Close Menu
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
Trending

As Suncor Approaches, Justice Alito Recuses

4 minutes ago

Bitcoin traders chase shorts as rising Treasury yields weigh over gold

27 minutes ago

Aiden Pleterski Faces Trial Over Alleged $30M Crypto Fraud

31 minutes ago
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Market Data Newsletter
Monday, September 28
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Home»News»Global Free Speech»Kurt Vonnegut and his daughter Nanette in 1997. Photo: Family handout This article first appeared in the Spring 2026 issue of Index on Censorship, The monster unleashed: How Hungary’s illliberal vision is seducing the Western world published on 2 April 2026. “My mother warned me early on that my father was going to get in trouble for writing dirty books.” Nanette Vonnegut, youngest daughter of the late American novelist Kurt Vonnegut, remembers these words vividly. Even though she was around eight years old at the time, she recognised the real fear in her mother’s voice. At the time, she didn’t quite know what to do with the warning. But through a serendipitous encounter, she now has a much better idea. When she was invited, along with her brother, to represent the Vonnegut Estate at a meeting about book censorship hosted by publisher Penguin Random House, she had what she describes as a conversion experience. Now, she is taking on the State of Utah alongside other plaintiffs, in a case defending the freedom to read, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Utah Foundation. “I was blown away by the urgency,” she told Index, recalling the passion and bravery of the librarians and lawyers who spoke at the meeting. Each person took their turn to make a speech, “like one sermon after another”. Vonnegut spoke about her own childhood memories, when she was afraid of what might happen to her father. One speaker in particular, she remembered, described how book bans in the USA are not about words or even sex, but about ideas. “Not until now, did I ever feel afraid for what’s going on. These books in Utah are being thrown away. They’re just pulled off the shelves,” Vonnegut said. But this, she added, has always been a lurking threat. No sex please, we’re prudish At the meeting, she discovered that in Utah, any mention of sex in a book was sufficient reason for it to be pulled from any school library in the state. Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, an anti-war novel first published in 1969, remains hugely controversial; it has already been banned in two school districts in Utah, labelled as pornographic. If the book is successfully challenged in a third district, the ban automatically becomes state-wide, as has already happened with 28 other books. Nanette Vonnegut can’t recall the book being particularly pornographic in nature. Interviewed on National Public Radio, Terry Hutchinson, a former member of a Utah schoolboard, said: “I am not a big Kurt Vonnegut fan. Not really because of subject matter, but because of style.” He believed that Slaughterhouse-Five should be removed from school libraries. For him, the book crossed the line when a character gets an erection. When Vonnegut and her attorney Tom Ford were invited to discuss the lawsuit on WHMP Radio, Ford explained that Utah’s book removal law, HB29 (passed in 2022 and amended in 2024), prohibits public school libraries from carrying any book that contains a description of a sex act. In Vonnegut v. Utah, the plaintiffs will argue that sections of HB29 are overbroad and in violation of First Amendment rights. “It prohibits a remarkably sweeping range of literature from every school library in the state,” Ford told the radio station. Appropriate age categories are irrelevant where this law is concerned – all sex is bad sex. The law itself, Ford said, springs from the false narrative created by conservative lawmakers in Utah that the state’s school libraries were full of pornographic books. In fact, Ford continued, the real targets of this censorship were ideas, messages and lived experiences. The earliest memory Vonnegut has of her father being a target of literary censorship is not one of quiet removal from a library shelf, but rather something more dramatic. In 1973, a school in Drake, North Dakota threw copies of Slaughterhouse-Five into its furnace. The books were burnt on the orders of the local school board, which had deemed the novel “profane”. Ironically, Vonnegut’s novel was inspired by his experiences as a prisoner of war in Germany during the Second World War. Before the war the Nazis had organised public burnings of books that they deemed “un-German”. Kurt Vonnegut wrote a letter to the school in response. “You can feel his rage and his hurt,” his daughter told Index, recalling the letter. Putting the Vonnegut name to good use Now, she said, she can’t believe that book banning is back in the USA, and “worse than ever”. She fears for the teenagers who don’t have access to the right resources and how much trouble it’s going to leave them in. For the first time, she feels she can really put her Vonnegut name to good use. Nanette Vonnegut grew up in a creative household, with her mother guarding the door to protect her father’s writing space. “You were scared of that door, because you knew that he was he was trying to write.” He worked hard, she remembered, all the time, and there was a sense that it was serious work. She described to Index how her father would come out from his writing for a snack (usually pumpernickel loaded with butter). The kitchen would be full of the kids and their friends, but he’d barely register them. Often, he would be muttering to himself; sometimes, he’d stop and talk to his youngest daughter, verbally working through an idea. Once, on his way back to his study, he paused and said to her: “You know, the unstructured life is not worth living.” Kurt rarely left the house. His wife, Jane Marie Cox, maintained the family’s social front by doing all the expected things like going to cocktail parties and playing tennis. She was his biggest supporter. Cox was passionate about reading too, and the Vonnegut house was always full of books. At the end of each day, the couple would discuss Vonnegut’s day of writing. “She was like his editor,” Nanette said, describing how when it came to stories, “she was the midwife.” A Vonnegut family trip Niagara Falls circa 1964. Photo: Family handout Memories of Slaughterhouse-Five Her father, she explained, was always writing to tell the truth. Slaughterhouse-Five was a particular challenge, because he struggled to get the information he needed about the fire-bombing of Dresden, which he had experienced. When he did finally finish the book, he left the galleys out for the children to read. When it was published, he became an overnight sensation. It was a writer’s house, and as the children got older, it became a party house too. According to Nanette Vonnegut, “It was a very heady, exciting time.” Her parents often had other creatives over at the Vonnegut home. Once, it was actor and director Peter Fonda, to talk about film rights for Vonnegut’s book Cat’s Cradle. Jack Kerouac, author of On The Road, visited before he was famous. After having a little too much to drink, his bad language ramped up. Nanette and a friend, aged around nine, were told to leave the room and go upstairs. “But we did not go upstairs,” she recalled. “We stayed behind the door. It was sort of thrilling and exciting. He was like a wild man, and he seemed to be a lot of fun. We didn’t want to miss any of it.” Growing up in this household, she internalised a strong faith in the creative process. She has inherited this “creative groove” as an artist. Take, for example, the day she snapped, for no particular reason, a photo of the Senate floor being shown on a television screen. A few days later, on 6 January 2021, came the US Capitol riot. Following her creativity, Vonnegut created a huge six-foot painting (opposite) from the photograph. Although mostly found in her art studio, Vonnegut feels a strong sense of the power of words, and is a writer too. “Words are the most sacred things that we have, and that’s something I grew up with,” she told Index. And above all, evident in her fight against Utah, she has always taken for granted the belief that there are no “dirty words”. READ MORE
Global Free Speech

Kurt Vonnegut and his daughter Nanette in 1997. Photo: Family handout This article first appeared in the Spring 2026 issue of Index on Censorship, The monster unleashed: How Hungary’s illliberal vision is seducing the Western world published on 2 April 2026. “My mother warned me early on that my father was going to get in trouble for writing dirty books.” Nanette Vonnegut, youngest daughter of the late American novelist Kurt Vonnegut, remembers these words vividly. Even though she was around eight years old at the time, she recognised the real fear in her mother’s voice. At the time, she didn’t quite know what to do with the warning. But through a serendipitous encounter, she now has a much better idea. When she was invited, along with her brother, to represent the Vonnegut Estate at a meeting about book censorship hosted by publisher Penguin Random House, she had what she describes as a conversion experience. Now, she is taking on the State of Utah alongside other plaintiffs, in a case defending the freedom to read, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Utah Foundation. “I was blown away by the urgency,” she told Index, recalling the passion and bravery of the librarians and lawyers who spoke at the meeting. Each person took their turn to make a speech, “like one sermon after another”. Vonnegut spoke about her own childhood memories, when she was afraid of what might happen to her father. One speaker in particular, she remembered, described how book bans in the USA are not about words or even sex, but about ideas. “Not until now, did I ever feel afraid for what’s going on. These books in Utah are being thrown away. They’re just pulled off the shelves,” Vonnegut said. But this, she added, has always been a lurking threat. No sex please, we’re prudish At the meeting, she discovered that in Utah, any mention of sex in a book was sufficient reason for it to be pulled from any school library in the state. Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, an anti-war novel first published in 1969, remains hugely controversial; it has already been banned in two school districts in Utah, labelled as pornographic. If the book is successfully challenged in a third district, the ban automatically becomes state-wide, as has already happened with 28 other books. Nanette Vonnegut can’t recall the book being particularly pornographic in nature. Interviewed on National Public Radio, Terry Hutchinson, a former member of a Utah schoolboard, said: “I am not a big Kurt Vonnegut fan. Not really because of subject matter, but because of style.” He believed that Slaughterhouse-Five should be removed from school libraries. For him, the book crossed the line when a character gets an erection. When Vonnegut and her attorney Tom Ford were invited to discuss the lawsuit on WHMP Radio, Ford explained that Utah’s book removal law, HB29 (passed in 2022 and amended in 2024), prohibits public school libraries from carrying any book that contains a description of a sex act. In Vonnegut v. Utah, the plaintiffs will argue that sections of HB29 are overbroad and in violation of First Amendment rights. “It prohibits a remarkably sweeping range of literature from every school library in the state,” Ford told the radio station. Appropriate age categories are irrelevant where this law is concerned – all sex is bad sex. The law itself, Ford said, springs from the false narrative created by conservative lawmakers in Utah that the state’s school libraries were full of pornographic books. In fact, Ford continued, the real targets of this censorship were ideas, messages and lived experiences. The earliest memory Vonnegut has of her father being a target of literary censorship is not one of quiet removal from a library shelf, but rather something more dramatic. In 1973, a school in Drake, North Dakota threw copies of Slaughterhouse-Five into its furnace. The books were burnt on the orders of the local school board, which had deemed the novel “profane”. Ironically, Vonnegut’s novel was inspired by his experiences as a prisoner of war in Germany during the Second World War. Before the war the Nazis had organised public burnings of books that they deemed “un-German”. Kurt Vonnegut wrote a letter to the school in response. “You can feel his rage and his hurt,” his daughter told Index, recalling the letter. Putting the Vonnegut name to good use Now, she said, she can’t believe that book banning is back in the USA, and “worse than ever”. She fears for the teenagers who don’t have access to the right resources and how much trouble it’s going to leave them in. For the first time, she feels she can really put her Vonnegut name to good use. Nanette Vonnegut grew up in a creative household, with her mother guarding the door to protect her father’s writing space. “You were scared of that door, because you knew that he was he was trying to write.” He worked hard, she remembered, all the time, and there was a sense that it was serious work. She described to Index how her father would come out from his writing for a snack (usually pumpernickel loaded with butter). The kitchen would be full of the kids and their friends, but he’d barely register them. Often, he would be muttering to himself; sometimes, he’d stop and talk to his youngest daughter, verbally working through an idea. Once, on his way back to his study, he paused and said to her: “You know, the unstructured life is not worth living.” Kurt rarely left the house. His wife, Jane Marie Cox, maintained the family’s social front by doing all the expected things like going to cocktail parties and playing tennis. She was his biggest supporter. Cox was passionate about reading too, and the Vonnegut house was always full of books. At the end of each day, the couple would discuss Vonnegut’s day of writing. “She was like his editor,” Nanette said, describing how when it came to stories, “she was the midwife.” A Vonnegut family trip Niagara Falls circa 1964. Photo: Family handout Memories of Slaughterhouse-Five Her father, she explained, was always writing to tell the truth. Slaughterhouse-Five was a particular challenge, because he struggled to get the information he needed about the fire-bombing of Dresden, which he had experienced. When he did finally finish the book, he left the galleys out for the children to read. When it was published, he became an overnight sensation. It was a writer’s house, and as the children got older, it became a party house too. According to Nanette Vonnegut, “It was a very heady, exciting time.” Her parents often had other creatives over at the Vonnegut home. Once, it was actor and director Peter Fonda, to talk about film rights for Vonnegut’s book Cat’s Cradle. Jack Kerouac, author of On The Road, visited before he was famous. After having a little too much to drink, his bad language ramped up. Nanette and a friend, aged around nine, were told to leave the room and go upstairs. “But we did not go upstairs,” she recalled. “We stayed behind the door. It was sort of thrilling and exciting. He was like a wild man, and he seemed to be a lot of fun. We didn’t want to miss any of it.” Growing up in this household, she internalised a strong faith in the creative process. She has inherited this “creative groove” as an artist. Take, for example, the day she snapped, for no particular reason, a photo of the Senate floor being shown on a television screen. A few days later, on 6 January 2021, came the US Capitol riot. Following her creativity, Vonnegut created a huge six-foot painting (opposite) from the photograph. Although mostly found in her art studio, Vonnegut feels a strong sense of the power of words, and is a writer too. “Words are the most sacred things that we have, and that’s something I grew up with,” she told Index. And above all, evident in her fight against Utah, she has always taken for granted the belief that there are no “dirty words”. READ MORE

News RoomBy News Room4 months agoNo Comments7 Mins Read9 Views
Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest Copy Link LinkedIn Tumblr Email VKontakte Telegram
Kurt Vonnegut and his daughter Nanette in 1997. Photo: Family handout

				
				
				
				
				This article first appeared in the Spring 2026 issue of Index on Censorship, The monster unleashed: How Hungary’s illliberal vision is seducing the Western world published on 2 April 2026.
“My mother warned me early on that my father was going to get in trouble for writing dirty books.”
Nanette Vonnegut, youngest daughter of the late American novelist Kurt Vonnegut, remembers these words vividly. Even though she was around eight years old at the time, she recognised the real fear in her mother’s voice. At the time, she didn’t quite know what to do with the warning. But through a serendipitous encounter, she now has a much better idea.
When she was invited, along with her brother, to represent the Vonnegut Estate at a meeting about book censorship hosted by publisher Penguin Random House, she had what she describes as a conversion experience. Now, she is taking on the State of Utah alongside other plaintiffs, in a case defending the freedom to read, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Utah Foundation.
“I was blown away by the urgency,” she told Index, recalling the passion and bravery of the librarians and lawyers who spoke at the meeting. Each person took their turn to make a speech, “like one sermon after another”. Vonnegut spoke about her own childhood memories, when she was afraid of what might happen to her father.
One speaker in particular, she remembered, described how book bans in the USA are not about words or even sex, but about ideas.
“Not until now, did I ever feel afraid for what’s going on. These books in Utah are being thrown away. They’re just pulled off the shelves,” Vonnegut said. But this, she added, has always been a lurking threat.
No sex please, we’re prudish
At the meeting, she discovered that in Utah, any mention of sex in a book was sufficient reason for it to be pulled from any school library in the state. Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, an anti-war novel first published in 1969, remains hugely controversial; it has already been banned in two school districts in Utah, labelled as pornographic. If the book is successfully challenged in a third district, the ban automatically becomes state-wide, as has already happened with 28 other books. Nanette Vonnegut can’t recall the book being particularly pornographic in nature.
Interviewed on National Public Radio, Terry Hutchinson, a former member of a Utah schoolboard, said: “I am not a big Kurt Vonnegut fan. Not really because of subject matter, but because of style.” He believed that Slaughterhouse-Five should be removed from school libraries. For him, the book crossed the line when a character gets an erection.
When Vonnegut and her attorney Tom Ford were invited to discuss the lawsuit on WHMP Radio, Ford explained that Utah’s book removal law, HB29 (passed in 2022 and amended in 2024), prohibits public school libraries from carrying any book that contains a description of a sex act. In Vonnegut v. Utah, the plaintiffs will argue that sections of HB29 are overbroad and in violation of First Amendment rights.
“It prohibits a remarkably sweeping range of literature from every school library in the state,” Ford told the radio station. Appropriate age categories are irrelevant where this law is concerned – all sex is bad sex.
The law itself, Ford said, springs from the false narrative created by conservative lawmakers in Utah that the state’s school libraries were full of pornographic books. In fact, Ford continued, the real targets of this censorship were ideas, messages and lived experiences.
The earliest memory Vonnegut has of her father being a target of literary censorship is not one of quiet removal from a library shelf, but rather something more dramatic. In 1973, a school in Drake, North Dakota threw copies of Slaughterhouse-Five into its furnace. The books were burnt on the orders of the local school board, which had deemed the novel “profane”. Ironically, Vonnegut’s novel was inspired by his experiences as a prisoner of war in Germany during the Second World War. Before the war the Nazis had organised public burnings of books that they deemed “un-German”. Kurt Vonnegut wrote a letter to the school in response.
“You can feel his rage and his hurt,” his daughter told Index, recalling the letter.
Putting the Vonnegut name to good use
Now, she said, she can’t believe that book banning is back in the USA, and “worse than ever”. She fears for the teenagers who don’t have access to the right resources and how much trouble it’s going to leave them in. For the first time, she feels she can really put her Vonnegut name to good use.
Nanette Vonnegut grew up in a creative household, with her mother guarding the door to protect her father’s writing space. “You were scared of that door, because you knew that he was he was trying to write.” He worked hard, she remembered, all the time, and there was a sense that it was serious work.
She described to Index how her father would come out from his writing for a snack (usually pumpernickel loaded with butter). The kitchen would be full of the kids and their friends, but he’d barely register them. Often, he would be muttering to himself; sometimes, he’d stop and talk to his youngest daughter, verbally working through an idea. Once, on his way back to his study, he paused and said to her: “You know, the unstructured life is not worth living.”
Kurt rarely left the house. His wife, Jane Marie Cox, maintained the family’s social front by doing all the expected things like going to cocktail parties and playing tennis. She was his biggest supporter. Cox was passionate about reading too, and the Vonnegut house was always full of books. At the end of each day, the couple would discuss Vonnegut’s day of writing.
“She was like his editor,” Nanette said, describing how when it came to stories, “she was the midwife.”
A Vonnegut family trip Niagara Falls circa 1964. Photo: Family handout
Memories of Slaughterhouse-Five
Her father, she explained, was always writing to tell the truth. Slaughterhouse-Five was a particular challenge, because he struggled to get the information he needed about the fire-bombing of Dresden, which he had experienced. When he did finally finish the book, he left the galleys out for the children to read. When it was published, he became an overnight sensation.
It was a writer’s house, and as the children got older, it became a party house too. According to Nanette Vonnegut, “It was a very heady, exciting time.”
Her parents often had other creatives over at the Vonnegut home. Once, it was actor and director Peter Fonda, to talk about film rights for Vonnegut’s book Cat’s Cradle. Jack Kerouac, author of On The Road, visited before he was famous. After having a little too much to drink, his bad language ramped up. Nanette and a friend, aged around nine, were told to leave the room and go upstairs.
“But we did not go upstairs,” she recalled. “We stayed behind the door. It was sort of thrilling and exciting. He was like a wild man, and he seemed to be a lot of fun. We didn’t want to miss any of it.”
Growing up in this household, she internalised a strong faith in the creative process. She has inherited this “creative groove” as an artist. Take, for example, the day she snapped, for no particular reason, a photo of the Senate floor being shown on a television screen. A few days later, on 6 January 2021, came the US Capitol riot. Following her creativity, Vonnegut created a huge six-foot painting (opposite) from the photograph.
Although mostly found in her art studio, Vonnegut feels a strong sense of the power of words, and is a writer too.
“Words are the most sacred things that we have, and that’s something I grew up with,” she told Index. And above all, evident in her fight against Utah, she has always taken for granted the belief that there are no “dirty words”.

			
			
					
				
				
				
				READ MORE
Share
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Email Copy Link

Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

Key Takeaways

Playback Speed

Select a Voice

This article first appeared in the Spring 2026 issue of Index on Censorship, The monster unleashed: How Hungary’s illliberal vision is seducing the Western world published on 2 April 2026.

“My mother warned me early on that my father was going to get in trouble for writing dirty books.”

Nanette Vonnegut, youngest daughter of the late American novelist Kurt Vonnegut, remembers these words vividly. Even though she was around eight years old at the time, she recognised the real fear in her mother’s voice. At the time, she didn’t quite know what to do with the warning. But through a serendipitous encounter, she now has a much better idea.

When she was invited, along with her brother, to represent the Vonnegut Estate at a meeting about book censorship hosted by publisher Penguin Random House, she had what she describes as a conversion experience. Now, she is taking on the State of Utah alongside other plaintiffs, in a case defending the freedom to read, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Utah Foundation.

“I was blown away by the urgency,” she told Index, recalling the passion and bravery of the librarians and lawyers who spoke at the meeting. Each person took their turn to make a speech, “like one sermon after another”. Vonnegut spoke about her own childhood memories, when she was afraid of what might happen to her father.

One speaker in particular, she remembered, described how book bans in the USA are not about words or even sex, but about ideas.

“Not until now, did I ever feel afraid for what’s going on. These books in Utah are being thrown away. They’re just pulled off the shelves,” Vonnegut said. But this, she added, has always been a lurking threat.

No sex please, we’re prudish

At the meeting, she discovered that in Utah, any mention of sex in a book was sufficient reason for it to be pulled from any school library in the state. Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, an anti-war novel first published in 1969, remains hugely controversial; it has already been banned in two school districts in Utah, labelled as pornographic. If the book is successfully challenged in a third district, the ban automatically becomes state-wide, as has already happened with 28 other books. Nanette Vonnegut can’t recall the book being particularly pornographic in nature.

Interviewed on National Public Radio, Terry Hutchinson, a former member of a Utah schoolboard, said: “I am not a big Kurt Vonnegut fan. Not really because of subject matter, but because of style.” He believed that Slaughterhouse-Five should be removed from school libraries. For him, the book crossed the line when a character gets an erection.

When Vonnegut and her attorney Tom Ford were invited to discuss the lawsuit on WHMP Radio, Ford explained that Utah’s book removal law, HB29 (passed in 2022 and amended in 2024), prohibits public school libraries from carrying any book that contains a description of a sex act. In Vonnegut v. Utah, the plaintiffs will argue that sections of HB29 are overbroad and in violation of First Amendment rights.

“It prohibits a remarkably sweeping range of literature from every school library in the state,” Ford told the radio station. Appropriate age categories are irrelevant where this law is concerned – all sex is bad sex.

The law itself, Ford said, springs from the false narrative created by conservative lawmakers in Utah that the state’s school libraries were full of pornographic books. In fact, Ford continued, the real targets of this censorship were ideas, messages and lived experiences.

The earliest memory Vonnegut has of her father being a target of literary censorship is not one of quiet removal from a library shelf, but rather something more dramatic. In 1973, a school in Drake, North Dakota threw copies of Slaughterhouse-Five into its furnace. The books were burnt on the orders of the local school board, which had deemed the novel “profane”. Ironically, Vonnegut’s novel was inspired by his experiences as a prisoner of war in Germany during the Second World War. Before the war the Nazis had organised public burnings of books that they deemed “un-German”. Kurt Vonnegut wrote a letter to the school in response.

“You can feel his rage and his hurt,” his daughter told Index, recalling the letter.

Putting the Vonnegut name to good use

Now, she said, she can’t believe that book banning is back in the USA, and “worse than ever”. She fears for the teenagers who don’t have access to the right resources and how much trouble it’s going to leave them in. For the first time, she feels she can really put her Vonnegut name to good use.

Nanette Vonnegut grew up in a creative household, with her mother guarding the door to protect her father’s writing space. “You were scared of that door, because you knew that he was he was trying to write.” He worked hard, she remembered, all the time, and there was a sense that it was serious work.

She described to Index how her father would come out from his writing for a snack (usually pumpernickel loaded with butter). The kitchen would be full of the kids and their friends, but he’d barely register them. Often, he would be muttering to himself; sometimes, he’d stop and talk to his youngest daughter, verbally working through an idea. Once, on his way back to his study, he paused and said to her: “You know, the unstructured life is not worth living.”

Kurt rarely left the house. His wife, Jane Marie Cox, maintained the family’s social front by doing all the expected things like going to cocktail parties and playing tennis. She was his biggest supporter. Cox was passionate about reading too, and the Vonnegut house was always full of books. At the end of each day, the couple would discuss Vonnegut’s day of writing.

“She was like his editor,” Nanette said, describing how when it came to stories, “she was the midwife.”

A Vonnegut family trip Niagara Falls circa 1964. Photo: Family handout

Memories of Slaughterhouse-Five

Her father, she explained, was always writing to tell the truth. Slaughterhouse-Five was a particular challenge, because he struggled to get the information he needed about the fire-bombing of Dresden, which he had experienced. When he did finally finish the book, he left the galleys out for the children to read. When it was published, he became an overnight sensation.

It was a writer’s house, and as the children got older, it became a party house too. According to Nanette Vonnegut, “It was a very heady, exciting time.”

Her parents often had other creatives over at the Vonnegut home. Once, it was actor and director Peter Fonda, to talk about film rights for Vonnegut’s book Cat’s Cradle. Jack Kerouac, author of On The Road, visited before he was famous. After having a little too much to drink, his bad language ramped up. Nanette and a friend, aged around nine, were told to leave the room and go upstairs.

“But we did not go upstairs,” she recalled. “We stayed behind the door. It was sort of thrilling and exciting. He was like a wild man, and he seemed to be a lot of fun. We didn’t want to miss any of it.”

Growing up in this household, she internalised a strong faith in the creative process. She has inherited this “creative groove” as an artist. Take, for example, the day she snapped, for no particular reason, a photo of the Senate floor being shown on a television screen. A few days later, on 6 January 2021, came the US Capitol riot. Following her creativity, Vonnegut created a huge six-foot painting (opposite) from the photograph.

Although mostly found in her art studio, Vonnegut feels a strong sense of the power of words, and is a writer too.

“Words are the most sacred things that we have, and that’s something I grew up with,” she told Index. And above all, evident in her fight against Utah, she has always taken for granted the belief that there are no “dirty words”.

Read the full article here

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using AI-powered analysis and real-time sources.

Get Your Fact Check Report

Enter your email to receive detailed fact-checking analysis

5 free reports remaining

Continue with Full Access

You've used your 5 free reports. Sign up for unlimited access!

Already have an account? Sign in here

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email Telegram Copy Link
News Room
  • Website
  • Facebook
  • X (Twitter)
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn

The FSNN News Room is the voice of our in-house journalists, editors, and researchers. We deliver timely, unbiased reporting at the crossroads of finance, cryptocurrency, and global politics, providing clear, fact-driven analysis free from agendas.

Related Articles

Global Free Speech

Iran sentences two journalists as media crackdown widens

7 hours ago
Global Free Speech

Northern Ireland: 25 years after journalist Martin O’Hagan was murdered, CPJ and Amnesty call for new investigation

10 hours ago
Global Free Speech

Ahead of trial, CPJ, partners demand release of detained photojournalist Hamdi al-Zaeem

2 days ago
Global Free Speech

Journalist Henry Constantín detained in Cuba on ‘disobedience’ charge

3 days ago
Global Free Speech

The BBC clearly sees the value of television series That Mitchell and Webb Look. Marking the 20th anniversary of its original screening, the Beeb has re-released the series on iPlayer. But – and there is very often a “but” with these things – they’ve removed around 11 sketches from the BAFTA award-winning show. The official word is that these sketches don’t “work today”, which is polite speak for “they may cause offence”. The episodes singled out include scenes featuring a battle reenactment with characters in blackface, a contestant on a show wearing a burka and a lost tribe” in a garden centre. These sketches set out to challenge stereotypes, not to reinforce them; but 20 years on, this distinction seems to have been lost along the way. I’m a bit uncomfortable about this. I find it infantilising, to say the least. Can’t we trust audiences to make up their own minds, to switch off if they find the sketches in question unpalatable? Does the BBC think that we are just passive consumers, unable to disaggregate the mocking of racism from racism itself? These sketches set out to challenge stereotypes, not to reinforce them This act of censorship is distorting – of the shows, whose narratives and rhythms were built to include these sketches, and more broadly too. Conversations we were having 20 years ago have been erased, as if to suggest that they never happened. But they did! And with this erasure, the opportunity for thoughtful engagement and learning from our past is gone. “Let’s just pretend we were all lovely 20 years ago. It’s better that way” seems to be the message. Speaking as a minority myself, I find that knowing the nasty stuff that people said before – and indeed, still say today – is much more useful than pretending it never happened. This approach, I think, is also inconsistent. What it reveals is a cherry-picking (intended or not) of the groups that we can mock, and those that we can’t. Let’s face it, gender stereotypes are rarely deemed to have aged beyond the pale – if that were the case, we would have to wave goodbye to half the television made before the mid-2010s. Suppression like this sends a bad message to artists, namely that what they’re creating today may hold less value tomorrow. Or, even worse, that future audiences may deem them bigots – that Sword of Damocles hovering over the heads of any creative paying attention to the discourse of the moment. Suppression like this sends a bad message to artists The BBC’s decision reaffirms a broader trend. In 2020, Little Britain was removed from the iPlayer platform for similar reasons. It has since been reinstated – minus some sketches. Meanwhile, the UK’s arts space more broadly is seeing a retreat to the land of “safe”, as Index recently revealed in a year-long investigation into self-censorship in UK theatre. The BBC, it must be said, does remarkable stuff. The ongoing podcast investigation into the disappearance of US journalist Austin Tice is just one example. But this does not mean, however, that they don’t sometimes get it wrong. Chopping at That Mitchell and Webb Look is one example. Sure, the removal of the material isn’t the life-or-death story that Index often works on. Sure, Mitchell and Webb aren’t the faces of persecuted artists – they have huge platforms and agreed to the changes themselves. Still, one can’t help but think that the decision came from a place of conservatism, perhaps even fear. This is weak and dispiriting, indeed the very opposite of what enables creativity in the arts. We shouldn’t be encouraging this cultural timidity. Rather, we should harness culture and creativity as the starting points of a conversation about our here and now. That’s what the arts are for, after all. READ MORE

3 days ago
Global Free Speech

CPJ urges US senators to seek accountability for Israel’s killing of journalist Shireen Abu Akleh

3 days ago
Add A Comment

Comments are closed.

Editors Picks

Bitcoin traders chase shorts as rising Treasury yields weigh over gold

27 minutes ago

Aiden Pleterski Faces Trial Over Alleged $30M Crypto Fraud

31 minutes ago

A Clever RSA Attack Fooled a Hardware Vault—Here’s What It Means for Crypto

32 minutes ago

EFF to San Francisco Police: Drones are Powerful Surveillance Tools That Require a Robust Policy

54 minutes ago
Latest Posts

YouTube And Meta Reverse Course On Musk Documentary Ads. X, Unsurprisingly, Does Not.

58 minutes ago

The 5th Circuit Rejects Qualified Immunity for Cops Who Searched a Driver After a Bogus Traffic Stop

1 hour ago

Eyes on key U.S. employment data as crypto bulls take a breather: Crypto Week Ahead

1 hour ago

Subscribe to News

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

At FSNN – Free Speech News Network, we deliver unfiltered reporting and in-depth analysis on the stories that matter most. From breaking headlines to global perspectives, our mission is to keep you informed, empowered, and connected.

FSNN.net is owned and operated by GlobalBoost Media
, an independent media organization dedicated to advancing transparency, free expression, and factual journalism across the digital landscape.

Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
Latest News

As Suncor Approaches, Justice Alito Recuses

4 minutes ago

Bitcoin traders chase shorts as rising Treasury yields weigh over gold

27 minutes ago

Aiden Pleterski Faces Trial Over Alleged $30M Crypto Fraud

31 minutes ago

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

© 2026 GlobalBoost Media. All Rights Reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Our Authors
  • Contact

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

🍪

Cookies

We and our selected partners wish to use cookies to collect information about you for functional purposes and statistical marketing. You may not give us your consent for certain purposes by selecting an option and you can withdraw your consent at any time via the cookie icon.

Cookie Preferences

Manage Cookies

Cookies are small text that can be used by websites to make the user experience more efficient. The law states that we may store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies, we need your permission. This site uses various types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.

Your permission applies to the following domains:

  • https://fsnn.net
Necessary
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Statistic
Statistic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Preferences
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
Marketing
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.