British Journal of Canadian Studies

Analogies of harm: excess, expression, and obscenity in Margaret Atwood’s Bodily Harm and the Supreme Court of Canada decision R v Butler

British Journal of Canadian Studies (2020), 32, (1-2), 23–42.

Abstract

Thinking through Margaret Atwood’s 1981 novel Bodily Harm and the 1992 Supreme Court of Canada case R v Butler, this article examines a Canadian discussion about the excessiveness of the freedom of expression to which obscenity has been key. For Atwood, expression is central to Bodily Harm’s narrative of personal, political revelation. Yet it is also at the root of a discourse of harm that Atwood elucidates throughout the novel as she incorporates pornography into an expansive analogic continuity of violence. In Butler, the Supreme Court curtails obscenity in the name of equality and collective well-being, even as it continues to view expression as a valuable individual freedom and a national good. In each text freedom of expression both is and is not safeguarded; in each, the freedom can be conceived of and celebrated, but its excessive possibilities must also be contained.

Access Token
£25.00
READ THIS ARTICLE
If you have private access to this content, please log in with your username and password here

References

Atwood, Margaret, 1983, ‘Atwood on Pornography’, Chatelaine, 56:9. Google Scholar

Atwood, Margaret, interview by Linda Sadler, 1990, ‘A Question of Metamorphosis’, in Earl G. Ingersoll (ed.), Margaret Atwood: Conversations (Willowdale: Firefly), pp. 40-57. Google Scholar

Atwood, Margaret, 1996, Bodily Harm (London: Vintage). Google Scholar

Bal, Mieke, 2002, Travelling Concepts in the Humanities (Toronto: University of Toronto Press). Google Scholar

Bouson, J. Brooks, 1993, Brutal Choreographies: Oppositional Strategies and Narrative Design in the Novels of Margaret Atwood (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press). Google Scholar

Brownley, Martine Watson, 2000, Deferrals of Domain: Contemporary Women Novelists and the State (New York: St Martin’s Press). Google Scholar

Butler, Judith, 1997, Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative (New York: Routledge). Google Scholar

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, part I of the Constitution Act, being schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c.11. Google Scholar

Cossman, Brenda, Shannon Bell, Lise Gotell, and Becki L. Rose, 1997, Bad Attitude/s on Trial: Pornography, Feminism, and the Butler Decision (Toronto: University of Toronto Press). Google Scholar

Court of Queen’s Bench (England and Wales), 1868, R v Hicklin, L.R. 3 Q.B. 360. Google Scholar

Criminal Code, 1985, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46. Google Scholar

Ford, Karen Jackson, 1997, Gender and the Poetics of Excess: Moments of Brocade (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi). Google Scholar

Howells, Coral Ann, 1996, Margaret Atwood (Houndsmills: Macmillan). Google Scholar

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976, 999 UNTS 171. Google Scholar

Irvine, Lorna, 1993, Collecting Clues: Margaret Atwood’s Bodily Harm (Toronto: ECW). Google Scholar

Jacobus, Mary, 1986, Reading Woman: Essays in Feminist Criticism (New York: Columbia University Press). Google Scholar

Jochelson, Richard, and Kirsten Kramar, 2011, Sex and the Supreme Court: Obscenity and Indecency Laws in Canada (Black Point, NS: Fernwood). Google Scholar

Kappeler, Susanne, 1986, The Pornography of Representation (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press). Google Scholar

Kirtz, Mary K., 1987, ‘The Thematic Imperative: Didactic Characterization in Bodily Harm’, in Beatrice Mendez-Egle (ed.), Margaret Atwood: Reflection and Reality (Edinburg, TX: Pan American University Press), pp. 116-30. Google Scholar

Lacombe, Dany, 1988, Ideology and Public Policy: The Case against Pornography (Toronto: Garamond). Google Scholar

MacNeil, William, 2012, Novel Judgements: Legal Theory as Fiction (London and New York: Routledge). Google Scholar

Mahoney, Kathleen, 1991, ‘Canaries in a Coal Mine: Canadian Judges and the Reconstruction of Obscenity Law’, in David Schneiderman (ed.), Freedom of Expression and the Charter (Toronto: Carswell), pp. 145-79. Google Scholar

Raz, Joseph, 1994, ‘Free Expression and Personal Identification’, in Wilfred J. Waluchow (ed.), Free Expression (Oxford: Clarendon), pp. 1-29. Google Scholar

Rubenstein, Roberta, 1987, Boundaries of the Self: Gender, Culture, Fiction (Urbana: University of Illinois Press). Google Scholar

Salecl, Renata, 1994, The Spoils of Freedom: Psychoanalysis and Feminism after the Fall of Socialism (London: Routledge). Google Scholar

SCC (Supreme Court of Canada), 1989, Irwin Toy Ltd v Quebec (Attorney General), 1 SCR 927. Google Scholar

SCC (Supreme Court of Canada), 1990, R v Keegstra, 3 SCR 697. Google Scholar

SCC (Supreme Court of Canada), 1992a, R v Butler, 1 SCR 452. Google Scholar

SCC (Supreme Court of Canada), 1992b, R v Zundel, 2 SCR 731. Google Scholar

SCC (Supreme Court of Canada), 2000, Little Sisters Book and Art Emporium v Canada (Minister of Justice), 2 SCR 1120. Google Scholar

Sunstein, Cass, 1998, Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict (New York: Oxford University Press). Google Scholar

Tiffin, Helen, 1987, ‘Vision and Form’, in Russell McDougall and Gillian Whitlock (eds), Australian/Canadian Literatures in English: Comparative Perspectives (North Ryde: Methuen Australia), pp. 119-32. Google Scholar

Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, adopted 10 December 1948, UNGA Res 217 A(III). Google Scholar

Waluchow, Wilfred J. (ed.), 1994, Free Expression (Oxford: Clarendon). Google Scholar

If you have private access to this content, please log in with your username and password here

Details

Author details

Authers, Benjamin