To the best of our knowledge, Evola didn't elaborate on what he meant
by a 'complex' in this respect ; he didn't go deeper into the concept
of 'maternal impression'. Since it has been shown that Evola was far
from being the first to uphold the theory of 'maternal impression',
we presume that what you are still having some trouble trying to
understand is not how "he perceived a white couple giving birth to a
coloured child due to an 'idea,' which has 'filled the subconscious
of the mother'", but how 'maternal impression' may be possible. A
chapter of 'Metaphysics of Sex' such as 'Male psychology and female
psychology' may put you on the right track, if, bearing in mind that
the feminine nature is a reflection of the feminine cosmic principle
as a matter which is given a form which is external to it, and that
it is characterised by malleability, credulity, and suggestibility on
the psychological plane, you think about the potential consequences
of these features in the sexual domain. The feminine psyche is highly
impressionable in the literal sense.
No doubt, Evola thought 'telegenesis' was not some form of
Lamarckism, and, as a matter of act, it s not some form of
Lamarckism. What modern scientists call 'telegenesis' was known by
the ancients under a different name, as shown by the short insight we
have given into the theory of 'maternal impression' ; there is no
spontaneous generation ; contrary to what those who claim to
guarantee people's 'traditionalism' sometimes suggest in a
pontificating manner, Evola's work is imparted by the classical
spirit which is at the root of European tradition. Transformism was
unknown to that spirit.
According to Lamarck (1744-1829), a change in the environment brings
about change in 'needs', resulting in change in behaviour, bringing
change in organ usage and development, and in form over time ; a more
frequent and continuous use of any organ gradually strengthens,
develops and enlarges that organ, while the permanent disuse of any
organ imperceptibly weakens and deteriorates it, and progressively
diminishes its functional capacity, until it finally disappears. What
has that nonsense got to do with the theory of 'maternal impression'?
Still according to Lamarck, for example, the giraffe neck
progressively lengthened from straining to reach the high leaves -
how giraffes managed to feed, and, therefore, not to extinguish, in
the meantime, Lamarckism, which was dismissed at the beginning of the
twentieth century, doesn't care to tell us. In any case, Lamarckism
never claimed that the mind of the she-giraffe was influenced by a
thought of a longer neck, that an idea came to fill the subconscious
of the she-giraffe.
Evola state that 'environmental' factors can influence
the 'phenotype,' and, as a matter of fact, the influence of
environmental factors on the phenotype was fully demonstrated. So can
it influence, to a certain extent, and only to a certain extent, the
genotype, since ionising radiations and mutagenic substances turn out
to cause alterations of the DNA cells of the reproduction cells, a
phenomenon known as 'chromosomal reorganisation', which, however,
don't cause new, unknown genes to appear : instead, the order of the
genes is reversed, often causing a disruption in metabolism and in
ontogenesis. The only viable mutations concern always concern
superficial characteristics such as eyes colour and hair colour.
It would be most interesting to know the skin colour of a sample of
children of coloured persons produced by 'impressed' white women with
white men. Since you have read with attention 'The Elements of Racial
Education', in which Evola puts forward the revolutionary idea that
the race of the body doesn't necessarily corresponds to the race of
the soul in a given individual, an idea which anyone sensitive to
those things find true to reality, it seems to us that you already
have the answer to your second question.
And it would be even more interesting to ponder on the phenomenon
of 'maternal impression' with respect to the fact that the cause of
the decline of civilisations "can never be found in the outer world,
nor can it ever be explained by purely historical and human factors".
--- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "darklittleflame"
<ads694@h...> wrote:
>
> --- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "evola_as_he_is"
> <evola_as_he_is@y...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > This is the explanation given by Evola : "here, an idea which has
> > filled, in special conditions, the subconscious of the mother as
> > a 'complex' has had a formative influence on birth, even years
> > after".
>
> Are there any writings By Evola (preferably in English) where he
> elaborates on what he means by a 'complex' in this regard?
>
> I am still having some trouble trying to understand how he
perceived
> a white couple giving birth to a coloured child due to an 'idea,'
> which has 'filled the subconscious of the mother.' Particularly
> given his stance against Lamarckian style theories. "The racist
idea
> of heredity...allows us to understand racism as an explicit
> refutation of the Lamarckian and, in part, Marxist theory of the
> influence of the environment" (Elements p.17). Although, no doubt,
> Evola thought 'telegenesis' was not some form of Lamarckianism. If
> so, can anyway explain in what sense 'ideas' presumably altering
the
> genetics of a female's ovaries is not Lamarckian?
>
> Evola does then go on to state that 'environmental' factors can
> influence the 'phenotype,' ie "the outer and contingent manner of
> manifestation...of certain hereditary and racial tendencies"
(ibid).
> Does this then imply that Evola saw skin colour in this regard, as
> a 'contingent manner of manifestation'?
>
> Thank you for the examples of past thinkers who held similar ideas.
> Most interesting.
>