OPINIONSrnFrankenstein’s Childrenrnby George McCartneyrn”Monstrum horrendum, informe ingens.”rn—Vergil, AeneidrnMonsters From the Id: The Rise ofrnHorror in Fiction and Fihnrnby E. Michael JonesrnDallas: Spence Publishing Company;rn336 pp., $27.95rnI n 1974,1 first encountered one of therncreatures E. Michael Jones writesrnabout in Monsters From the Id. It appearedrnin the guise of one of m graduate-rnschool classmates. She was a bright,rnprettv woman who seemed unusuallvrnself-possessed and accomplished for a 22-rnyear-old. My impression changed, however,rnwhen I committed the faux pas ofrnmentioning that my wife had recently becomernpregnant with our second child.rnWithout a moment’s hesitation, my colleaguernbrightly inquired, “Are you consideringrnaborhon?” I was so astonishedrnthat I could not help laughing in herrnperky, well-scrubbed face. I do not believernshe ever forgave my convidsivcrnrudeness. Of course, had I been attentivernto contemporary trends, her questionrnwould not have taken me by surprise. Itrnhad been a full year since Roe v. Wade,rnand the Robespierres of the feminist legalrnrevolution had become tirelesslv vigilantrnin its bloody cause.rnNot coincidentally, this was the highwaterrnmark of the left-liberal sexual agenda.rnWhenever sex was the topic (andrnwhen wasn’t it?), the discussion was purelyrntechnical: positions, techniques, lubricants,rnand —of course —contraceptivernmeasures, all talked about iu the samerntones you might use to analyze our golfrngame. Dalliance without consequencesrnwas the order of the day; it was called —rnhow quaint it seems now—”recreahonalrnsex,” a pleasurable but rouhnc matter tornbe managed sensibly to everyone’s mutualrnsatisfaction. Romance? Sure, if yournGeorge McCartney teaches English atrnSt. John’s Universitwrnneeded it, but, really, it would not do tornget too intense. Sexual relahons shouldrnbe as enjoyable and as significant as havingrndinner with a friend. Pregnancy wasrneasily avoidable; should there be any mistakes,rnabortion on demand provided anrnironclad backstop. Intercourse, after all,rnhad loftier purposes than procreation. Asrnanother woman in my graduate programrnassured me, there would have been nornVietnam War if people had been “doingrnit more.” When I pointed out that thernpresident who had dragged us into thatrnmess was known to have made (in lago’srnphrase) “the beast with two backs” aboutrnas frequenriv and indiscriminately as humanlyrn—or should I say, inhumanly? —rnpossible, she muttered darkly that J.rnEdgar Hoover and the CIA had forcedrnpoor Saint Jack to depart from his liveand-rnlet-live bon vivant ways.rnYou could not really blame those poorrndears for holding such preposterous no-rnHons. They had falleir under the sway ofrnthe 1970’s universit)’ culture in which therntenets of such seers as William Blake hadrnbecome gospel. “Sooner murder an infantrnin its cradle, than nurse unacted desires,”rnBlake had counseled, and intellectualsrnof the 70’s were only too willing torntake him at his word. Now, a quarter of arncentury later, our enlightened nation hasrnmurdered well over 40 million infants,rnmost of them sacrificed in the cause ofrnadult desire. Strangely, people do notrnseem any happier than they did beforernthe revolution; in fact, they seem considerablyrnmore confused. With the grislyrnspecter of parhal-birth abortion and thernscandal of fathers abandoning their familiesrnbv the millions to pursue erotic selfrealization,rnmany adults are having secondrnthoughts about the virtues of sexualrnliberation. Young people, on the otherrn3 hand, seem to be acting out their distressrnI by torturing themselves with heavy metalrn5 and rap music, not to mention mutilatingrnI their bodies with tattoos and decorativernpiercings.rnJones traces the causes of today’s sexualrnchaos to the Enlightenment ofrntwo-and-a-half centuries ago. The secularrnmovements —Jacobinism, lUuminism,rnand scientific materialism —thatrnemerged during the French Revolutionrnpresumed to take rational control of sexualrndesire but unwittingly set free the disruptivernmonsters from the id. Jones takesrnhis title from the 1959 science-fictionrnfdm Forbidden Planet, which to his mindrnallegorically expresses what has happenedrnto us in the modern era. In thernmovie, astronauts travel to another starrnand discover the artifacts of the Krell, arnlong-dead race of highly evolved beingsrnwho once commanded a supremely sophisticatedrntechnology —no levers, nornbuttons, no maintenance. They merelyrnhad to wish for something, and their machinesrnwould make it happen. This felicitousrnstate, however, turned out to berntheir undoing. In their pride, they hadrnoverlooked the subconscious. Havingrnachieved sucli extraordinary power, the’rneventually fell victim to their own de-rn26/CHRONICLESrnrnrn