> In message <Pine.GSO.4.63.0703201921090.22191_at_VtSj9e7G2G4-0RqT5JKJAwnLA9iUuLN3qwRpEQVRhNbsp1jqBia-JXTRjRB7TuRxpeoO7CNOEraZAA4ivlSjQJdx72hfCCjUvSiwfvm8fKHMsH6ONvzXttQ7nOPxAA.yahoo.invalid> Michael Hitchens writes:
>>
>> By the way, that scenario implies that incest is not something you should
>> just let go by letting them share a hearth. My impression was not that
>> the fate of the misquided love birds in that scenario was specific to
>> them, but an example of what happens to all those who practie incest. So
>> I'm not sure turning a blind eye would be all that smart.
>>
>> The skullpointers did allow intra-clan marriage - but see where it got
>> them (sort of proves one of your points).
>
> As I understand it the impression is deliberate because that is the
> way the Heortlings think. I don't believe there is anything in the
> scenario which objectively links incest to chaos.
True, but I kind of like the idea. Maybe not 100% all the time, but as a fair chance at least.
Michael
Powered by hypermail