A level: Students of English and Art, could consider ideas about the intrinsic qualities of words and images. “Arsewoman in Wonderland” can encourage debate about censorship. Is pornography acceptable for art and, if not, what other subjects should be considered out of bounds? If you believe in censorship do you automatically deny artists the right to be philosophers - what kind of philosophy can there be if only certain “healthy” aspects of life can be considered? Those opposed to censorship may like to have the issue brought to public attention in a thoughtful rather than a sensational way.

Look at a page of printed text. Consider it as if it were an art object, looking at the typeface, the white margins and the spaces between the paragraphs. Compare pages from a selection of books. Which is the most pleasing? Why? Are you tempted to read that book more than the others?

Can you tell anything about the nature of the contents from the appearance of the page? Is it is fiction or non-fiction, old or new? If there is an illustration, how is the image incorporated into the text? Does it relate to the pattern of black and white shapes created by the typeface? Does the illustration develop ideas in the text? Choose a typeface a horror movie script.

Should there be restrictions on art? Is the theme of violence acceptable? (as in the Chapman brothers’ “Disasters of War”) Is death and butchery acceptable? (as in Damien Hirst’s “Mother and Child Divided”). Should pornography be out of bounds? Is there an age limit beyond which it can more readily be discussed? How would you establish the limits of censorship? Should there be an art censor equivalent to the British Board of Film Censors? Do you think that art exhibitions, like films, should have certificates to act as a guide for parents and teachers? If you are opposed to censorship do you think that an immoral work could ever be a work of art?