VoyForums Notice -- Quick Contributions:
Donate $10 to the Red Cross: Text the word REDCROSS to 90999
Donate $10 to the Salvation Army: Text the word STORM to 80888
* The charge will appear on your cellphone bill.
Date Posted:Tuesday, January 31, 05:51:03pm Author: Nell Subject: Phoey In reply to:
JayBee
's message, "Ah! (r)" on Tuesday, January 31, 11:39:10am
I wrote out a whole giant response to this, and then must have failed to hit approve before I shut myself out of my browser earlier.
Very short version - I was, I realize now, slipping from 'infidelty/adultery' as one sort of thing to infidelty on a broader scale - so that sexual fidely, or lack thereof, becomes a metaphor for that character's more general approach to issues of faithfullness and their ability to make or keep promises/oaths and the way they treat others who are vulnerable to them in one way or another.
I also am enough influenced by the 'personal is political' approach of 1970s feminism to think that personal choices, with regard to sexuality and, in particular, how you treat your sexual partners *do* reveal some essential characteristics of the person/character under discussion.
Thus the glimpses, and they are mostly glimpses, that we get of how the main six made some of these decisions do seem, to me, to be glimpses into something that is most essentially themselves, as it were.
So that sexual infidelty becomes a metaphor or a symbol of other kinds of infidelities that shape that character's personality (dare I say, their character?)?
So, for example, that sexual fidelty doesn't appear to be something Paul values very much does seem to reflect the relatively low value he personally places on truth telling, or loyalty to other individuals. This is part of who he is, we've chatted about Paul before and his commitment to ideals that are at some great remove from actual humans who suffer and die for those things - and the way he treats his sexual partners, as ultimately disposable - I think - reinforces/illustrates/represents the essential "Paulness" of his decision making.
Anyway - this is more what I was trying to get at - I think. ;-)
