 |
| Shai Woodley and Ansel Elgort from Divergent and Fault In Our Stars |
The genealogy of incest is interesting to think about. There was a time of universal copulation among the sexes in groups before any monogamy. The first men who wanted a woman for themselves only, had to buy them from the group, and this was frowned on. Mothers had children by sons, brothers, fathers, cousins, uncles, nephews, and knew nothing about kinship. Certainly those having healthy genes and inbred, survived and flourished, and those having genetic diseases who interbred were ill, died, tended not to have children and pass their defects on.
An awareness of filiation evolved to inhibit certain men and women from copulation? Probably.
BUT the original prohibition of incest was between brother and sister. Sisters could be traded, sold, given as objects for the purpose of affiliation, with other groups.
Underlining the universal fact that marriage is not an alliance between a man and a woman, but an"alliance between two families," "a transaction between men concerning women," Georges Devereux drew the correct conclusion of a basic homosexual motivation of a group character. Through women, men establish their own connections; through the man-woman disjunction, which is always the outcome of filiation, alliance places in connection men from different filiations. .....Male homosexuality is therefore the representation of alliance that represses the ambiguous signs of intense bisexual filiation. .....and men are "never more homosexual than when they arrange marriages." (Deleuze and Guattari Anti-Oedipus :Capitalism and Schizophrenia p. 165)
This is difficult but stay with me:
"Incest is only the retroactive effect of the repressing representation on the repressed representative;
the representation disfigures or displaces this representative against which it is directed;
it projects onto the representative, categories, rendered discernible,
that it has itself established.
In other words incest is now a category, a label, an observed object (Burroughs) that did not exist until it occurred to men to arrange their sisters's marriages with men they had homosexual impulses towards on a displaced filial bisexual phantasy. Now bolstered by the rationalization of alliance and alliance's perks.
The present modern "incest between brother and sister," has attracted a feeling of horror, weirdness, illegality, punishment, criminality, and whatever else one wants to attach to it. All it ever was, was projecting backwards onto a practice that allowed men to gratify their homosexual feelings with other men from different filiations.
Reading through Foucault the marriage alliances were cemented in time through the glueing together of property.When capitalism intersected, the marriage alliance was strengthened. And the original sexual impulses were buried in the folds of the established ritual. Women had to be pure, so the DNA of their child would inherit the property of their partner's DNA (different filiation). So incest took on a greater taboo between brother and sister.
Speculating here on the early exchange of sisters, what if a brother did not want a sister to leave? What if he knew he were sexually attracted to his sister and did not want to share her with another man especially of a different filiation. What if the alliance and her monetary value were of no concern to him? Was that a bad thing? Maybe it was a better outcome for her too than to be "traded" to a strange man from another group?
Reading through Cleopatra, who was one of the most intelligent women of her time, speaking all the dialects of the inhabitants of Egypt up and down the Nile, overseeing the export of cotton, planning excellent strategy with Caesar to re-integrate Alexander's kingdom, having a child with him that by all reports was an exceptional adolescent before he was murdered by Augustus (too many Caesars).
Cleopatra was the daughter of a father and mother who were brother and sister. Her mother and father were brother and sister of parents who were also brother and sister, (and back for awhile) so proof of insanity, incompetence, inferior intelligence do not hold up unless those attributes are flagrant, and it certainly does not indicate a proof of any horror, criminality, weirdness, etc. I mean does anyone get the woolies because Cleopatra was the child of a sister and brother, who were themselves children of a sister and brother? Who even knew this before a minute ago?
All this is in our minds, carefully programmed to think of sex with one's brother as a terrible thing. Well in some cases it probably is. In many cases it would not be consensual. If it happens an abnormal guilt accompanies it. It is the abnormal guilt about it that causes the damage, not the act itself. What is the real danger? Worse even than genetic diseases being doubled and tripled? Other than pregnancy, which is not such a big deal now.
It is that there is no exchange and/or consolidation of property
My reading BTW
It flaunts a fuck you in the face of capitalism. So at least if you "succumbed" you must torture yourself all your life about it. Hopefully you will ruin your life over it so as to receive the worse punishment possible on God's green earth that is turning not green.
 |
| All this is from Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus:Capitalism and Schizophrenia. |
_________________________________________________________________________________
I can't stand it another minute. So many tweets on the fact that these two play brother and sister in Divergent and Lovers in The Fault In Our Stars and HOW STRANGE AND WEIRD that is.
Ansel almost didn't get the role because of that. The producers were worried that the fans would be thinking
INCEST! OMG INCEST!
Obviously the ones who keep tweeting and tweeting about this can't tell the difference at some level between reality and a movie. Now if you count the tweets - and they go on day after day - that is a scary thing among girls who are old enough to be online tweeting and writing tweets. What are they thinking, these primitive young women? They are now dragging "incest" a made up idea in the first place, into another level of simulation by imagining two actors in two different movies, being brother and sister and then lovers, and that being weird.
This thinking is the beginning of madness.
THIS KIND OF THINKING IS AT THE ROOT OF VERONICA ROTH'S TRILOGY
- DAMAGED GENES INSTEAD OF INCEST -
BOTH ARE MADE UP
Are you beginning to understand the Muslim world a little better?
_________________________________________________________________
And I must add something here about ants. I used to be fascinated with this topic. Some ants in the nest are kept - fed differently like bees? - as royal progeny. In the spring they will be released to fly, mate, and form new colonies. Some related ant colonies are so large they encompass another state or two.
But the point I am getting to is that some of these ants commit incest in the nest. These females are kept from flying on the "maiden" journey flyaway. They are forcibly held in the nest to become queens to make more ants. Ant factories I might say.
