250 292
250
per højholt
no effect on animal semen or
on plants’ prosaic pollen, but
a substantial one on human
males. In the same year that
Guillèn’s presumption was
established, Jørgen Møller
M.D. remarked in an article
on the ear that “among
humans the outer ear ’s
phys iologi cal value i s
remarkablysmall;nonetheless,
it appears to slightly amplify
sound and to possess some
value in pinpointing a sound’s
direction.” At the same time,
Dr. Møller suggests that
among most mammals, whose
outer ear is much more fully
developed than a human one,
the benef it is obviously
greater. The dif ference
between the benefit a human
derives from his outer ear and
that enjoyed by the higher
mammals is, therefore, sliding,
and this difference blurs no
less than all others during
human sexual intercourse,
whereupon the capacity of
the lovers’ ears for self-
hearing increasesdramatically,
in some cases so remarkably
that the lovers, despite their
heartfelt and apparently
soundless undertaking, could
not help but notice that for a
split second their ears heard
themsel ves . That thi s
occurrence collided a moment
later with their more or less
conscious awareness of the
outer ear ’s super f lui ty
prompted the lovers to reject
the outer ear in the orgasm’s
final seconds. Naturally, this
rejectionwasnotphysiological,
but mental, which meant that
it was easily transferrable to
the sperm, which then began
its journey up to the egg, the
journey’s eagerly anticipated
end. This brings us back to the
aforementioned traces silence
left in 1915, since a number