<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2627" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>First of all, I want to thank you, Frank, for appreciating my
novel and for writing and posting this...I feel a lot of support from
this list, which isn't nothing! Sure it's electronic, but it's still real and I
feel real appreciation. </STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>So, just to correct a few things:</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Of course I know about multi-level selectionism--how could I not!
</STRONG><STRONG>And I think it's good stuff and it makes sense to me! I'm
a supporter. </STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>In fact, I'll be meeting with David Wilson in about 3 weeks
(with others) to discuss the possibility of a new Evolutionary Studies program
here at New Paltz. Very exciting!</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV>You wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>What's also missing from the novel, as it is from evolutionary psychology
<BR>generally, is the desire for a long-term monogamous commitment, which is
<BR>a quite different kind of love.</DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Hmm. Let me say this: The novel deals with some love themes:
passionate love v companionate love (what i call 'hot' love and 'warm' love) and
selfless love and selfish love, and also romantic soul-mate love, short-term
mating and long-term mating, among other love themes.</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>It's true that many of the female characters "desire"
romantic love and don't care how they get it or for how long, whether it is for
10 years or a year. I also think some (if not all) the female characters DO
desire monogamous enduring relationships...As well, there is plenty of talk
about "long-term, monogamous commitment" I think.</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>But anyway, what drives any story is a
quest/motivation/striving... The female characters DO want
love. </STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>In fact, if you think about it, 3 out of the 4 female characters DO
end up in long-term, monogamous, committed relationships...</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Also, what do you mean when you say the </STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>"desire for a long-term monogamous commitment" is missing from EP?
I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean that evolutionary psychologists talk too
much about short-term mating? I think that's the popular culture's EP....
</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Just as an interesting example: David Buss, in his EP textbook,
devotes 58 pages</STRONG> <STRONG>to male and female long-term
mating and only 23 pages to male and female short-term mating.</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Well, again, thank you for supporting me, Frank....</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>All best!!!!</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Alice</STRONG></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=checker@panix.com href="mailto:checker@panix.com">Premise Checker</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=paleopsych@paleopsych.org
href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 15, 2005 3:31
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [Paleopsych] Alice Andrews:
Playing with Myself: Questions for myself about my novel, Trine Erotic</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Our list member has written the very first novel written around
<BR>evolutionary psychology ideas, and I can recommend it highly. It is
<BR>composed of stories with stories, and you're never quite sure what the
<BR>reality is. It's like postmodernism in this way. And you wonder to what
<BR>extent the novel is autobiographical or about the person the author wished
<BR>she were or just made up of creatures that exemplify what evolutionary
<BR>psychology demands that they do.<BR><BR>But it's quite clear that the
female protagonists very much want men they <BR>can bat ideas around with,
though there's no place for the love of ideas <BR>for their own sake in
evolutionary psychology. The narrators seem to know <BR>this, though they want
to transcend these limits. Gordon Tullock, an <BR>economics professor I had,
thought that altruism in humans was the result <BR>of an evolutionary defect:
we had not been humans long enough for altruism <BR>to have been weeded out!
I'm sure he'd worry that Alice is defective, <BR>being much too in love with
ideas.<BR><BR>One answer, that she apparently doesn't know about, is that
evolution <BR>takes place on many levels, not just at the level of the gene.
This makes <BR>group selection possible and makes room for altruism. The book
here is <BR>Elliott Sober and David Sloan Wilson, _Unto Others_, which is
slowly <BR>getting accepted in the biology community. (Paradigm shifts do take
time, <BR>you know.)<BR><BR>Another answer is that, however much the overall
selfish gene theory is <BR>true, our desires are indirect mechanisms to
promote the overall goal and <BR>that there are many of these desires. Steven
Reiss came up with 16 basic <BR>desires that are relatively independent of one
another. Desiring to raise <BR>(one's own) children is largely independent of
romance (which includes <BR>the neighboring desires of wanting coitus and of
wanting aesthetic <BR>experiences. Why the latter, I'm not sure, but factor
analysis puts the <BR>three of them together.). And both are independent of
curiosity, which is <BR>at the top of my list and my wife's (I am sure) and at
least near the top <BR>of Alice's.<BR><BR>What's also missing from the novel,
as it is from evolutionary psychology <BR>generally, is the desire for a
long-term monogamous commitment, which is <BR>a quite different kind of
love.<BR><BR>Note to myself: you've got to get around to buying and reading
C.S. Lewis' <BR>_The Four Loves_. You shouldn't let your atheism keep you from
the book. <BR>After all, Moses and Solomon (less so Jesus) were
proto-sociobiologists.<BR><BR>---------------------<BR><BR>Alice Andrews:
Playing with Myself: Questions for myself about my novel, Trine
<BR>Erotic<BR><A
href="http://www.entelechyjournal.com/playing_with_myself.htm">http://www.entelechyjournal.com/playing_with_myself.htm</A><BR><BR>[This
is the first novel written from the perspective of evolutionary
<BR>psychology. I am finishing it up now and am enjoying its playfulness
<BR>exceedingly.]<BR><BR> Q What are some of the major
questions you try to deal with in Trine<BR>
Erotic?<BR><BR> A Well, there are quite a few: Is there free
will? What is the will?<BR> What is and is there a single Ia
self? Are we determined by our genes?<BR> Can we (and how
and what affect does it have to) go against our<BR> nature?
What is the unconscious? Is it what evolutionary
psychologists<BR> refer to as our universal human nature? Or
is it something else? And<BR> how does it work? And is there
a universal human nature? How does<BR> culture influence us?
What is art? What is love? And is there<BR> something beyond
our evolutionary, deep reflexessome kind of global<BR>
brain, as Howard Bloom suggests, that is motivating
us?<BR><BR> Q You dedicate the book to every womans desire
and the art within her<BR> and to alpha males everywhere.
Does that mean its not for other<BR> malessay,
Beta?<BR><BR> A No, no. Its sort of tongue-in-cheeky. Im
playing with the<BR> evolutionary theory that art is
displayed as a mating signal/strategy.<BR> So Im saying:
Here is this piece of artand, naturally, I would want to<BR>
signal the highest type of man. Of course, alpha male is
subjective<BR> when it comes to humansfor apes it may be
just a factor of strength or<BR> posing. For me, an alpha
male doesnt always look like an alpha; a man<BR> could be an
alpha and work in a factory but be an original thinker
and<BR> want to lead or organize people. (David M. Busss
work explains this,<BR> actually.) But anyway, its not just
for alpha males. Its for all<BR> males. But its particularly
for men who are creative and deep and<BR> interested in
figuring out the world . . . understanding human nature,<BR>
and more. And it's for females too!<BR><BR> Q Why did you
write the book?<BR><BR> A Well, for one, I was compelled to
write. And there are a lot of<BR> other reasons as well.
But, I have to say that I found the fiction I<BR> was
reading leaving me cold. I just found myself not getting turned
on<BR> by all that good literature. I wanted to be turned
on. I saw the<BR> appeal; saw the code of it. You know,
theres something here in this<BR> story but Im not going to
let on to what it is because youre supposed<BR> to get it
because were so smart, and good fiction shows and doesnt<BR>
tell. And Im not going to even attempt to affect you in any
way<BR> because that would be pompous and sentimental and
ultimately<BR> ineffective. And were so sophisticated and
subtle. I guess these are<BR> some of the rules of fiction.
Like how you shouldnt write out ideas.<BR> And its related
to the seduction/anti-seduction stuff I write about in<BR>
the book. Most modern fiction is quite seductive, in the<BR>
Baudrillardian sense, by trying or appearing not to seduce. I think
my<BR> style is anti-anti-seductionor [2]meta-seduction. I
am possibly<BR> "seducing" by going against a seductive
"hiding" strategy. For<BR> example, I can choose to wear
revealing clothing (which isnt<BR> seductive) or less
revealing clothing, which concealswhich is<BR> seductive.
But I can wear the revealing clothes as a reaction to
the<BR> seductive strategy, which says, Im not trying to
seduce with the<BR> not-trying-to-seduce clothes. And this
is seductive in its own waya<BR> hiding from hiding. Of
course, the revealing clothing looks the<BR> sameits just a
matter of intention. And only a few will be able to<BR> read
the code or signal. I realize this is made confusing because I
am<BR> using Baudrillards sense of the word. In fact, what
you have are three<BR> things working: seduction (in its
denotation), anti-seduction, and<BR> anti-anti-seduction or
meta-seduction. Dont tell me Im confusing<BR>
YOU!??<BR><BR> Im not terribly affected by most fiction
(though I know Im in the<BR> minority). And Im not proud of
that fact. Its just the way I am. Im<BR> not very subtle. I
like to read nonfiction. Otherwise I feel like Im<BR>
wasting my time. Id rather be doing something or writing or
learning<BR> something. Unfortunately I dont have that
feeling (that Im learning<BR> something, etc.) when I read
most fiction. And perhaps that is a fault<BR> of mine.
Perhaps Im just not refined enough or my personality
doesnt<BR> allow me to slow down. Maybe it has something to
do with the fact that<BR> Im right-brain dominant. I really
see a difference though, between<BR> people who love fiction
and me. And, thankfully, Ive stopped worrying<BR> that
theres something wrong with me in this.<BR><BR> For the
record, I dont place a value on one or the
otherseductive<BR> fiction (which is what is accepted and
favored) versus meta-seductive<BR> fiction (fiction which
tells you what its doing, openly wants to<BR> affect, deals
with ideas, etc.).<BR><BR> But to answer your question: I
wrote a book that I was wanting to<BR>
read.<BR><BR> Q Is there any fiction you do
like?<BR><BR> A Oh, of course. I loved Smillas Sense of
Snow, liked Jeanette<BR> Wintersons Sexing the Cherry, D.H.
Lawrenceliked Kundera when I was<BR> younger Dostoevsky,
John Berger, Hermann Hesse, and [3]there are<BR>
others<BR><BR> Q You mention wanting to affect the reader.
What kind of affect are<BR> you hoping
for?<BR><BR> A Any, I suppose. Nietzsche wrote that the
effect of works of art is<BR> to excite the state that
creates art . . . he says its intoxication .<BR> . . First
and foremost, I want the reader to get some pleasure
from<BR> it. After that, its mostly a working out of some of
the questions<BR> which seem to haunt us, stuff about love.
And I suppose I want it to<BR> be a part of the readers
working it out, like a friend. There is also<BR> the sort of
feministy thing about desire and art in women. I suppose
I<BR> would like TE to inspire women to let loose their
desire and art more.<BR> In Sirens Song, the nameless
protagonist says her father told her that<BR> the point
about art was to share itabout an audience. Which reminds
me<BR> of a scene in Bride of the Wind, a film about Alma
Mahler I just saw<BR> on video. Alma says to her husband
Mahler, I wish youd conduct one of<BR> my songs. And he
says, One of your songs? . . . Perhaps one day in<BR>
rehearsal. And she says, Rehearsal? But then there wouldnt be
an<BR> audience. And he says, Ill be there. Arent I enough?
And Im interested<BR> in this. Because despite the womens
rights movement and so much<BR> liberation and so many women
artists, I still think there is this<BR> thing within us
(women) . . . a resistance . . . and I question its<BR>
etiology. If such a resistance existsor rather, a relative lack
of<BR> desire to broadcast compared to menis it innate? That
is, is it<BR> related to biology, to the evolutionary theory
that men try to<BR> broadcast to as many women as possible,
since it is in their genetic<BR> interest to do so? (Or
since they are the product of millions of years<BR> of
evolution which ensured such a tendency persisted?) Or is
it<BR> cultural? Or some admixture? Again, I question my
premise as well. Im<BR> interested in trying to uncover
whether or not such a tendency exists.<BR> I certainly have
felt my relative lack of desire to broadcast. But of<BR>
course, that could have everything to do with other
things:<BR> personality, conditioning, stage of life,
etc.<BR><BR> About my Sirens Song character: her feeling had
always been that it<BR> was something that had to do with
her (whatever her art was, be it<BR> painting or writing);
she didnt have an impulse to broadcast it. And<BR> so, there
is this question about what art is, and its purpose and<BR>
function. And, in some sense, the book is my grappling with
deciding<BR> to share whatever it is in meand that in my
sharing of it, there is<BR> meaning. There is a dialectics
of desire, as Barthes saysand I quote<BR> him at the
beginning of Sirens Song. For me, I couldnt and wouldnt<BR>
want to put the book out there if I didnt think it would serve
some<BR> kind of purpose. And of course, art is purposeful.
It is motivated by<BR> all sorts of deep, powerful urges.
The artist experiences it as an<BR> outpouring of some kind
of force that has to be expelled, a feeling of<BR>
compulsion. And then theres that choice an artist makesdo you go
mad<BR> or stay somewhat functionally neurotic, or do you
release and create?<BR> (The existential problem of whether
or not it is a choice, I cant<BR> answer. My answer probably
changes with my mood.)<BR><BR> But also, there is the EP
theory of art as signal. And in some ways<BR> that is also
about survival. So I see art as a saviorfor the artist<BR>
but also for the audience, of course. Once I decided that Trine
Erotic<BR> was for an audience, it took on a whole new
light. It was outward<BR> directed and relating, and it was
pleasurable in a way that before it<BR> hadnt been (that is,
writing for myself). So much goes unsaid in the<BR> culture.
Most of us (except perhaps for some hard-core feminists)<BR>
think women are free to do their thing. We have this
sense,<BR> historically and culturally, that women are now
free. Yet I dont<BR> really think so. I think its good to
show a female character who feels<BR> restricted with
respect to desire and the art within her. I think some<BR>
women will identify and it may feel liberating, or help
create<BR> movement. And of course, thats where the fiction
reactionaries come<BR> in. I shouldnt be so pompous as to
think that something I have created<BR> could have some kind
of affect. But to me, perhaps because Im a woman<BR> and
mother (it may be nature or nurture or both), I dont see why
you<BR> would put something out there if it wasnt for some
good, for some use.<BR> And that is also tied in to the
notion that it could be my compulsion<BR> and selfishness
(much like an overbearing parent) that made me<BR> continue
to write new stories, though it felt like love, but that
it<BR> is finally the selfless love for the reader that
allows me to stop<BR> creatingto allow the reader to create
something of their own from the<BR> book or envision the
next story or storiesto be individuated and truly<BR> the
artist, to be free.<BR><BR> Q This seems related to the
whole reader response issue in the novel .<BR> .
.<BR><BR><BR> A Yes. I say the book is alive. And in a
way, the book is like a<BR> lover. It is also a meme (or
memeplexwhat I call memesome). I, the<BR> author, am
egoless; the words are not minetheyre this meme. And the<BR>
words belong to the reader, and the reader is the
artistcreating<BR> meaning and art through the
reading.<BR><BR> Q You say feministy, but sometimes you
sound downright backwards about<BR> women in the novel. The
scene with the woman walking behind Caleb, for<BR> example,
youre not critical of ityou seem to romanticize it.<BR><BR>
A Well, first of all, the most interesting thing about people is
their<BR> contradictions. I think thats why Ed and Calebs
characters are<BR> interesting. I am putting those questions
out there, because we have<BR> all felt them. I mean, I say
something like, it was a walking dance<BR> which fulfilled
something primal for them and though they both<BR>
understood the sexist implications, they didnt care . . . Its
dealing<BR> with the different layers again accepting and
integrating them not<BR> trying to ban certain impulses or
desires because we are told to. Is<BR> it bad or is she
inferior because she is turned on by walking behind<BR> him?
I dont know. I dont think so. If she feels free as a woman,
then<BR> I dont see the problem. But I see the potential
danger in this<BR> positionjust as there is potential danger
in an EP/essentialist<BR> position. But Steven Pinker I
think does the best job of explaining<BR> why it doesnt have
to be dangerousand in fact, in the long run might<BR> do
more good than harm.<BR><BR> Q You play with the question of
patterns . . . Why?<BR><BR> A Well, for one, Gurdjieff, the
basis for Rajingiev and Guerttiev, was<BR> interested in
habits. And I guess I am too. The book is about these<BR>
women who have recurring patterns in their relationships. And,
of<BR> course, people do throughout their lifespanoften
debilitatingly so.<BR> And I suppose a big question in
standard social clinical psychology is<BR> how do you break
these patterns? But Im not only interested in<BR> patterns
as related to psychological processes/neuroses/habits,
but<BR> also to questions of time, e.g. eternal recurrence.
Would it all<BR> really be the same if we played it all back
from the beginning? And<BR> can we change? And do we really
have free will? And can we actually<BR> determine reality or
has everything been set and were just living it<BR> out? The
new physics gets at a lot of these issues . . .<BR><BR> Q
Why didnt you use Gurdjieff s name in the book? You use the
real<BR> names of others<BR><BR> A I didnt
because many of the philosophical/spiritual ideas I
wrote<BR> about in Sirens Song and some in Baby Theory are
really not the ideas<BR> of Gurdjieff. Rajingiev and
Guerttiev are not pseudonyms for<BR> Gurdjieff; they are
names for a fictional sage. Yet Gurdjieffians will<BR>
certainly recognize some of Gurdjieff in them, thats
true.<BR><BR> Q What does the title mean, Trine
Erotic?<BR><BR> A Well, trine means three . . . and three is
important throughout the<BR> book. Erotic refers to Eros . .
. love (though also it has a sexual<BR> component). But the
first meaning of the title is three love stories:<BR> three
loves. (Trine Erotic= Love Stories, Sirens Song, and Baby
Theory<BR> . . . Also Conscious Shock = soft kill, Red Love,
and Sirens Song.) In<BR> addition, there are couplet stories
that make a final third story:<BR> Conscious Shock and Third
Force make Trine Erotic; soft kill and Red<BR> Love make
Love Stories; Love Stories and Sirens Song make
Conscious<BR> Shock . . .)<BR><BR> And
there is a feeling that Third Force isnt over and that
Trine<BR> Erotic itself is part of something . .
.<BR><BR> Three-love is also for a sort of triune theory of
love I have in the<BR> book: evolution, experience, culture.
The notion that our problems<BR> stem from the conflict
between our different layers. So, for example,<BR> if I were
a man, I might feel an attraction for women who are
heavier<BR> or who have a particular hip-to-waist ratio than
what the culture<BR> tells me is attractive. This conflict
of impulses and desires tends to<BR> clog feelings, or at
least makes people feel disjointed. It is hard to<BR> put it
all together. Its hard to know what it is the I really
desires;<BR> what is more true for the
self?<BR><BR> Three is everywhere in TE. Its also a
Fibonacci number, and Id say<BR> just about every number in
the book is a Fibonacci number. And trine<BR> is also an
astrological concept, relating to the relationship of<BR>
planets.<BR><BR> Q Whats a Fibonacci
number?<BR><BR> A Fibonacci was an Italian mathematician who
discovered an interesting<BR> series of numbers, which are
now called Fibonacci numbers. It begins<BR> with 1. You then
add one to that to get 2. You then add those two<BR> numbers
together to get 3. Then 2+3=5; 3+5=8; 5+8=13; 8+13=21 . .
.<BR> and so on . . . Whats interesting about these numbers
is that the<BR> ratio between any of the pairs of numbers is
approximately the golden<BR> ratio or the golden number,
which is around 1.618. And whats<BR> interesting about the
golden number is that artists throughout history<BR> have
used it in their art. (The golden mean, the golden section,
or<BR> golden ratio is most beautiful to our eyes.) In
addition, what is<BR> interesting about the actual numbers
themselves in the series is that<BR> they can be found in
naturein particular in the spirals of things. So,<BR> if you
count the spirals in a pine cone or the seeds in a
sunflower,<BR> or the spirals of a shell, you will find you
get a Fibonacci number. .<BR> . . 13 rows of spirals, or 21,
like that. As well, the human face<BR> shows a lot of
correspondence to Fibonacci numbers and the golden<BR>
ratio. . . . And this is interesting because there is a lot of
work<BR> being done in EP and other fields to suggest that
there is a<BR> correlation between symmetry and what is
thought of as beautiful, with<BR> developmental health and
stability, perhaps, even fertility and<BR> fecundity. And
perhaps, somehow, there is a relationship between the<BR>
mathematics of outward beauty and inner.<BR><BR> Q Why use
Fibonacci numbers?<BR><BR> A I think theres a magical
quality to the numbers, no question. They<BR> seem most
natural. Its like choosing between painting your wall a
flat<BR> yellow or painting it yellow with a mixture of
white, with a subtle<BR> Lazure technique, to create a
feeling of softness and naturalness,<BR> what youd find in
nature. In addition, mathematics is important<BR> throughout
much of the book. I talk about there being a math to<BR>
everything; about the algorithms of our adapted mind; write about
how<BR> the nameless protagonist adds everything up: Calebs
lies, his Heliosen<BR> ways, his amorality . .
.<BR><BR> Q In the book, you sometimes refer to TE as
metafiction. Why?<BR><BR> A Oh, because its about fictionits
a story about a story about a<BR> story. And because its
concerned with ideas about fiction and writing.<BR> Also,
because I go outside of the fiction and interject as the
author<BR> about the work. Its meta in a lot of ways. Im
interested in fictionthe<BR> craft of writing. I see TE as a
triptych. Each section, each story has<BR> a different
style. Some stories are crafted more than others, but so<BR>
far, readers have told me they dont see a difference. To me theres
a<BR> huge difference, as far as craft and complexity
between some of the<BR> stories . .
.<BR><BR> Q Which ones?<BR><BR> A I dont
want to say. I want to get virgin feedback still . .
.<BR><BR> I do want to say this: I dont think of myself as a
writerI think of<BR> myself more as a synthesizera
synthesizer of memes. If my writing were<BR> a singing voice
it would be closer to Leonard Cohens than Pavarottisor<BR>
Joan Osbornes than Kathleen Battles. The tradition in fiction is,
of<BR> course, pre-film, and has mostly been concerned with
painting mental<BR> pictures for readers. But Im more
interested in representing and<BR> transmitting ideas than I
am pictures. My emphasis is on conveying<BR> meaning up
frontthats where I put my energy. I realize meaning is
also<BR> conveyed subtly, but its just not enough for me. I
have more I want to<BR> convey. And, of course, I also do it
in the traditional wayI dont<BR> think it would be a novel
otherwise. Also, thats not to say Im not<BR> interested in
language. I am very much. And I have a pretty good ear,<BR>
so I care very much about the sounds. Sometimes I would spend half
an<BR> hour on one sentence. For example, every sentence
fragment is there<BR> for a reason. I could have chosen
instead a semi-colon or a connecting<BR> word or an em-dash,
etc., but for me it was a question of sound and<BR> meaning
and even a visual impression. And of course, sometimes,
my<BR> first writing would be just right and I could leave
it alone. That was<BR> always
nice.<BR>
_______________________<BR><BR> [4]Alice Andrews has taught
both writing and psychology (and sometimes<BR> both at the
same time) with an evolutionary lens for over a decade.<BR>
Currently she's teaching "Social Psychology " and "Personality
and<BR> Psychotherapy" at the [5]State University of New
York at New Paltz.<BR> Alice is also an editor and writer
(books and magazines), and was the<BR> associate editor of
[6]Chronogram from 2000-2002. She is the author of<BR>
[7]Trine Erotic, a novel which explores evolutionary
psychology.<BR><BR>References<BR><BR> 1. <A
href="http://www.entelechyjournal.com/">http://www.entelechyjournal.com/</A><BR>
2. <A
href="http://www.entelechyjournal.com/meta-seductionfiction.htm">http://www.entelechyjournal.com/meta-seductionfiction.htm</A><BR>
3. <A
href="http://www.entelechyjournal.com/books.htm">http://www.entelechyjournal.com/books.htm</A><BR>
4. <A
href="http://www.entelechyjournal.com/andrews">http://www.entelechyjournal.com/andrews</A><BR>
5. <A
href="http://www.newpaltz.edu/">http://www.newpaltz.edu/</A><BR>
6. <A
href="http://www.chronogram.com/">http://www.chronogram.com/</A><BR>
7. <BR><A
href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1587761211/qid=1029245378/sr=11-1/ref=sr_11_1/trineerotic-20%22%3ETrine%20Erotic%3C/A%3E/102-5304949-9560913">http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1587761211/qid=1029245378/sr=11-1/ref=sr_11_1/trineerotic-20%22%3ETrine%20Erotic%3C/A%3E/102-5304949-9560913</A><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>paleopsych
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</A><BR><A
href="http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych">http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych</A></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>