Well, there is, in addition to these, what I shall call Pygmalionism, which embraces at the same time cerebral onanism and incest.
"Imagine an artist falling in love with his child, his creation: with an Herodiade, a Judith, a Helen, a Jeanne d'Arc, whom he has either described or painted, and evoking her, and finally possessing her in dream.
"Well, this love is worse than normal incest.

In the latter sin the guilty one commits only a half-offence, because his daughter is not born solely of his substance, but also of the flesh of another.

Thus, logically, in incest there is a quasi-natural side, almost licit, because part of another person has entered into the engendering of the _corpus delicti_; while in Pygmalionism the father violates the child of his soul, of that which alone is purely and really his, which alone he can impregnate without the aid of another.

The offence is, then, entire and complete.

Now, is there not also disdain of nature, of the work of God, since the subject of the sin is no longer--as even in bestiality--a palpable and living creature, but an unreal being created by a projection of the desecrated talent, a being almost celestial, since, by genius, by artistry, it often becomes immortal?
"Let us go further, if you wish.