Will Self on God Save the Queen/Sex Pistols

8 Sep 2010 | Volume 39.03 Autumn 2010

In the summer of 1977 I was 15 years old and wore an old tropical linen jacket I’d bought in a charity shop for a quid. It wasn’t so much off-white as ruinous, and it matched the colour of my shoes — winkle-pickers I’d painted myself using some kind of weird leather paint. Naturally I had to lie on my skinny rump to force my El Greco feet through the eight-inch ankles of my drainpipe jeans. Given all this sartorial mayhem it goes without saying that I absolutely concurred with the Sex Pistol’s front man, Johnny Rotten, when he sang, “God save the queen / The fascist regime”. Admittedly the causal connective ‘it’s’ was lost in all the filth and the fury of his delivery, but we knew what he meant.

Actually, I can barely remember the circumstantial pomp that went into the celebration of the Queen’s Silver Jubilee, all I can recall is the Sex Pistols’ treasonable ditty, and the fact that it was banned from being played on the radio. At least I’m certain it was banned from the BBC’s Radio 1. I’m not so sure about the commercial stations, but then Britain in the late 1970s still had the anomalous character of a socialist democracy with a vertiginous class system; an anomaly of which the state broadcaster was a key component.

Actually, being banned by the BBC wasn’t that crushing a piece of censorship; other far more anodyne ditties used to be blanked from the charts, or have their lyrics bleeped out by reason of their mild smuttiness. And of course, like all censorship, ridding the Sex Pistols’ “God Save the Queen” from the airwaves only ensured its fizzing presence in the brainwaves of disaffected youth. Malcolm McLaren, the band’s Situationist-inspired manager, got reams of publicity from the banning, together with a special cruise he organised on the day of the Jubilee, during which the band were to blast Parliament with their subversive sounds.

This is an extract from Smashed Hits 2.0, the new issue of Index on Censorship, out now. To read the rest of the article go to www.indexoncensorship.org/subscribe.

Will Self’s novels, short story collections and non-fiction include The Book of Dave (Viking) and The Butt (Bloomsbury)

To listen to contributors’ playlists go to indexoncensorship.org/music

UK: Lily Allen’s half-sister to sue magazine for libel

27 Aug 2010 | Index Index, minipost, News and features

Singer Lily Allen’s half-sister has launched legal action against Now magazine over an article about her famous relative. Gala Talbott is suing the publication’s owner IPC Media, seeking libel damages of up to £15,000.

The nineteen-year-old claims that an article entitled “Lily’s Heartache over Secret Sister” made false allegations about the relationship between the two women. She said the story was distressing and embarrassing, and that it had damaged her reputation. In addition to her libel claim Talbott is seeking an injunction banning any repetition of the same allegations.

UK: First libel supreme court hearing

27 Jul 2010 | Index Index, minipost, News and features

The first libel case in the new Supreme Court, Joseph v Spiller was heard on 26-27 July.

The case concerns Motown tribute act, the Gillettes, who sued after their former agent Jason Spiller posted on his website that the band were not professional and that they consider contractual terms and conditions to “hold no water in legal terms”.

William Bennett, representing Craig Joseph, a singer for the group who arranged their bookings, has argued that a “fair comment” defence should be rejected because the “comment” related to a false fact and no reference was made in the post to the truthful facts upon which the comment was based. In contrast lawyers for the agent, Spiller, contended that the false fact was not materially detrimental to Joseph and thus the defence should not fail. He further appealed to the justices to clarify and simplify the meaning of the “fair comment” defence, including renaming it “comment” to avoid misleading juries, since the defence protects both fair and unfair comments equally. A ruling, which could have serious effect on future definitions of fair comment, is expected in August or early September.

SUPPORT INDEX'S WORK