Assumed less to undo the law than to provoke its punishment

1. Does "Breton was a “juvenile victim” involved in an Oedipal game" mean "Breton was a young man who was a victim of the Oedipal game"?

2. Does "an “Icarian pose” assumed less to undo the law than to provoke its punishment" mean "an “Breton was a high-flying man who assumed the breaking of the law less important than the punishment that comes after it"?

3. A dichotomy happens between two things. Can you understand what these two things are in the following text?

Context:

A number of artists’ work at this time, from Andres Serrano to Rona Pondick, engaged in a discourse of bodily fluids, which caused questions to be asked about the historical effectivity of such work. The contrast between these two artists evokes somewhat the contrast art historian Hal Foster makes between the Surrealism of André Breton, artist and writer, and philosopher Georges Bataille, Surrealism being an historical precedent of abject art where the desublimatory trajectory of the body was probed to challenge orthodox categories. According to Foster, Breton thought that ‘Bataille was an “excrement-philosopher” who refused to rise above big toes, mere matter, sheer ***, to raise the low to the high. For Bataille, Breton was a “juvenile victim” involved in an Oedipal game, an “Icarian pose” assumed less to undo the law than to provoke its punishment.’ Foster elaborates Surrealism as pivoting on these dichotomies of pure filth and acting dirty.