ever defined, of which he did not say whether they could change over time, and of which he did not determine the defining criteria. Second, the three standards of the Miller test (prurient interest, patently offensive, lacking serious value) were not met. With regard to determination of the albums prurient interest, it was argued that there was no clear intention on the part of 2 Live Crew to lure hearers into sexual activity, and, referring to the profit-making motive of the rap band, Judge Gonzalez ignored that motive was irrelevant in aesthetic maters. Next, the patently offensive character of the "Nasty" album was decided upon as the result of a misinterpretation of the lyrics, based upon Gonzalez arbitrary determination of "the" community standards. Actually, the lyrics of 2 Live Crews music should not be taken literally as they are comedic parodies in a culturally specific language. Also, music does not appeal to the intellect but to human emotions and imagination. Finally, the Judges ruling that "Nasty" did not have any serious artistic value was by definition mistaken since the "as a whole" test fails automatically in the case of a recording which after all always has some serious elements (the Judge never heard all the songs). Judge Gonzalez particularly failed to take into account Professor Longs testimony which indicated the specific artistic style of the "Nasty" recording. Long pointed to the call and response style, the tradition of "doing the dozens" (a word game with insults), and the meaning of "boasting" as part of this type of rap music. Judge Gonzalez thus completely ignored the specific African American cultural values that are manifested by the album. Finally, the prior restraint decision of Judge Gonzalez did not meet any resistance in the legal commentaries (Morant 1992:13-15). Gonzalez decision in this respect complies with the legal principle that until speech or expression is ruled obscene, it must be accorded ...
