On 2004/04/20, at 1:23, Scribe1865@xxxxxxx wrote: > fear of, and violent defense against > what is strange or unusual This is precisely the sort of assumption that I have been questioning all along. The strange and unusual invite a wide range of responses, from touristic enjoyment, to giggles, to voyeuristic obsession (plus, of course, scholarly interest--the anthropologist's usual excuse), as well as fear and violence. That is why, for example, people in advertising have endless debates over whether this or that new twist in the creative has (1) not gone far enough, remaining dull and boring, (2) has gone too far, thus likely to offend the client, customer, critic or government censor who sees the ad, or (3) strikes (ideally at least) just the right balance to attract and hold the attention of the desired target audience. My point is a general one, having to do with the character of historical (or sociological or anthropological) explanation: Fear and violent defense occur in specific social, cultural, historic circumstances that any decent theory must provide an account for. That human beings are capable of infantile rage or calculated cruelty is too general a potential to account for why specific acts of barbarity occur in specific times and places. Cheers, John L. McCreery The Word Works, Ltd. 55-13-202 Miyagaya, Nishi-ku Yokohama, Japan 220-0006 Tel 81-45-314-9324 Email mccreery@xxxxxxx "Making Symbols is Our Business" ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html