Anne-Louise Sarks and Benedict Hardie in By Their Own Hands. Picture: Pia Johnson
THEATRE
By Their Own Hands
By Benedict Hardie and Anne-Louise Sarks.
The Hayloft Project, Melbourne Theatre Company Southbank Theatre, The Lawler, June 14.
THE Hayloft Project's take on the Oedipus story obsesses over the nuts and bolts of the incestuous relationship with the same kind of lurid curiosity that the Learning Channel showed to "extreme cougar wives" and their three, four and five-decade-younger lovers.Hmm. If anyone reading this blog sees it, please report back.
Like last year'sOn the Misconception of Oedipus this play fingers incest as if it were a bruise, as if there were things to be gleaned from re-experiencing the pain. Implicitly, mother on son incest is "nicer", apparently, than father on daughter.
Tickets $25. Bookings: mtc.com.au or (03) 8688 0800. Ends June 23.I realize this is based on a classic work, but I'd like to see more neutral or positive portrayals of relationships that exist today and always have.
![Non-Monogamy Diagram [I:FV]](http://www.obsidianfields.com/lj/nonmonogamy2.5.1.gif){kind=link}
Once again, apologies to Anonymous for accidentally rejecting a comment I meant to approve. I really need to zoom in when using a tablet. Here is the thoughtful comment...
ReplyDeleteI've heard that line used a couple times. I once saw somebody asked the question about what they would do in a situation where they had slept with somebody with no resulting children, and later found out she was a long lost sister or cousin. They're answer was that they would leap into a speeding car. I've seen similar answers as well. What I gleam from it is some sick feeling of duty or a need to redeem themselves. Looking at what most people believe when it comes to incest, there are mainly two most believable reasons they use beside the eww factor. 1. It breeds mutant babies (which is obviously a gross exaggeration, and disproven) which is not true especially for this situation where no child resulted and 2. It's abusive which is also not inherently true and especially in the situation described where no abuse occurred. If incest is wrong because those things occur (which, as said before, is disproven), then a situation where those thing definitely don't occur, at least isn't wrong. Sort of like the old saying no harm no foul. And yet these people take this very seriously and claim they would take their lives if they found out they were involved in incest even if no child resulted and there was no abuse, meaning that for that situation, incest is wrong because...incest. It's circular logic, and their reactions prove it. But more than that, I find that because they feel there isn't an excuse that they have to die to redeem themselves very disturbing. That people don't pipe in and tell them that even if incest was wrong (it's not), everybody makes mistakes and yet people just agree as if such a mistake made you less than human, and your duty truly was to die.