Spectator readers respond to recent articles
Thought crime, style crime
Sir: I welcome the new presentation of The Spectator, along with the continuing commitment to ‘elegance of expression and originality of thought’, and providing ‘a refuge from an
often censorious and humourless world’. These are the reasons why I subscribe, and I am seldom let down.
Yet I see with disappointment that Melanie Phillips has been quick to exercise her right to oppose Spectator doctrine (‘I think, therefore I’m guilty’, 18 September). While I
agree with the thrust of her argument, a less elegant, more censorious and humourless way of expressing it is difficult to imagine. Isn’t style crime just as bad as thought crime?
Ian Bentley
Essex
Sir: Can I congratulate you on a thoroughly helpful issue of the magazine this week (‘Don’t even think it!’). I particularly appreciated the article by Melanie Phillips on the new intolerance.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in