You don’t have the opportunity to see a movie like “Deep Throat” at the Holmes Student Center’s Carl Sandburg Auditorium too often. But 23 years ago, watching porn on campus was not out of the ordinary.

The Holmes Center Board’s (now Campus Activities Board) Erotic Film Festival started in 1973 and ran through 1985.

-The festival’s featured guest speakers, such as Harry Reems, star of the classic porn flick “Deep Throat,” and Playboy writer Arthur Knight.

For a measly 75 cents, an 18-year-old student could see three pornographic movies of different varieties.

The first movie was referred to as a “legitimate movie,” in which the plot of the movie was not centered solely around sex.

The second type of film was labeled “softcore,” in which full frontal nudity could be shown without penetration.

The third type, “hardcore,” was the graphic, anything-goes type of pornographic material that today features stars such as Jenna Jameson.

Anti-porn groups and poor attendance caused the HCB to stop showing the films. But in their prime, these festivals were all the rage.

Here’s what one student said about the festival in a 1976 Northern Star article:

“You can really smell the beer and the pot. The rowdies are all part of it.”

Despite the good times, the festival ended in 1985 after an onslaught of controversy.

“Public pressure led to the demise of the festival. People read articles and sent letters to the president of the university,” said Glen Gildemeister, director of NIU’s Regional History Center.

In 1997 CAB showed a film called “Antique Smut.” The event sold well, but complaints were filed because of the age of the actors in the film.

“We caught a lot of heat for it,” said current CAB president Jennifer Suerth. “Since then, we have stopped showing those movies.”

Despite the controversy, there is no legislation preventing an organization from showing X-rated material.

“I am unaware of there being a policy that prohibits movies from being shown based on content,” said NIU Ombudsman Tim Griffin.

When asked if CAB would ever bring back the Erotic Film Festival, Suerth said, “We wouldn’t bring it back. I don’t see the need for it.”

The fact that NIU used to hold erotic film festivals was news to many people, including communication professor Laura Vazquez, who teaches advanced media production.

“It doesn’t surprise me,” Vazquez said. “When you think about the political climate on our campus in the ’70s, it was very radical.”

Vazquez is editing a documentary about riots at NIU in the 1970s. Through the film, the culture of the past era is explored.

“Sexuality was a very common theme,” she said. “I’m not surprised to find out that on this campus, and others across the country, they were watching pornographic material. It shows people were much more open to it.”

Fellow communication professor Jeffrey Chown received his undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan during the 1970s. Chown said he remembers several occasions when pornographic films were screened in Ann Arbor.

“I remember going to a showing of ‘Behind the Green Door,’ and it was basically packed,” he said. “There was an excitement about seeing something different. In the middle of the movie, streakers ran across. Everybody hooted and hollered.”

Back then, students obviously took well to the films across the country. Today, Chown teaches COMS 356, Critical Interpretation of Film. In the course, he’s shown several erotic films, such as “She’s Gotta Have It,” “Y Tu Mama Tambien” and “Last Tango in Paris.” Most would be surprised to hear that the biggest complaints Chown receives about showing erotic films come from the students.

“A couple of years ago, I showed ‘Last Tango in Paris’ and got a lot of complaints from students that I was showing pornography,” Chown said.

-The students were not vague about their dislike of the material. After “Last Tango in Paris,” Chown received an evaluation from one student that said, “If I want to see pornography, I’ll go to Dollar Video and get some. This should not be shown in a college classroom.”

Still, Chown remained vigilant that he was showing these films for artistic purposes.

“This is a film that was nominated for an Academy Award,” he said. “It was considered high art.”

Communication is not the only department dealing with adult content in its classes. The school of art often deals with works pertaining to sexuality.

“We have had student media work that has dealt with adult issues, such as sexuality,” said assistant art professor Kurt Schultz. “In almost every case, it has been done in a mature manner, with a clear understanding of the artist’s intent.”

Like the communication department, students in the art department choose how to react to questionable content.

“The students themselves usually define what is deemed acceptable in the work they produce, as they must present and defend their projects in front of their peers,” Shultz said.

Through years of showing films that many of his students claimed had questionable content, Chown said he never has received a complaint from university officials.

“I’ve never had an administrator reprimand me about it,” Chown said. “I think students tend to be more conservative than administrators. A lot of the administrators went through the same period I did.”

Complaints from the students about erotic material in the classroom led to very interesting questions. If students in the 1970s saw sexuality in films as a release and a sign of freedom, why are students today so hesitant when it comes to analyzing these works in the classroom?

“I think the conservatism of the ’80s prevailed,” Vazquez said. “In the late ’70s, early ’80s, there was a great recoil. We had Reaganism, and we put the lid back on.”

Today, sexuality is flaunted in public like never before. Perhaps students expect the classroom to be a shelter from such content. Through the music videos of performers like Britney Spears, or the Victoria’s Secret fashion show, the public is bombarded by sexual material, even at extremely young ages.

“What’s so interesting about it now is that the people who are the most open about nudity are the children,” Vazquez said. “Britney Spears is my case in point.

“I think a lot of young people aren’t prepared for the ramifications of sexual responsibility. Along with having a sexual experience with someone comes a responsibility,” she said. “It’s about trust, it’s about sincerity. I’m not sure a lot of young people understand the full repercussions of that kind of experience.”

With the introduction of the home video in the 1980s, pornography in general took a turn from being artistic to straight-up, hardcore action. Pornographic features in the 1970s, such as the “Emmanuelle” series, played more like movies, and less like gratuitous hardcore action.

“Today, with video, it’s just a way to get two people in a bedroom having graphic sex,” Chown said. “There’s no ambition today to explore the outer boundaries of what’s acceptable.”

In the 1970s, sexual freedom led the young to discuss their behaviors and deal with the emotional repercussions of sexuality.

“These things come in cycles. I think we’re in a period that’s getting closer to the 1950s,” Chown said. “In some ways, I think students are maybe more promiscuous today than they were in the 1950s, but I think the anxiety about sex at some levels is similar.”

A lot of the anxiety can be attributed to the increase in cases of AIDS and other STDs.

“The ‘70s is all pre-AIDS. AIDS introduced fear and anxiety into sexuality that reduced the freedom and experimentation,” Chown said. “I think that reflected in the attitude about what we can watch on a movie screen.”

Whether students today will recede back to the conservatism of the ’50s is up to them. Even Chown’s guess is as good as ours.

“What would I know? I’m too old for that anyway.”