1461. But is such praise of marital happiness, based, as it is, on such a temporary erotic intoxication, entirely honest? Is not such a being far too intoxicated and thereby far too partial a judge? Is there, indeed, a "judge" at all? Is he not rather merely a kind of glowing "counsel for the defence"? But who is the "counsel for the prosecution" in the case? Is there actually a "counsel for the prosecution" at all? No, for the general public there is essentially no "counsel for the prosecution" to prosecute a glowing, happily infatuated or erotically intoxicated writer's praise of love in the form of a play, a film, a novel or a fairytale. Watching a performance of such a highly emotional product in the form of films, plays and so on is in principle the same as attending a kind of trial scene in a court of law. The audience is the "judge" who "judges" the product. The writer is the "counsel for the defence". The play or the film is his "speech for the defence". The subject is "marital happiness" or the "perfect marriage". But here the trial scene ceases to resemble a real trial in a court of law in that, as previously mentioned, it has no "counsel for the prosecution". The "judge" (the audience) is presented with all the light sides of the case, but absolutely none of its dark sides. It is of course the duty of a "counsel for the defence" to put forward nothing but the good sides of the "accused", just as it is the duty of the "counsel for the prosecution" to deal solely with everything that can reveal the unfortunate sides of the "accused". Since these two beings in a trial in a court of law are both quite impartial partners in relation to the "accused", they will be able to submit to the "judge" a fairly clear picture of the fortunate and unfortunate sides of the "accused". And on the basis on these two sides the "judge" will then be able to make a fair assessment enabling him to judge correspondingly fairly. But if there were no "prosecutor", only the fortunate sides would be put forward. But if the "judge" then accepts these as a fundamental picture of the "accused" or of the case that he is to try, it would of course be a false picture or a picture that shows the case in a far lovelier or more beautiful light than it actually is. But if the being's unfortunate sides are not brought to light there can be no question of an "infringement of the law" or punishable phenomena, no matter how much of an out-and-out "criminal" the person concerned is. And the "verdict" would then inevitably have to be "not guilty", which in turn means "acquittal". What would one say if such an administration of justice could take place in reality? Indeed, would one not be absolutely outraged? And would society not sink down into anarchy or lawlessness. A judicial system without a prosecutor could never be anything but a parody of the law. But if an administration of justice according to this principle seems so ridiculous and destructive of society and is a parody of justice or true logic, why then should the same practice not also seem to be ridiculous and destructive in other circumstances? Why should the same circumstances not apply to such a "trial scene", which a film or play actually is? Here the general public freely accepts numerous "trial scenes" in which "verdicts" are given exclusively from the point of view of the "defence", there being no "prosecutor" in the "trial scene" concerned. All "verdicts" given here must then be "not guilty". The "judge", that is, the audience is presented with only the most rose-coloured, light sides of the "case" or "subject" (married life), that is, the sides that are expressive of and inspired by the writer's exaggerated happiness at his temporary acquisition of a sexual partner who suits him particularly well. In such an erotic intoxication he paints an exaggerated picture of the sublime idyll of marriage, or of how the young couple, the "hero" and the "heroine", after many trials and tribulations with villains, rivals, narrow-minded parents, old-fashioned traditions, religious fanaticism and so on, finally get one another and swear "eternal faithfulness" to one another, have many children and live happily ever after.