I agree, we just can't tell from the article what the father's response would be to his child turning "evil." But keep in mind that evil is just a departure from societal norms. What has been evil in one culture isn't evil in another -- nobody, I think, thought at the time that the rape of the Sabine women was evil, it was just the way the world worked. And there was a time when husbands were legally incapable of raping their wives. Or masters from murdering their slaves. Nor is it just a historical matter -- the use of "comfort women" during WWII was not evil in the eyes of the Japanese, and as recently as a few years ago rape was a political tool in Bosnia (was it Bosnia? or Kosovo? I tend to mingle those areas in my failing mind).
So whether, and under what circumstances, rape-murder is evil or not is a societal question. And whether being converted to a duck is a good or bad thing is also a societal questions -- for all we know, there may have been, or may be, cultures in which being turned into a duck is an elevation, (A sort of reverse Buddhism?)
The point being, if you are going to accept with open arms your child's rejection of societal norms and adoption of non-societally-approved behaviors, how do you distinguish between those you will celebrate and those you will not?
And the article does say, without limitation, "there is nothing that befalls one of
his children in which my father is not able to find "a marvelous experience."" That implies that even if one of the children were to be wrongly executed for a murder he did not commit, the father would find something about it which was marvelous. If the author didn't mean to say that, he shouldn't have said it!
Well, lunchtime is over and this vicious workday demands my immediate return. I'll e-see you later! |
