Introduction
Since the first crude beginnings of mankind's brief tenure on earth, the topic of incestuous relationships has been a theme of major concern and soul-searching importance. Few, if any of us, have not at one time or another analyzed the efficacy, indeed, the very necessity for the existence of the myriad taboos that exist against such relationships, on the level of pure logic. To be sure, there are claims by geneticists that such relationships are more-likely than others to produce defective offspring. But, why then, is the phenomenon of prejudice against this type of relationship so widespread, even amongst peoples who have not the slightest inkling into the fascinating world of biochemistry? In fact, with the invention of "The Pill," the genetic argument even fails to bear its weight in the modern, technological societies from which it sprang.
Purely and simply, the basic argument against sex within the unit of the nuclear family is a sociological one, even more so than a biological one. The nature of man within his culture is a gregarious one, to be sure to seek out others of his own kind for purposes of marriage and sexual intercourse. But the nature of man is also an outward nature, an expansionist nature. Close, but not too close, is the rule here. And,, the structure of most societies is based on that very premise. Thus, when one violates the incest taboo, one is assaulting the basic assumptions upon which the structure of his society is founded. This was the theme of the ancient Greek story, "Oedipus Rex," and it remains the center of concern today.
Nonetheless, the fact of "wrongness," whether or not it is defined in terms of cultural or scientific parameters, does not alter the desire that certain members of the same family seem to hold for one another. If it is unique to our species to view one another in specific social roles, it is by no means unique of our species to produce members who defy such "codes of conduct" in their search for fulfillment in life. It is not infrequently in nature that members of other species indulge in sexual relationships with members of what we would define as their "families." It is therefore not "unnatural" for such relationships to occur ... Even in our own modern society. Genetically undesirable?
Perhaps. Culturally santionable? Certainly. But not unnatural.
In the following story, author John Lewis has probed the subtleties of a relationship of just this sort. A young mother, wronged by her society's values, Marion Peters turns inward in self-defense. She decides, rightly or wrongly, that her own sense of values are equal to or at least no less critical than those of the culture into which she was born. Alone because of the unfortunate divorce of her husband, who left her for another woman, she is expected to cope with a basically good, but unruly, boy who is almost, but not quite, a man. The conditions under which she must face this considerable challenge are further complicated by a voice from her past. A haunting, chilling voice that first threatens, then finally succeeds in breaking down her las "moral" link with her culture.
It is up to the reader to decide for himself whether or not the young mother's actions are justifiable under the circumstances. In any case, the author has presented his story in such a fashion that it appears not in the least unnatural.
-THE PUBLISHERS