost - Your Honor, prosecution wishes to introduce exhibits - Introduces clippings NY Times, Wall Street Journal, showing shaky financial position of Sanford House in last two years, Wesley R. Sanford considering selling off to big industrial bidders who seek diversification - Are these news accounts substantially true? - yes - In short, since you took over, Sanford House has not fared as well as in past? - Sanford hems, haws, says depends what you mean by doing well, admits firm’s book sales have gone down - Then Duncan, bastard, slips it to him - Perhaps, Mr

Sanford, you were desperate, desperate enough to ignore your father’s previous good taste, and try to save your position in firm by undertaking publication of an obscene work? - Zelkin objects, Upshaw sustains. But it got over to jurors.

Score - maybe a draw.

DR HUGO KNIGHT:

Zelkin’s exam - Witness’s credentials impressive, teaching and UCLA professorial background, but manner unfortunate - supercilious, know-it-all, talked over jurors’ heads, literaryjargon incomprehensible as Sanskrit - says Jadway’s gifts limited, but used them well - book excellent example of interior monologue - used Cathleen as oracle for own feelings

- book realistically pornographic but not obscene - pornography only a device - Can you be more explicit, Professor? - The Seven Minutes not about sex at all - Poor Abe. Not only jury but he, himself, appears astounded. Knight never used that answer in briefings. Abe resumes, tries

- Not about sex? - No, because the sex is merely symbolism, the means by which the author inveighs against The Seven Deadly Sins, or The Seven Mortal Sins, namely pride, wrath, envy, lusty, gluttony, avarice, sloth - each of Cathleen’s seven minutes is symbol of a mortal sin -Zelkin attempts divert witness from symbolism kick, but idiot keeps labeling everything symbolism - and sure enough enter Leda and the Swan.

Duncan’s cross - Dr Knight, if you will enlighten us further about J J Jadway’s hidden meanings, pray tell, is ‘cunt’ symbolism ? -Laughter.

Score - disaster. The witness is our eighth deadly sin. Duncan’s round easily.

DA VECCHI:

Zelkin’s exam - da Vecchi a cheerful little Italian singing out answers like a gondolier - an art student in Paris in the 1930s - met J J Jadway in Montparnasse, in the Dome, used to see him at Brasserie Lipp, got to know Jadway quite well in period he was working on Minutes - Did you ever hear him speak of his work then in progress? - ah, yes, yes -Did he speak of it as a commercial undertaking ? - no, never never, only as an artist, he said, ‘It is my opus, the work of my life,’ always proud

- Did you feel that Jadway was a man of esthetic sensibilities? - you mean what ? - I’m sorry, I mean did he have an understanding of art? -ah, yes, yes, of writing, of painting, of what is in the Louvre, of what is in my studio when I paint him - Do you believe Jadway’s book is obscene ? - never, never, it is from the sou of an artist. Effective witness, so far.

Duncan’s cross - The cookie crumbles fast - So you knew Jadway quite well. Were you friends? - yes, friends - How many times did you see him in Paris? - many times - By ‘see him,’ Mr da Vecchi, I do not mean see him pass in the street or sitting in a caf6, but rather, how much time did you spend with him alone? - alone together? oh, now and then

- Were you alone with him more than three or four times ? -I cannot

remember - Perhaps you can remember where you were after Jadway’s death, when the Second World War began? -I was in France still, in the maquis underground near Marseilles - Doing what? What was your occupation in the underground ? -I was an artist - Painting pictures ? -no, no, I make forged passports to help refugees - Did you pursue this same occupation after the war was over? - forge passports, never, no, I am a painter - Yes, you are a painter. I’d like to explore some of your more creative activities. I have evidence from Italy that you have painted under several names. One name you used was Vermeer, another was Raphael, another was Tintoretto. There is an old quip to the effect that, ‘Of the 2,500 paintings done by Corot in his lifetime, 7,800 are to be found in America.’ According to the police dossier in Rome, you painted at least eight Corots and sold them as authentic Corots. Now, of course, having once served a prison sentence for committing forgeries and perpetrating hoaxes need not necessarily impugn your honesty as a witness, but considering this record - Damn Duncan and that son-of-abitching witness. Why couldn’t he have told us? He wanted a free trip, publicity. Now look at him. Smile gone. Shifty, cunning, scared. Goddammit. Score -Duncan has it by a knockout.

SIR ESMOND INGRAM:

Zelkin’s exam - Better, much better right away - celebrated Oxford don - celebrated literary critic - cranky, but pixie-charm, witty, an impressive sage -jury very attentive - Sir Esmond, you once wrote in The Times of London that The Seven Minutes was ‘one of the most honest, sensitive, and distinguished works of art created in modern Western literature.’ Do you still hold that view? -I do -Then you do not hold it to be an obscene book ? - there are no obscene books, only obscene men with obscene minds - Later: Then you feel it was honest and valid for Jadway to tell his story as he did? - it was the honest approach, the courageous one - many authors can denude the human body, but few have the nerve or genius to denude the human spirit - a French publisher once wrote that the most interesting thing about eroticism was not that there were thirty-two coital positions, but rather ‘what goes on inside people’s heads, the way in which lovers react to each other,’ and this mystery Jadway penetrated and exposed completely - Do you believe that Jadway’s book has redeeming social value? - It is a work of considerable social value. Jadway attempted to give sex its natural and proper place in the spectrum of human behavior. The editor of Les Lettres Nouvelles, Maurice Nadeau, once asked, ‘Why should love -which forms the principal or subsidiary subject of eight novels out of ten - stop at the edge of the bed, around which the curtains are then drawn ?’ After all, the function of literature, he said, was to explore the human heart, to explore every manifestation of being. And then he added, “The way in which people make love may tell us more about them than any searching analysis could. It, too, reveals a form of truth which

is interesting becauseit is usually concealed.‘With this book, Ingram says, Jadway did humankind a service.

Mike Barrett had finished reviewing his notes of the afternoon’s testimony. When he looked up, he saw that Sir Esmond Ingram was still in the witness box and was now submitting to Elmo Duncan’s pressing crossexamination.

‘… and because of this background, Sir Esmond, you consider yourself an arbiter of what is good literature or bad?’

‘It is not I who consider myself an arbiter of art, but my readers who regard me as such and who depend upon me to help them form their own judgments.’

‘But you do consider yourself qualified to advise readers what is of literary value and what is simply scatological ?’

‘I believe that I am highly qualified.’

‘Because of your erudition alone, Sir Esmond?’

‘Heavens, no. Because of my experience of life, my empathy for and understanding of my public.’

‘Then you feel, Sir Esmond, your life has much in common with that of your average reader?’

T would say so, yes.’

‘Sir Esmond, how many times have you been married?’

‘Three times, sir.’

‘Have you ever been in jail?’

‘Two times, sir.’

‘Do you eat meat, like the average reader?’

‘I am a vegetarian, sir. May I add, counselor, the line you are taking is quite clever, and altogether naughty, yes, extremely naughty.’

Goodbye, Sir Esmond, Barrett thought.

Barrett looked over his shoulder. He would just make it back to the office in time to meet Maggie Russell.

He folded his notes and shoved them into his pocket. He glanced at Abe Zelkin. ‘I’m leaving now, Abe.’

Zelkin closed his eyes and shook his head mournfully. ‘Bring back Cassie McGraw,’ he said. ‘We need her, Mike. We’re dead and buried without her.’

‘I’ll find her,’ said Barrett. ‘I won’t come back without her.’

Then, quietly slipping out of his chair, he left behind him the scene of carnage - determined to return with the only ally alive who might save them and their cause.

For Maggie Russell, it had been a wonderful afternoon.

Her relief over Jerry’s escape from the crossexamination, her affection for Mike Barrett in making this possible, had been so great that she had been in a maniacally festive mood throughout her drive from downtown Los Angeles.

Wanting some kind of celebration, she had stopped in Beverly

Hills, and at a table in Leon’s restaurant she had indulged in a martini and a high-caloric lunch and her fantasies of the future. After that she had driven to Saks and shopped for a new dress there and at I. Magnin’s down the block. The dress had been less a celebration than an investment. Intuition had warned her that by now, certainly by five o’clock, Mike Barrett would have had second thoughts about having by passed his questioning of Jerry no matter what he expected in return. The best way to soften a man’s regrets over what he had given up was to remind him that he may have gained something more. The dress, a short sheath, low-cut, soft, supple, silky, might help a little. Maggie hated women’s games. By nature she was direct. But the situation warranted an extra effort. When she saw him, she wanted her appearance to remind him that if he had lost something important he had also gained something more lasting. That is, if he was still interested in her.