the cultural trends that encourage or advocatenthe overthrowing of what manynliberal propagandists call the “incestntaboo.” His is a passionate and devastatingndiatribe against incest as a moralnand behavioral transgression, whatevernits explanation. Moreover, short ofnusing the word “sin” (which wouldnprobably make the editors of VV thrownup and its printers faint), Mr. Schjeldahlnelaborates on the notion of evil. Herenis what he has to say:nEvil is the topic for today. Not, fornthe moment, the evil of social andneconomic injustice, not political evilsnthat, in their abstractness, galvanizenand reassure the spirit of reform. No.nThe topic is evil with a human face,nsingular and intimate, irreversible eviln— what one person does to anothernand what happens next. No wondernhorror movies are popular. They conformnto our current social experiencenso closely pure corn-fed Americannliberal insensibility—looking straightnat evil and seeing an unhealthy effectnof puritanical education … I sharenand try to live Herman’s social idealn— a democratic family in which authoritynand child-care are evenlynshared—but I’m skeptical of her ideologicalnoptimism, that old-time liberalnoptimism that sees evil as a conditionednresponse.nIt’s superb that in a fanatically radical-chicnjournal a writer with an obviousnliberal allegiance is able to mentionnevil as something autonomous andnpsychomoral, as if he were quoting fromnour own pages. Yet Mr. Schjeldahl isnunable to make the necessary cognitivenand logical connection between what hencalls evil and the liberal hegemony innAmerican culture. The new wave ofnhorror movies does not mirror our experience,nit creates it. There is a monsternout there, fed by the faulty liberalnarchtenet that every ethical norm hasnbeen, until recently, a token of repressionnand now should, or must, be abolishednin the name of human inquiry and selfrealizationnunfettered by reason, knowledgenor empirical evidence. Having over­nthrown all other “repressive” conventionsnof human sexuality, the liberalnculture is now after incest as “the lastntaboo.” Not stopping before any abominationnis the liberal culture’s honornand idealism. Not to fight it might meannboredom for the theoreticians of pedophilia.nNot long ago a feminist book wasnpublished entitled From Reverence tonRape: The Treatment of Women in thenMovies, but neither the author nor thencritics ever made the cognitive linkagenwhich obviously indicates that the acceptancenof rape as an inseparable coefficientnof our culture may be the resultnof the liberal scholasticism in viewingnthe First Amendment. Consequently,nbooks are written and movies are madenwhich portray incest as the forbiddennultimate in humanness. The public,nparticularly youthful consumers of thenradical-cultural tawdriness, is vulnerable.nThe “respectable” publishingnhouses sniff money, feature the ShownTkfe.’-type stuff to libraries and a certainnMs. Virginia Andrews makes millionsnfor Gulf & Western, Inc.’s Pocket Bookndivision by writing books which turnnthe incest theme into schmaltz andnkitsch. She sells them to teen-agersnwho devour her tear-jerkers about copulatingnsiblings and, in due course, embarknon existentially damaging imitations.nAn aura is created. Incestuousntrendiness does not “come out of thencloset.” It is cynically promoted and itninfests the society.nXhis is how we see evil at work.nNothing metaphysical, just the mechanismnof the liberal culture cranked upnon Madison Avenue. DnTHE AMERICAN PROSCENIUMnPerversionnWith a sort of bemused smile we readnin the newspapers and watched on TVnWest German crowds protesting SecretarynHaig’s presence and affirmationnof the U.S. resolve to defend Europenagainst communism. During thesengatherings the American flag was usednto fashion a pig as a symbol of Americannrepulsiveness, and a mob inebriatednwith idiotic fanaticism once againnhurled at us insults, among which killingnbabies in Vietnam was perhaps thenmildest. All this happened just a fewndecades after we rescued Europe fromnnazi barbarity and Western Europenfrom Stalin’s lethal schemes by generouslynhelping it to recover from itsnown disasters, by making it robust onnour — literally speaking — nourishmentnand wealthy behind the shield of ournarms.nWe have good reasons to surmise thatnWest Germany is not the only breedingnground of badly vitiated minds and fertilensoil for simplistic Soviet propaganda;nnnthe same mood prevails in other partsnof Europe. Scorn, malice and reprehensionnis what Europe returns for all wenhave done for her. Europeans envy usnour zest for life, our blue jeans and ournpopular music: this jealousy forms ansort of inferiority complex in the collectivenEuropean consciousness andnleads to a kinky hatred. The Russiansnthreaten to exterminate the Poles fornthe latters’ mere mention that they donnot feel free, and West Europeans seemnto find such a response quite legitimate.nHowever, to West Europeans, freedomnis nothing less than the license to dragnus through mud and abomination, whilenall we are permitted to say is that thenEuropean abusiveness is actually a maturendisagreement, or old and wise diplomacy.nA not-too-subtle conservativencolumnist in Washington, D.C. callednthe German detractors of Haig and OldnGlory “perverts,” and though the expressionnseems to us a bit pithy, wencannot deny that there are times whennsuch epithets have a certain validity,neven accuracy. Signs of perversionni53nXoveinber/December 1981n