What do you think?
Rate this book
Sodom’un 120 Günü
Sıra dışı hayatı ve sivri fikirleriyle ünlü Marquis de Sade’ın en tartışmalı ve en sert eseri sayılan, Pier Paolo Pasolini tarafından 1975’te sinemaya uyarlandığında içerdiği şiddet ve sadizm öğeleri sebebiyle oldukça tepki çeken ve yönetmenin öldürülmesinde payı olduğu iddia edilen Sodom’un 120 Günü, 1785’te yazıldı ve ancak 1904’te yayımlanabildi.
Eserde Sade bir kış mevsiminde zevk ve acıyı, tahakküm ve teslimi tatmak için ormanın kalbindeki, gözlerden uzak bir kalede bir araya gelen dört zengin libertinin hikâyesini anlatıyor. Pek çoklarınca Sade’ın başyapıtı olarak kabul edilen bu dehşet verici ve bednam metin, yüzyıllar sonra bile edebiyatçıları, filozofları, sanatçıları etkilemeye devam ediyor.
Eserde Sade bir kış mevsiminde zevk ve acıyı, tahakküm ve teslimi tatmak için ormanın kalbindeki, gözlerden uzak bir kalede bir araya gelen dört zengin libertinin hikâyesini anlatıyor. Pek çoklarınca Sade’ın başyapıtı olarak kabul edilen bu dehşet verici ve bednam metin, yüzyıllar sonra bile edebiyatçıları, filozofları, sanatçıları etkilemeye devam ediyor.
408 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1785
2497 people are currently reading
39099 people want to read
About the author
Marquis de Sade
622 books2,269 followersA preoccupation with sexual violence characterizes novels, plays, and short stories that Donatien Alphonse François, comte de Sade but known as marquis de Sade, of France wrote. After this writer derives the word sadism, the deriving of sexual gratification from fantasies or acts that involve causing other persons to suffer physical or mental pain.
This aristocrat, revolutionary politician, and philosopher exhibited famous libertine lifestyle.
His works include dialogues and political tracts; in his lifetime, he published some works under his own name and denied authorship of apparently anonymous other works. His best erotic works combined philosophical discourse with pornography and depicted fantasies with an emphasis on criminality and blasphemy against the Catholic Church. Morality, religion or law restrained not his "extreme freedom." Various prisons and an insane asylum incarcerated the aristocrat for 32 years of his life: ten years in the Bastile, another year elsewhere in Paris, a month in Conciergerie, two years in a fortress, a year in Madelonnettes, three years in Bicêtre, a year in Sainte-Pélagie, and 13 years in the Charenton asylum. During the French revolution, people elected this criminal as delegate to the National Convention. He wrote many of his works in prison.
This aristocrat, revolutionary politician, and philosopher exhibited famous libertine lifestyle.
His works include dialogues and political tracts; in his lifetime, he published some works under his own name and denied authorship of apparently anonymous other works. His best erotic works combined philosophical discourse with pornography and depicted fantasies with an emphasis on criminality and blasphemy against the Catholic Church. Morality, religion or law restrained not his "extreme freedom." Various prisons and an insane asylum incarcerated the aristocrat for 32 years of his life: ten years in the Bastile, another year elsewhere in Paris, a month in Conciergerie, two years in a fortress, a year in Madelonnettes, three years in Bicêtre, a year in Sainte-Pélagie, and 13 years in the Charenton asylum. During the French revolution, people elected this criminal as delegate to the National Convention. He wrote many of his works in prison.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,733 reviews
January 26, 2016
Zelmire is an exceptionally beautiful name. It’s a shame I’d never be able to bestow it on my daughter for fear of her asking someday where I got the idea...
October 9, 2023
Scholars have tried to read all kinds of things into de Sade's cornerstone of transgressive literature: Is it a book about totalitarianism, as Pasolini's movie version implies? Is it trying to shed light on humanity's dark side, as Simone de Beauvoir suggests? Are we dealing with a satirical take on Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Camille Paglia's opinion), or even with a work of "pornology", as Gilles Deleuze assumes? I tend to take a more radical view: This book is the epitomy of nihilism, it is not trying to tell us anything. Instead, it tries to push the envelope of sexual deviation as far as possible - to no particular end, just for the sake of it. The result is extremely repulsive, which in this case means that de Sade's mission is successful: He wants to shock and disturb, and he does.
The book tells the story of four middle-aged, wealthy French libertines who spend 120 days in a castle in the Black Forest in order to indulge in extreme sexual acts. The protagonists have been abusing their daughters and now marry each other's kids while proceeding to sexually exploit them. They also choose 8 female and 8 male child/teenage sex slaves from a large number of kids abducted for the purpose. The rest of the personnel includes eight "studs" chosen for their large penises, four elderly women, cooks and servants, plus four middle-aged women who specialize in deviant sexual practices.
Those middle-aged women are crucial for the structure of the book, which has remained a fragment with only the first of four parts more or less finished. Each part is structured in 30 days and dedicated to different kinds of so-called "passions": Simple, complex, criminal and murderous. In a sinister take on One Thousand and One Nights, the middle-aged women tell stories about perverse events that stimulate the libertines to do similar or the same things to their victims. Be aware that the "simple passions" start with rape, child abuse and child prostitution, later acts involve feces, sodomy, mutilation, and pretty much everything you can, or rather: Hopefully can't imagine. And yes: 4 kinds of passions with 150 stories over 30 days each makes for 600 (!!!) extreme sexual acts. The book might not be finished, but de Sade outlined them all.
This is literature as a dare: The book is hard to get through because it is extremely disgusting and, somewhat mysteriously, also very boring. While there is a comical aspect to some rather silly over-the-top schemes of degradation, it's overall just dull to read torture scene after torture scene after torture scene. There is no emotional movement or development, it's just relentlessly cruel and repulsive. Fun fact: de Sade, who spent over 30 years in jail and mental institutions for his real life criminal behavior (also involving child abuse), wrote the book while incarcerated in the Bastille - he was transferred to another jail just two weeks before the Bastille was stormed in the French Revolution. During those events, the scroll with the original text remained hidden in the cell where it was later discovered.
So is this great literature? I'd say no. It's more of an illustration of where a human mind can go, to what extremes a writer can take a text. But apart from that demonstration, the book has nothing to say. To find rationalizations, to construct a meta-level in an attempt to render de Sade harmless might seem appealing, but the author wanted this text to be vicious, and it is.
If you want to learn more about this text, you can listen to our podcast episode (in German).
The book tells the story of four middle-aged, wealthy French libertines who spend 120 days in a castle in the Black Forest in order to indulge in extreme sexual acts. The protagonists have been abusing their daughters and now marry each other's kids while proceeding to sexually exploit them. They also choose 8 female and 8 male child/teenage sex slaves from a large number of kids abducted for the purpose. The rest of the personnel includes eight "studs" chosen for their large penises, four elderly women, cooks and servants, plus four middle-aged women who specialize in deviant sexual practices.
Those middle-aged women are crucial for the structure of the book, which has remained a fragment with only the first of four parts more or less finished. Each part is structured in 30 days and dedicated to different kinds of so-called "passions": Simple, complex, criminal and murderous. In a sinister take on One Thousand and One Nights, the middle-aged women tell stories about perverse events that stimulate the libertines to do similar or the same things to their victims. Be aware that the "simple passions" start with rape, child abuse and child prostitution, later acts involve feces, sodomy, mutilation, and pretty much everything you can, or rather: Hopefully can't imagine. And yes: 4 kinds of passions with 150 stories over 30 days each makes for 600 (!!!) extreme sexual acts. The book might not be finished, but de Sade outlined them all.
This is literature as a dare: The book is hard to get through because it is extremely disgusting and, somewhat mysteriously, also very boring. While there is a comical aspect to some rather silly over-the-top schemes of degradation, it's overall just dull to read torture scene after torture scene after torture scene. There is no emotional movement or development, it's just relentlessly cruel and repulsive. Fun fact: de Sade, who spent over 30 years in jail and mental institutions for his real life criminal behavior (also involving child abuse), wrote the book while incarcerated in the Bastille - he was transferred to another jail just two weeks before the Bastille was stormed in the French Revolution. During those events, the scroll with the original text remained hidden in the cell where it was later discovered.
So is this great literature? I'd say no. It's more of an illustration of where a human mind can go, to what extremes a writer can take a text. But apart from that demonstration, the book has nothing to say. To find rationalizations, to construct a meta-level in an attempt to render de Sade harmless might seem appealing, but the author wanted this text to be vicious, and it is.
If you want to learn more about this text, you can listen to our podcast episode (in German).
February 19, 2016
WARNING: This review talks about some very gruesome things but if you’re considering reading this book, you’d best be ready for gore.
First- can we talk about the fact that in the edition I read (Wilder Publications 2008), there’s an amazing offense warning on it? Why is it amazing, you ask? Thanks for playing. Because it reads as follows:
“This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race have changed before allowing them to read this classic work.”
HOLD THE FUCK UP. Are you telling me… are you telling me that the sick fucks over at Wilder Publications anticipate CHILDREN reading this book?
Look. I hate censorship. My parents never censored what I read and I turned out okay (then again, I grew up to read books like this, so maybe not). But if there was ever a case for a parent putting their foot down and taking a book away, this is it. Frankly, I was kind of hoping my mommy would take it away and I’m an adult.
Furthermore, note that the warning says “views on race.” Right, this book has zero mention of anything related to race. There are many reasons this book is fucked up. There are many, many, many reasons no child should read this book. Permit me to give you a brief overview of those reasons that is by no means comprehensive:
-Children are kidnapped, raped, and forcibly sodomized by middle-aged men, sometimes their own fathers, on every page.
-They’re shot, stabbed, drowned, drugged, bled out, crushed, have limbs amputated with a saw, lit on fire, shat on, forced to eat shit, smothered, flogged, flayed, have their bone marrow sucked out, waterboarded, strangled, forced to walk across broken glass, scalded, roasted, toasted, forced to eat their own grilled flesh, forced to switch intestines with each other, shot from cannons, ground to dust, poisoned, nailed to tables, nailed up in coffins, nailed up in spike-filled chests and rolled around, nailed to a cross, nailed to each other and left to die (yeah the marquis is really into nailing things), hanged, decapitated, and eaten.
-They are eaten alive by ravens or flies or mice or snakes or “famished reptiles”
-They die of being forced to lose their virginity to a stallion.
-Their orifices are sewed shut.
-Their genitals and eyeballs are popped with needles.
-They are forced to sit astride a pickaxe in their vaginas with cannonballs tied to each foot and left there to die.
-Their flesh is peeled from their bones and their nerve ends jerked around.
-Their eyelids are seared with matches so they can’t close them to sleep.
-Their bodies are used as plates for hot food and cut with sharp forks and knives.
-Their bowels are filled with boiling oil or hot irons.
-Little girls are sewed into donkey skins (???) which shrink and kill them (???).
My point is, this book is Saw IV on cocaine. Wilder Publications, you didn’t have to look hard to find something offensive in this book. Why did you pick the one thing (THE ONE THING ON THIS EARTH) that isn’t mentioned?
I’m further confused by the fruits of a cursory Google search- apparently Wilder Publications puts similar labels on many of their pre-modern books, like the Constitution, or Kant’s philosophy. However, those labels have one slight alteration: “...Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book… etc.”
I’m sorry, you didn’t think it might be a good idea to include the sexuality & interpersonal relations bit here? Think the 120 Days of Sodom has a politically correct take on sex & human decency? That’s telling, Wilder. That’s telling.
And no, it’s not because the company changed their warning label policy over time- the Kant book with the above label and the 120 Days of Sodom I read were both published in 2008. I DON’T GET IT.
Anyway, this book gets four stars not because I liked it (I was terrified to turn every page) but because I can’t help but admire the imagination of the fucked up piece of shit who wrote this. I’m scarred for life, but I have to be in awe of (and afraid of) a human mind that can dream up so many ways to be a sick bastard. However, it does get incredibly repetitive. After the 150th or so page (out of 370) you’ve heard it all and are wholly desensitized and nothing shocks you anymore. Despite de Sade’s impressive imagination, there is an ontological limit on how many different ways you can traumatize the human body and mind, so this book would have the same effect if it were half this length.
I would like to thank de Sade for giving me four villains by which all other fictional villains I encounter will be compared.
I think the only book that ever even came close to shocking me like this was Last Exit to Brooklyn, but even that’s no contest. 120 Days of Sodom is the most appalling thing I’ve ever read, and I’m afraid I’ll never be able to unread it.
But I’m not sorry I did- watching myself react to it was interesting (both emotionally/intellectually and physically- there were many times my whole body would be tense, or I’d have to curl up in the fetal position in my reading chair, or I’d make the most outrageous faces, and there was a lot of actual dry-heaving).
And also, I’ll read anything once. Even this.
First- can we talk about the fact that in the edition I read (Wilder Publications 2008), there’s an amazing offense warning on it? Why is it amazing, you ask? Thanks for playing. Because it reads as follows:
“This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race have changed before allowing them to read this classic work.”
HOLD THE FUCK UP. Are you telling me… are you telling me that the sick fucks over at Wilder Publications anticipate CHILDREN reading this book?
Look. I hate censorship. My parents never censored what I read and I turned out okay (then again, I grew up to read books like this, so maybe not). But if there was ever a case for a parent putting their foot down and taking a book away, this is it. Frankly, I was kind of hoping my mommy would take it away and I’m an adult.
Furthermore, note that the warning says “views on race.” Right, this book has zero mention of anything related to race. There are many reasons this book is fucked up. There are many, many, many reasons no child should read this book. Permit me to give you a brief overview of those reasons that is by no means comprehensive:
-Children are kidnapped, raped, and forcibly sodomized by middle-aged men, sometimes their own fathers, on every page.
-They’re shot, stabbed, drowned, drugged, bled out, crushed, have limbs amputated with a saw, lit on fire, shat on, forced to eat shit, smothered, flogged, flayed, have their bone marrow sucked out, waterboarded, strangled, forced to walk across broken glass, scalded, roasted, toasted, forced to eat their own grilled flesh, forced to switch intestines with each other, shot from cannons, ground to dust, poisoned, nailed to tables, nailed up in coffins, nailed up in spike-filled chests and rolled around, nailed to a cross, nailed to each other and left to die (yeah the marquis is really into nailing things), hanged, decapitated, and eaten.
-They are eaten alive by ravens or flies or mice or snakes or “famished reptiles”
-They die of being forced to lose their virginity to a stallion.
-Their orifices are sewed shut.
-Their genitals and eyeballs are popped with needles.
-They are forced to sit astride a pickaxe in their vaginas with cannonballs tied to each foot and left there to die.
-Their flesh is peeled from their bones and their nerve ends jerked around.
-Their eyelids are seared with matches so they can’t close them to sleep.
-Their bodies are used as plates for hot food and cut with sharp forks and knives.
-Their bowels are filled with boiling oil or hot irons.
-Little girls are sewed into donkey skins (???) which shrink and kill them (???).
My point is, this book is Saw IV on cocaine. Wilder Publications, you didn’t have to look hard to find something offensive in this book. Why did you pick the one thing (THE ONE THING ON THIS EARTH) that isn’t mentioned?
I’m further confused by the fruits of a cursory Google search- apparently Wilder Publications puts similar labels on many of their pre-modern books, like the Constitution, or Kant’s philosophy. However, those labels have one slight alteration: “...Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book… etc.”
I’m sorry, you didn’t think it might be a good idea to include the sexuality & interpersonal relations bit here? Think the 120 Days of Sodom has a politically correct take on sex & human decency? That’s telling, Wilder. That’s telling.
And no, it’s not because the company changed their warning label policy over time- the Kant book with the above label and the 120 Days of Sodom I read were both published in 2008. I DON’T GET IT.
Anyway, this book gets four stars not because I liked it (I was terrified to turn every page) but because I can’t help but admire the imagination of the fucked up piece of shit who wrote this. I’m scarred for life, but I have to be in awe of (and afraid of) a human mind that can dream up so many ways to be a sick bastard. However, it does get incredibly repetitive. After the 150th or so page (out of 370) you’ve heard it all and are wholly desensitized and nothing shocks you anymore. Despite de Sade’s impressive imagination, there is an ontological limit on how many different ways you can traumatize the human body and mind, so this book would have the same effect if it were half this length.
I would like to thank de Sade for giving me four villains by which all other fictional villains I encounter will be compared.
I think the only book that ever even came close to shocking me like this was Last Exit to Brooklyn, but even that’s no contest. 120 Days of Sodom is the most appalling thing I’ve ever read, and I’m afraid I’ll never be able to unread it.
But I’m not sorry I did- watching myself react to it was interesting (both emotionally/intellectually and physically- there were many times my whole body would be tense, or I’d have to curl up in the fetal position in my reading chair, or I’d make the most outrageous faces, and there was a lot of actual dry-heaving).
And also, I’ll read anything once. Even this.
May 18, 2015
***3" FUCKED UP x's INFINITY " STARS***
Marquis De Sade described his novel as "the most impure tale that has ever been told since our world began". .
I know I've said this numerous times but I've never meant it more than I do right now. THIS. STORY . IS. NOT. FOR. EVERYONE. It's obnoxiously repetitive, gruesome beyond belief, and just plain disgusting. With that said, the authors imagination is disturbingly fascinating and surprisingly comical... **don't judge me!** De Sage managed to make me gag, chuckle and cringe, all within a single paragraph. At times I felt my sanity was in serious jeopardy. Hell, I m still questioning if it remains intake.
The 120 Days of Sodom is a hefty story, therefore the easiest way for me summarize this fuckery is by comparing it to a buffet style restaurant. God, this is totally cheesy but its all I can come up with at the moment.
I'm just going to call said establishment "The fetish Cafe " which is really a secluded medieval castle and where all the fuckery takes place. . "The Fetish Cafe" is owned by 4 Libertinebastardsmen (2 of which are siblings):
* The Duc- The Bishops brother. Currently married to the Ducts daughter Constance. Loves to fuck. Period.
*The President de Curval -Married to Julie who is also the Ducs daughter. Prefers male anus over a female pucker but he'll get it in, where he can fit it in.
*The Durcet- Married to the Presidents daughter Adelaide, whom he cannot stand. Desperately in need of a little blue pill. Hates vagina.
*The Bishop- Perhaps the most timid of the bunch. Is the supposed uncle of Aline, but is really her father ( he bedded one of the Ducs previous wives) Detest vagina.
There are 4 world renowned chefs - 4 middle aged- prostitutes:
*Madame Duclos
*Madame Champville
*Madame Martaine
*Madame Desranges
Their sole purpose is narrate past experiences of their most unscrupulous customers, in which the 4 main characters then proceed to feast/perform similar acts on their victims. They "inspire"the Libertines.
The wait staff consist of 8 studs whom are experts in dishing out large helping of meat. ... these 8 cockmongers were chosen solely on the size of their penis.
The rest of the staff consist 8 boys and 8 girls between the ages of 12-15. They receive the brunt of the sexual, verbal and physical abuse.
Your choice of beverage:
*Snot smoothie
*Sauvignon de Phlegm
*Urine on the rocks
*Warm flatulence tea
*Coffee
Limited Appetizers:
Turd fritter or soft stool chowder
The buffet contains the following items:
*Brutality
* Cannibalism
* Sodomy
* Incest
*Sacrilegious activity
*Fecophilia/Scat
*Biastophilia/ Rape
*Sadism
*Pygophilia
*Masochism
*Pedophilia
*Degradation
*Beastility
*Necrophilia
*Sadism
Dessert
The libertines do not feel their patrons are entitled to such indulgence....
. . . . Now excuse me while I find something filled with unicorns, rainbow and fairy dust.. Haa! yeah right :-)
*** Special thanks to Lucy and Carla for taking this crazy journey with me***
For more reviews, Free E-books and Giveaways
Marquis De Sade described his novel as "the most impure tale that has ever been told since our world began". .
I know I've said this numerous times but I've never meant it more than I do right now. THIS. STORY . IS. NOT. FOR. EVERYONE. It's obnoxiously repetitive, gruesome beyond belief, and just plain disgusting. With that said, the authors imagination is disturbingly fascinating and surprisingly comical... **don't judge me!** De Sage managed to make me gag, chuckle and cringe, all within a single paragraph. At times I felt my sanity was in serious jeopardy. Hell, I m still questioning if it remains intake.
The 120 Days of Sodom is a hefty story, therefore the easiest way for me summarize this fuckery is by comparing it to a buffet style restaurant. God, this is totally cheesy but its all I can come up with at the moment.
I'm just going to call said establishment "The fetish Cafe " which is really a secluded medieval castle and where all the fuckery takes place. . "The Fetish Cafe" is owned by 4 Libertine
* The Duc- The Bishops brother. Currently married to the Ducts daughter Constance. Loves to fuck. Period.
*The President de Curval -Married to Julie who is also the Ducs daughter. Prefers male anus over a female pucker but he'll get it in, where he can fit it in.
*The Durcet- Married to the Presidents daughter Adelaide, whom he cannot stand. Desperately in need of a little blue pill. Hates vagina.
*The Bishop- Perhaps the most timid of the bunch. Is the supposed uncle of Aline, but is really her father ( he bedded one of the Ducs previous wives) Detest vagina.
There are 4 world renowned chefs - 4 middle aged- prostitutes:
*Madame Duclos
*Madame Champville
*Madame Martaine
*Madame Desranges
Their sole purpose is narrate past experiences of their most unscrupulous customers, in which the 4 main characters then proceed to feast/perform similar acts on their victims. They "inspire"the Libertines.
The wait staff consist of 8 studs whom are experts in dishing out large helping of meat. ... these 8 cockmongers were chosen solely on the size of their penis.
The rest of the staff consist 8 boys and 8 girls between the ages of 12-15. They receive the brunt of the sexual, verbal and physical abuse.
Your choice of beverage:
*Snot smoothie
*Sauvignon de Phlegm
*Urine on the rocks
*Warm flatulence tea
*Coffee
Limited Appetizers:
Turd fritter or soft stool chowder
The buffet contains the following items:
*Brutality
* Cannibalism
* Sodomy
* Incest
*Sacrilegious activity
*Fecophilia/Scat
*Biastophilia/ Rape
*Sadism
*Pygophilia
*Masochism
*Pedophilia
*Degradation
*Beastility
*Necrophilia
*Sadism
Dessert
The libertines do not feel their patrons are entitled to such indulgence....
. . . . Now excuse me while I find something filled with unicorns, rainbow and fairy dust.. Haa! yeah right :-)
*** Special thanks to Lucy and Carla for taking this crazy journey with me***
For more reviews, Free E-books and Giveaways
November 11, 2017
"Δεν μπορεί κανείς να φανταστεί σε ποιο βαθμό, ο άνθρωπος τα ποικίλλει[τα πάθη], όταν φλογιστεί η φαντασία του. Οι διαφορές ανάμεσά τους, υπέρμετρες σ’ όλες τις άλλες τους μανίες, σ’ όλες τις άλλες τους πράξεις, μεγαλώνουν ακόμη πιο πολύ. Όποιος μπορέσει να προσδιορίσει και να καταγράψει λεπτομερώς αυτές τις παρεκτροπές θα δώσει ίσως μια από τις ωραιότερες και πιο ενδιαφέρουσες μελέτες γύρω από τα ήθη".
Μαρκήσιος Ντε Σαντ.
Οι 120 μέρες των Σοδόμων είναι σύμφωνα με όλα τα πρότυπα αλλά και τη γνώμη του Μαρκησίου το πιο ζοφερό,απεχθές και ενοχλητικό βιβλίο που θα μπορούσε ποτέ να διαβαστεί.
Η πλοκή του αρκετά απλή και προσεκτικά δομημένη, επιτρέπει στο συγγραφέα να μας παρουσιάσει έναν μεγάλο αριθμό διεστραμμένων με άρτιο και κατανοητό τρόπο.
Βρισκόμαστε στις αρχές του 18ου αιώνα όπου μια παρέα τεσσάρων ευγενών της Γαλλίας με τεράστια περιουσία και εξουσία μετακομίζει για τέσσερις μήνες σε ένα απομονωμένο γοτθικό κάστρο.
Χαμένο και απροσπέλαστο κάπου μέσα στο Μέλανα Δρυμό.
Μαζί τους είναι μια μεγάλη ομάδα θυμάτων. Ανήλικα κορίτσια και αγόρια που έχουν απαχθεί απο τις οικογένειες τους. Πεπειραμένες πόρνες κάθε ηλικίας.
Οι σύζυγοι των τεσσάρων ευγενών (προϊόντα και αντικείμενα αιμομιξίας) και ενήλικοι άνδρες προικισμένοι ανατομικά απο τη φύση. Ανάμεσα τους κάποιες γυναίκες για υπηρετικό προσωπικό.
Ο πρώτος μήνας αφιερώνεται στα απλά πάθη και ο τελευταίος στα μεγαλύτερα φρικαλέα σεξουαλικά εγκλήματα.
Αφήγηση γεωμετρικά αυξανόμενης σεξουαλικής βλάβης-κακοποίησης.
Πριν συνεχίσω να γράψω τη γνώμη μου γι'αυτό το αριστούργημα φρίκης θα ήθελα να τονίσω πως αγάπησα αυτό το βιβλίο και θα εξηγήσω τους λόγους,αλλά κυρίως να υπερασπιστώ τους θιασώτες της αισθητικής εμπειρίας απο τη λογοτεχνία λέγοντας πως τίποτε δεν σας υποχρεώνει να το διαβάσετε. Τίποτα δεν σας υποχρεώνει να υποχρεώσετε να το διαβάσουν αυτοί που δεν είναι υποχρεωμένοι (όπως πολύ σωστά αναφέρεται στο επίμετρο).
Έτσι θα είμαστε όλοι ευχαριστημένοι τη στιγμή που γνωρίζουμε τι πραγματεύεται ο Μαρκήσιος μέσα στο έργο του και όχι καθαυτό το έργο του.
Ξεκινάμε να διαβάζουμε ένα καινοτόμο και άκρως αποκαλυπτικό έργο. Σε καμία περίπτωση ερωτικό αλλά ούτε αποκλειστικά φρικιαστικό. Είναι πρόδρομος μιας παγκόσμιας αλήθειας ως προς τον ψυχισμό των ανθρώπων απο καταβολής κόσμου.
Είναι ένα ημιτελές έργο που γράφτηκε απο τον Μαρκήσιο ενώ ήταν έγκλειστος σε σωφρονιστικό ίδρυμα λόγω ασέβειας και άπρεπης, σχεδόν εγκληματικής συμπεριφοράς. Πόσο ειρωνικό φαντάζει το γεγονός, ένας ανήθικος, διεστραμμένος κρατούμενος που σωφρονίζεται...γράφει παράλληλα ένα φρικαλέο κλασικό έπος για το σοδομισμό (με άνδρες ή γυναίκες) και το έγκλημα.
Αδιαμφισβήτητα ο Μαρκήσιος υπήρξε ένα απο τα πιο ριζοσπαστικά μυαλά στη Δυτική ιστορία. Καταφέρνει εκπληκτικά να συγχωνεύσει ψυχολογικές διαστροφές και ψυχρό ορθολογισμό σε μια απο τις κυριότερες πτυχές της ανθρώπινης ύπαρξης.
Παραμένει θεωρώ -μετά απο αυτή την ανάγνωση - μια τρομακτική μα και υπέρλαμπρη φιγούρα της παγκόσμιας ιστορίας και λογοτεχνίας. Ο άνδρας του οποίου το όνομα δημιούργησε το σαδισμό είναι γνωστός υπέρμαχος των βίαιων, βλάσφημων σεξουαλικών εκμεταλλεύσεων.
Σε αυτό το βιβλίο ο αναγνώστης είναι το θύμα.
Ο Σαντ με απόλυτη μαεστρία καταφέρνει να σου ενσταλάξει τη φιλοσοφία του με μια φυσική επαναστατική σοφία και μία βάναυση και αναρχική αισθητική απολαύσεων.
Βασικών αρχέγονων ενστίκτων. Φυσικής νομοτέλειας. Ισορροπημένης τάξης πραγμάτων και πολιτικών πραξεων που οδηγούν τον κάθε άνθρωπο στην πλήρη, ακόλαστη, ακαταμάχητη, ελεύθερη και ολική καταστροφή του πολιτισμού για την απόλυτη απελευθέρωση.
Καταστρέφει θεσμούς, αξίες, ήθη και πιστεύω για να καταλήξει στο καθεστώς των κυρίαρχων.
Ο πιο δυνατός επιβάλλει τις ορέξεις του στον άλλον. Η απεριόριστη εξουσία των εξεχόντων πέρα απο κάθε αρχή απαγόρευσης. Δεν τους συγκρατεί κανένας νομικός, πολιτιστικός ή ηθικός κανόνας προκειμένου να ικανοποιήσουν τις επιθυμίες τους.
Σύμφωνα με το Μαρκήσιο ο πολιτισμός και η οργανωμένες κοινωνίες καταπιέζουν τη φύση του ανθρώπου. Φέρνει εκατοντάδες παραδείγματα διαταραγμένων και νευρωτικών ατόμων- μέσα απο την αφήγηση του -επειδή πιέστηκαν κοινωνικά στο να εκδηλώσουν τις απαράδεκτες ορμές τους.
Αυτοί καταλήγουν στο απολαυστικό
σεξουαλικο έγκλημα πληρώνοντας κάθε τίμημα, εκτός τιμωρίας.
Έτσι βιώνουμε στην πορεία της ανάγνωσης την απόδειξη της φιλοσοφίας του Αριστοτέλη ότι χωρίς αρετή και σεμνότητα ο άνθρωπος είναι ένα απο τα απεχθέστερα και άγρια ζώα σε σχέση με το φαγητό και το σεξ.
Ουρολαγνεία, κοπροφαγία, παιδοκτονία, κτηνοβασία, βασανιστήρια και ακρωτηριασμοί προς σεξουαλική τέρψη είναι μερικά απο όσα εκφράζει ο συγγραφέας με μεγάλη μαεστρία.
Η τέχνη του έγκειται στο γεγονός πως αποστασιοποιείται απο κάθε πράξη και κρύβεται επιμελώς πίσω απο τους χαρακτήρες της ιστορίας.
Σύμφωνα με τον Μαρκήσιο θα έπρεπε να νομιμοποιηθεί ως υποχρεωτικός ο σοδομισμός αλλά και το σεξουαλικό έγκλημα.
Επειδή πριν ή χωρίς ή με το φόνο, το κοινό στοιχείο για να έχουμε αποτέλεσμα σεξουαλικής ηδονής και απόλαυσης είναι ο καταναγκασμός του άλλου.
Θα πρέπει απαραιτήτως μέσα απο την αρχή του σαδισμού να λείπει κάθε επικοινωνία ανάμεσα στους συμμετέχοντες, αν υπάρχει τότε τίποτα δεν πάει καλά.
Αντιθέτως αν δελεάσουμε με συμφέρον και εξαπάτηση η απόλαυση είναι ακόμη πιο μεγάλη.
•Θα μπορούσαμε να υποστηρίξουμε πως η έννοια της φυσικής ροπής προς απόλαυση (κάτι που υπεραμύνεται ο Μαρκησιος) προσλαμβάνει εντελώς διαφορετικό νόημα από κοινωνία σε κοινωνία αλλά και ανάμεσα σε άτομα της ίδιας κοινωνίας, αφού καθορίζεται από τους «πολιτιστικούς παράγοντες που διαπλάθουν τις έμφυτες τάσεις» που αντικατέστησαν την σεξουαλική συμπεριφορά που επιβάλλεται από τα ένστικτα.•
Οι πολιτιστικοί αυτοί παράγοντες είναι τα έθιμα, οι νόμοι και οι ηθικοί κανόνες, οι τελετουργίες και οι θρησκευτικές αξίες. [αφορισμοί του Μαρκήσιου].
Κανένας δεν είναι εκ φύσεως καλός ή κακός, ούτε βιολογικά διαταραγμένος. Απλώς ο "κακός" δεν εκπολιτίστηκε αρκετά ώστε να διαχειριστεί σωστά τις ροπές που υπάρχουν σε όλους μας. Τώρα ποιες και γιατί πρέπει να καταπιεστούν είναι ένα μεγάλο κοινωνικό τέλμα.
•Όμως μόνο με ελεύθερες ενορμήσεις πετυχαίνουμε έναν μη καταπιεστικό πολιτισμό και μια ιδανική απόλαυση που μας χάρισε για αυτό το σκοπό η ίδια η φύση.•
Απο τη μια το φυσιολογικό των ανώμαλων ορμών και απο την άλλη η απαγόρευση να εκδηλωθούν.
Να πραγματωθούν οι ροπές του ασυνείδητου,οι παράνομες σκέψεις, οι εγκληματικές πράξεις ως φυσικές απολαύσεις ή να καταδικαστούν ηθικά;
Ίσως με λιγότερη απόλαυση να απορρίψουμε το έγκλημα ως ηθικό υποκείμενο. Οι αποφάσεις καθαρά προσωπικές και οι επιπτώσεις αντίστοιχα.
Ο μαρκήσιος δεν αποκλίνει απο τις συμβουλές των εκκλησιαστικών πατέρων όταν λεει:
«Οι αφηγήσεις σας πρέπει να είναι όσο γίνεται πιο διεξοδικές και εκτεταμένες. Δεν μπορούμε να κρίνουμε τι σχέση υπάρχει ανάμεσα στο πάθος που περιγράφετε και στα ήθη και στους χαρακτήρες των ανθρώπων, παρά μόνο εφόσον δε συγκαλύπτετε κανένα περιστατικό. Άλλωστε τα πιο ασήμαντα περιστατικά εξυπηρετούν αφάνταστα αυτό που περιμένουμε από τις αφηγήσεις σας».
Και αυτό που τον κάνει ξεχωριστό και τεράστιο είναι η αντιστράτευση του απο την σημερινή εξέλιξη της σεξουαλικότητας.
Δεν δέχεται καμία επικοινωνία και κανενός είδους συνείδηση εκτός απο το δόλο.
Δεν έχει καμία ευαισθησία όταν περιγράφει και πιστεύει το φόνο και τα βασανιστήρια σαν πρόδρομους άκρατης ηδονής.
Αποστασιοποιείται απο την ηδονή με συγκατάθεση,ανταλλαγή,συνενοχή και κοινό οργασμό.
Ο Σαντ κρατά στον φιλοσοφικό του οπλισμό την ψυχή της ανθρωπότητας. Ο άνθρωπος νιώθει απόλαυση όταν σκοτώνει ή φρίκη μπρος στον φόνο;
Μυστηριακός πυρήνας της ανθρώπινης ύπαρξης.
Σίγουρα η ανθρωπότητα θα ήταν διαφορετική χωρίς αυτή τη διαβόητη παρουσία του Μαρκησίου ντε Σαντ.
Καλή ανάγνωση.
💋💋💋💋
Πολλούς ασπασμούς.
Μαρκήσιος Ντε Σαντ.
Οι 120 μέρες των Σοδόμων είναι σύμφωνα με όλα τα πρότυπα αλλά και τη γνώμη του Μαρκησίου το πιο ζοφερό,απεχθές και ενοχλητικό βιβλίο που θα μπορούσε ποτέ να διαβαστεί.
Η πλοκή του αρκετά απλή και προσεκτικά δομημένη, επιτρέπει στο συγγραφέα να μας παρουσιάσει έναν μεγάλο αριθμό διεστραμμένων με άρτιο και κατανοητό τρόπο.
Βρισκόμαστε στις αρχές του 18ου αιώνα όπου μια παρέα τεσσάρων ευγενών της Γαλλίας με τεράστια περιουσία και εξουσία μετακομίζει για τέσσερις μήνες σε ένα απομονωμένο γοτθικό κάστρο.
Χαμένο και απροσπέλαστο κάπου μέσα στο Μέλανα Δρυμό.
Μαζί τους είναι μια μεγάλη ομάδα θυμάτων. Ανήλικα κορίτσια και αγόρια που έχουν απαχθεί απο τις οικογένειες τους. Πεπειραμένες πόρνες κάθε ηλικίας.
Οι σύζυγοι των τεσσάρων ευγενών (προϊόντα και αντικείμενα αιμομιξίας) και ενήλικοι άνδρες προικισμένοι ανατομικά απο τη φύση. Ανάμεσα τους κάποιες γυναίκες για υπηρετικό προσωπικό.
Ο πρώτος μήνας αφιερώνεται στα απλά πάθη και ο τελευταίος στα μεγαλύτερα φρικαλέα σεξουαλικά εγκλήματα.
Αφήγηση γεωμετρικά αυξανόμενης σεξουαλικής βλάβης-κακοποίησης.
Πριν συνεχίσω να γράψω τη γνώμη μου γι'αυτό το αριστούργημα φρίκης θα ήθελα να τονίσω πως αγάπησα αυτό το βιβλίο και θα εξηγήσω τους λόγους,αλλά κυρίως να υπερασπιστώ τους θιασώτες της αισθητικής εμπειρίας απο τη λογοτεχνία λέγοντας πως τίποτε δεν σας υποχρεώνει να το διαβάσετε. Τίποτα δεν σας υποχρεώνει να υποχρεώσετε να το διαβάσουν αυτοί που δεν είναι υποχρεωμένοι (όπως πολύ σωστά αναφέρεται στο επίμετρο).
Έτσι θα είμαστε όλοι ευχαριστημένοι τη στιγμή που γνωρίζουμε τι πραγματεύεται ο Μαρκήσιος μέσα στο έργο του και όχι καθαυτό το έργο του.
Ξεκινάμε να διαβάζουμε ένα καινοτόμο και άκρως αποκαλυπτικό έργο. Σε καμία περίπτωση ερωτικό αλλά ούτε αποκλειστικά φρικιαστικό. Είναι πρόδρομος μιας παγκόσμιας αλήθειας ως προς τον ψυχισμό των ανθρώπων απο καταβολής κόσμου.
Είναι ένα ημιτελές έργο που γράφτηκε απο τον Μαρκήσιο ενώ ήταν έγκλειστος σε σωφρονιστικό ίδρυμα λόγω ασέβειας και άπρεπης, σχεδόν εγκληματικής συμπεριφοράς. Πόσο ειρωνικό φαντάζει το γεγονός, ένας ανήθικος, διεστραμμένος κρατούμενος που σωφρονίζεται...γράφει παράλληλα ένα φρικαλέο κλασικό έπος για το σοδομισμό (με άνδρες ή γυναίκες) και το έγκλημα.
Αδιαμφισβήτητα ο Μαρκήσιος υπήρξε ένα απο τα πιο ριζοσπαστικά μυαλά στη Δυτική ιστορία. Καταφέρνει εκπληκτικά να συγχωνεύσει ψυχολογικές διαστροφές και ψυχρό ορθολογισμό σε μια απο τις κυριότερες πτυχές της ανθρώπινης ύπαρξης.
Παραμένει θεωρώ -μετά απο αυτή την ανάγνωση - μια τρομακτική μα και υπέρλαμπρη φιγούρα της παγκόσμιας ιστορίας και λογοτεχνίας. Ο άνδρας του οποίου το όνομα δημιούργησε το σαδισμό είναι γνωστός υπέρμαχος των βίαιων, βλάσφημων σεξουαλικών εκμεταλλεύσεων.
Σε αυτό το βιβλίο ο αναγνώστης είναι το θύμα.
Ο Σαντ με απόλυτη μαεστρία καταφέρνει να σου ενσταλάξει τη φιλοσοφία του με μια φυσική επαναστατική σοφία και μία βάναυση και αναρχική αισθητική απολαύσεων.
Βασικών αρχέγονων ενστίκτων. Φυσικής νομοτέλειας. Ισορροπημένης τάξης πραγμάτων και πολιτικών πραξεων που οδηγούν τον κάθε άνθρωπο στην πλήρη, ακόλαστη, ακαταμάχητη, ελεύθερη και ολική καταστροφή του πολιτισμού για την απόλυτη απελευθέρωση.
Καταστρέφει θεσμούς, αξίες, ήθη και πιστεύω για να καταλήξει στο καθεστώς των κυρίαρχων.
Ο πιο δυνατός επιβάλλει τις ορέξεις του στον άλλον. Η απεριόριστη εξουσία των εξεχόντων πέρα απο κάθε αρχή απαγόρευσης. Δεν τους συγκρατεί κανένας νομικός, πολιτιστικός ή ηθικός κανόνας προκειμένου να ικανοποιήσουν τις επιθυμίες τους.
Σύμφωνα με το Μαρκήσιο ο πολιτισμός και η οργανωμένες κοινωνίες καταπιέζουν τη φύση του ανθρώπου. Φέρνει εκατοντάδες παραδείγματα διαταραγμένων και νευρωτικών ατόμων- μέσα απο την αφήγηση του -επειδή πιέστηκαν κοινωνικά στο να εκδηλώσουν τις απαράδεκτες ορμές τους.
Αυτοί καταλήγουν στο απολαυστικό
σεξουαλικο έγκλημα πληρώνοντας κάθε τίμημα, εκτός τιμωρίας.
Έτσι βιώνουμε στην πορεία της ανάγνωσης την απόδειξη της φιλοσοφίας του Αριστοτέλη ότι χωρίς αρετή και σεμνότητα ο άνθρωπος είναι ένα απο τα απεχθέστερα και άγρια ζώα σε σχέση με το φαγητό και το σεξ.
Ουρολαγνεία, κοπροφαγία, παιδοκτονία, κτηνοβασία, βασανιστήρια και ακρωτηριασμοί προς σεξουαλική τέρψη είναι μερικά απο όσα εκφράζει ο συγγραφέας με μεγάλη μαεστρία.
Η τέχνη του έγκειται στο γεγονός πως αποστασιοποιείται απο κάθε πράξη και κρύβεται επιμελώς πίσω απο τους χαρακτήρες της ιστορίας.
Σύμφωνα με τον Μαρκήσιο θα έπρεπε να νομιμοποιηθεί ως υποχρεωτικός ο σοδομισμός αλλά και το σεξουαλικό έγκλημα.
Επειδή πριν ή χωρίς ή με το φόνο, το κοινό στοιχείο για να έχουμε αποτέλεσμα σεξουαλικής ηδονής και απόλαυσης είναι ο καταναγκασμός του άλλου.
Θα πρέπει απαραιτήτως μέσα απο την αρχή του σαδισμού να λείπει κάθε επικοινωνία ανάμεσα στους συμμετέχοντες, αν υπάρχει τότε τίποτα δεν πάει καλά.
Αντιθέτως αν δελεάσουμε με συμφέρον και εξαπάτηση η απόλαυση είναι ακόμη πιο μεγάλη.
•Θα μπορούσαμε να υποστηρίξουμε πως η έννοια της φυσικής ροπής προς απόλαυση (κάτι που υπεραμύνεται ο Μαρκησιος) προσλαμβάνει εντελώς διαφορετικό νόημα από κοινωνία σε κοινωνία αλλά και ανάμεσα σε άτομα της ίδιας κοινωνίας, αφού καθορίζεται από τους «πολιτιστικούς παράγοντες που διαπλάθουν τις έμφυτες τάσεις» που αντικατέστησαν την σεξουαλική συμπεριφορά που επιβάλλεται από τα ένστικτα.•
Οι πολιτιστικοί αυτοί παράγοντες είναι τα έθιμα, οι νόμοι και οι ηθικοί κανόνες, οι τελετουργίες και οι θρησκευτικές αξίες. [αφορισμοί του Μαρκήσιου].
Κανένας δεν είναι εκ φύσεως καλός ή κακός, ούτε βιολογικά διαταραγμένος. Απλώς ο "κακός" δεν εκπολιτίστηκε αρκετά ώστε να διαχειριστεί σωστά τις ροπές που υπάρχουν σε όλους μας. Τώρα ποιες και γιατί πρέπει να καταπιεστούν είναι ένα μεγάλο κοινωνικό τέλμα.
•Όμως μόνο με ελεύθερες ενορμήσεις πετυχαίνουμε έναν μη καταπιεστικό πολιτισμό και μια ιδανική απόλαυση που μας χάρισε για αυτό το σκοπό η ίδια η φύση.•
Απο τη μια το φυσιολογικό των ανώμαλων ορμών και απο την άλλη η απαγόρευση να εκδηλωθούν.
Να πραγματωθούν οι ροπές του ασυνείδητου,οι παράνομες σκέψεις, οι εγκληματικές πράξεις ως φυσικές απολαύσεις ή να καταδικαστούν ηθικά;
Ίσως με λιγότερη απόλαυση να απορρίψουμε το έγκλημα ως ηθικό υποκείμενο. Οι αποφάσεις καθαρά προσωπικές και οι επιπτώσεις αντίστοιχα.
Ο μαρκήσιος δεν αποκλίνει απο τις συμβουλές των εκκλησιαστικών πατέρων όταν λεει:
«Οι αφηγήσεις σας πρέπει να είναι όσο γίνεται πιο διεξοδικές και εκτεταμένες. Δεν μπορούμε να κρίνουμε τι σχέση υπάρχει ανάμεσα στο πάθος που περιγράφετε και στα ήθη και στους χαρακτήρες των ανθρώπων, παρά μόνο εφόσον δε συγκαλύπτετε κανένα περιστατικό. Άλλωστε τα πιο ασήμαντα περιστατικά εξυπηρετούν αφάνταστα αυτό που περιμένουμε από τις αφηγήσεις σας».
Και αυτό που τον κάνει ξεχωριστό και τεράστιο είναι η αντιστράτευση του απο την σημερινή εξέλιξη της σεξουαλικότητας.
Δεν δέχεται καμία επικοινωνία και κανενός είδους συνείδηση εκτός απο το δόλο.
Δεν έχει καμία ευαισθησία όταν περιγράφει και πιστεύει το φόνο και τα βασανιστήρια σαν πρόδρομους άκρατης ηδονής.
Αποστασιοποιείται απο την ηδονή με συγκατάθεση,ανταλλαγή,συνενοχή και κοινό οργασμό.
Ο Σαντ κρατά στον φιλοσοφικό του οπλισμό την ψυχή της ανθρωπότητας. Ο άνθρωπος νιώθει απόλαυση όταν σκοτώνει ή φρίκη μπρος στον φόνο;
Μυστηριακός πυρήνας της ανθρώπινης ύπαρξης.
Σίγουρα η ανθρωπότητα θα ήταν διαφορετική χωρίς αυτή τη διαβόητη παρουσία του Μαρκησίου ντε Σαντ.
Καλή ανάγνωση.
💋💋💋💋
Πολλούς ασπασμούς.
August 9, 2023
Sí, es un libro transgresor y perverso, incluso repetitivo, pero más allá de la historia pornográfica que narra el autor, como en todos sus libros, Sade hace una crítica exhaustiva a su entorno y a la sociedad francesa.
Podría considerarse una lectura asquerosa, no voy a decir que no, pero se trata de incomodar, de escarbar en lo podrido del alma humana que somete, corrompe y por medio del poder llega al límite.
Solo Sade puede superarse a sí mismo y con este libro, lo logra.
Podría considerarse una lectura asquerosa, no voy a decir que no, pero se trata de incomodar, de escarbar en lo podrido del alma humana que somete, corrompe y por medio del poder llega al límite.
Solo Sade puede superarse a sí mismo y con este libro, lo logra.
December 4, 2013
I am not a prude. I am not the type of person who will hesitate from delving into works others might find dark. One of my favorite novels is the Exorcist, commonly regarded as one of the most terrifying books ever written. I have pictures on the push-pin board in front of me while I write this containing images from Silent Hill, Audition, and other really gruesome stuff...of course, next to that I have pictures from It's a Wonderful Life and Aladdin, but that's not the point! Point is, I have no issue with things people might think are a little unorthodox.
This is not unorthodox. This is sadist porn.
Let me elaborate. The term "torture porn" has been applied to many works people dismiss as just gory or too violent. This is literal pornography in its most literal sense. The work itself exists to demonstrate violence for violence's sake, with the plot--if you can call it a plot--existing just to bring the audience to the next act of sexual sadism. These acts of sadism are grotesque, to the point where, if I were to bring up these acts in front of polite company, they'd put me away.
However, that's not why this book is rotten. After all, it's supposed to be horrifying. It's supposed to be repugnant. That's what I thought when I read this book--after seeing the Pier Pasolini film based on said book. The movie is often regarded as the most disturbing thing many people have ever seen, but the film is merciful to its audience compared to the book. One could argue that seeing these acts is far worse than reading about them, since one can just turn their mind off and blindly glance over the grotesque details. However, the film does something that the book does not.
It realizes its antagonists are evil.
The book's most disturbing quality isn't that it shows disturbing material for the sake of it so much as that it does it AND ACTS LIKE IT'S A GOOD THING. I initially thought it was a satire of some sort, but then realized, after looking into de Sade's other work, this couldn't be the case. This was just a list of the man's sexual fantasies, each one more screwed up than the last. The loving detail put into this book is enough to make someone cry on the inside.
And yet, upon reading this book, it cannot be forgotten. It's magnetizing, and remains buried inside of your head for YEARS to come. I've thankfully used it as mild inspiration for my writing. Whenever I need to hate one of my characters, I just think of how much I hate the villains in this book. The desired effect comes shortly.
This is not unorthodox. This is sadist porn.
Let me elaborate. The term "torture porn" has been applied to many works people dismiss as just gory or too violent. This is literal pornography in its most literal sense. The work itself exists to demonstrate violence for violence's sake, with the plot--if you can call it a plot--existing just to bring the audience to the next act of sexual sadism. These acts of sadism are grotesque, to the point where, if I were to bring up these acts in front of polite company, they'd put me away.
However, that's not why this book is rotten. After all, it's supposed to be horrifying. It's supposed to be repugnant. That's what I thought when I read this book--after seeing the Pier Pasolini film based on said book. The movie is often regarded as the most disturbing thing many people have ever seen, but the film is merciful to its audience compared to the book. One could argue that seeing these acts is far worse than reading about them, since one can just turn their mind off and blindly glance over the grotesque details. However, the film does something that the book does not.
It realizes its antagonists are evil.
The book's most disturbing quality isn't that it shows disturbing material for the sake of it so much as that it does it AND ACTS LIKE IT'S A GOOD THING. I initially thought it was a satire of some sort, but then realized, after looking into de Sade's other work, this couldn't be the case. This was just a list of the man's sexual fantasies, each one more screwed up than the last. The loving detail put into this book is enough to make someone cry on the inside.
And yet, upon reading this book, it cannot be forgotten. It's magnetizing, and remains buried inside of your head for YEARS to come. I've thankfully used it as mild inspiration for my writing. Whenever I need to hate one of my characters, I just think of how much I hate the villains in this book. The desired effect comes shortly.
March 9, 2022
ریویوو نصب شد :))
در میان کتاب های بسیار مشهور اما کم خوانده شده، بدون شک "صد و بیست روز سدوم" بدنام ترین ، بحث برانگیز ترین و به نوعی غیر قابل خواندن ترین آن هاست. این کتاب چکیده تمام زشتی ها، خشونت ، تجاوزات و هر عمل کثیفی است که به ذهن انسان می رسد.
کتاب ۱۲۰ روز سدوم هیچ ارتباطی به سکس، عشق شهوانی و حتی پورنوگرافی ندارد. در حقیقت هیچ چیز تحریک کننده از نظر جنسی در این کتاب نیست. اما این کتاب پر است از انواع و اقسام پوزیشن های سکس و توصیف جنسی بدن و روابط. اینکه چطور توصیف روابط جنسی، آنهم با جزئیات باور نکردی دقیق، نمی تواند منجر به برانگیختگی خوانتده شود، احتمالا بزرگترین جذابیت کار مارکیز دو ساد، نویسنده این کتاب است.
اما من قبلا برای شما راز ساد را فاش کرده ام. در این کتاب روابط جنسی فراوان توصیف شده اند، اما روابطی که بر پایه تبعیض، خشم، خشونت، بی بند و باری و عصیان شکل گرفته اند. اندام توصیف شده اند، اما چیزی جز کثافت و بوی گند را در ذهن خواننده تصویرسازی نمی کنند. حتی بدن های جوان و فرشته گون کودکان نیز در بستر توحش داستان ، به شکلی باعث اشمئزاز و تهوع می شود.
کتاب چهار فصل دارد که تنها فصل اول آن کامل نوشته شده و ساد فرصت نکرده در سی و چند روز محکومیت اش در زندان باسیل، بقیه فصول را کامل کند. سه فصل دیگر کتاب تنها به صورت سرفصل های شماره گذاری شده، اما با جزئیات صحنه نوشته شده اند؛ و از تمایلات معمولی تا خشونت بی حد و مرز جنسی و قتل در حین رابطه را در بر میگیرند.
ادبیات ساد بسیار غیر معمولی است و به سختی می توان باور کرد یک فیلسوف برجسته چنین چیز غیر قابل خواندنی بنویسد. من با برداشت های هنری این کتاب مخالفتی ندارم، بنظر من هم نوشتن چیزی تا این حد زشت، و خلق تصویری تا این حد ترسناک از موضوعی تا این حد غریزی و دلخواه، کار هر کسی نیست. یک ذهن بیمار ، عصبانی و بی پروا لازم دارد که ظاهرا دوساد در شرایطی قرار داشت که همه این پیش نیازها را مهیا می کرد.
این کتاب به نحوی بیانگر وضعیت دوساد در زمان نوشتنش است، زیرا او در آن زمان به حال خودش رها شده، و عصبانی و فروریخته بود.
۱۲۰ روز سدوم یک داستان زشت است که از تباهی انسان لذت می برد.
خیلی خوشحالم تمومش کردم . واقعا خوندنش عذاب الیم بود. نه به خاطر اینکه من آدم معتقدی باشم و کتاب هم پر از صحنه های جنسی خشنه، بلکه همه عذابم بخاطر این بود که هر چی میخوندم به هیچ چیز نمی رسیدم.
مثل فیلمش، اینم یه "خب که چی؟" بزرگ داشت تهش.
من اینو خوندم ولی شما نخونید
همین!
در میان کتاب های بسیار مشهور اما کم خوانده شده، بدون شک "صد و بیست روز سدوم" بدنام ترین ، بحث برانگیز ترین و به نوعی غیر قابل خواندن ترین آن هاست. این کتاب چکیده تمام زشتی ها، خشونت ، تجاوزات و هر عمل کثیفی است که به ذهن انسان می رسد.
کتاب ۱۲۰ روز سدوم هیچ ارتباطی به سکس، عشق شهوانی و حتی پورنوگرافی ندارد. در حقیقت هیچ چیز تحریک کننده از نظر جنسی در این کتاب نیست. اما این کتاب پر است از انواع و اقسام پوزیشن های سکس و توصیف جنسی بدن و روابط. اینکه چطور توصیف روابط جنسی، آنهم با جزئیات باور نکردی دقیق، نمی تواند منجر به برانگیختگی خوانتده شود، احتمالا بزرگترین جذابیت کار مارکیز دو ساد، نویسنده این کتاب است.
اما من قبلا برای شما راز ساد را فاش کرده ام. در این کتاب روابط جنسی فراوان توصیف شده اند، اما روابطی که بر پایه تبعیض، خشم، خشونت، بی بند و باری و عصیان شکل گرفته اند. اندام توصیف شده اند، اما چیزی جز کثافت و بوی گند را در ذهن خواننده تصویرسازی نمی کنند. حتی بدن های جوان و فرشته گون کودکان نیز در بستر توحش داستان ، به شکلی باعث اشمئزاز و تهوع می شود.
کتاب چهار فصل دارد که تنها فصل اول آن کامل نوشته شده و ساد فرصت نکرده در سی و چند روز محکومیت اش در زندان باسیل، بقیه فصول را کامل کند. سه فصل دیگر کتاب تنها به صورت سرفصل های شماره گذاری شده، اما با جزئیات صحنه نوشته شده اند؛ و از تمایلات معمولی تا خشونت بی حد و مرز جنسی و قتل در حین رابطه را در بر میگیرند.
ادبیات ساد بسیار غیر معمولی است و به سختی می توان باور کرد یک فیلسوف برجسته چنین چیز غیر قابل خواندنی بنویسد. من با برداشت های هنری این کتاب مخالفتی ندارم، بنظر من هم نوشتن چیزی تا این حد زشت، و خلق تصویری تا این حد ترسناک از موضوعی تا این حد غریزی و دلخواه، کار هر کسی نیست. یک ذهن بیمار ، عصبانی و بی پروا لازم دارد که ظاهرا دوساد در شرایطی قرار داشت که همه این پیش نیازها را مهیا می کرد.
این کتاب به نحوی بیانگر وضعیت دوساد در زمان نوشتنش است، زیرا او در آن زمان به حال خودش رها شده، و عصبانی و فروریخته بود.
۱۲۰ روز سدوم یک داستان زشت است که از تباهی انسان لذت می برد.
خیلی خوشحالم تمومش کردم . واقعا خوندنش عذاب الیم بود. نه به خاطر اینکه من آدم معتقدی باشم و کتاب هم پر از صحنه های جنسی خشنه، بلکه همه عذابم بخاطر این بود که هر چی میخوندم به هیچ چیز نمی رسیدم.
مثل فیلمش، اینم یه "خب که چی؟" بزرگ داشت تهش.
من اینو خوندم ولی شما نخونید
همین!
August 7, 2025
Of course, it is hardly sustainable to read this unfinished book, which is undoubtedly the worst of Sade's work, the worst in that it reveals even more bluntly, bordering on the bearable, the vices of human nature, its hidden side to flourishing. Because this is Sade's goal, his contemporaries denigrated him all his life. Or accused of erotic literature here, we can see that the goal is not to arouse the sensual image of the reader but to denounce the vices that remain in each of us, pushed here to their paroxysm. In particular, because it is about child abuse, which is always even less acceptable. However, the strength of this too-disparaged work is that it is, unfortunately, seldom appreciated at its current value.
March 4, 2020
One cannot separate The 120 Days of Sodom from the biography of its author, the deranged aristocrat the Marquis de Sade, and the fascinating story of its authorship: hastily scrawled in tiny print onto a 12-metre scroll of paper over the course of 37 days, while the author was imprisoned in the Bastille, just before the French Revolution. These scrolls were presumed lost during the storming of the Bastille, only to be rediscovered and published for the first time in the 20th Century.
The novel's structure is a sort of twisted Decameron, set in a remote castle during the months of November to February, with each day delivering increasing levels of degradation and depravity ("increasing" here being perhaps a little misleading, for the novel begins with allusions to murder, abduction and child-rape, but it does indeed manage to escalate considerably even from this starting point).
Understandably, given the conditions of its composition, The 120 Days of Sodom is an incomplete work. There are only 30 or so fully fledged days, with the remainder presented only in outline (as they are stated directly without context, some of these outlines are actually quite hilarious. I had considered quoting some of them here, but have decided to spare you). Even the "completed" sections are unfinished, containing many marginal notes, abbreviations and grammatical inconsistencies. The novel as it exists today was intended to be a draft for a much longer work, which was never completed (it is said that the Marquis cried tears of blood upon learning his manuscript was lost). I doubt, however that the completed version of this novel would have been the comprehensive encyclopaedia of sexuality that the Marquis may have envisioned; so fixated was he on his own proclivities - those of sodomy, violence and manipulation of bodily discharges - that the work consistently hits only a few tones, disturbing as those tones may be. The four hundred extant pages are more than enough for the reader to get the idea.
So why read these ramblings of a deranged mind, and why lend them literary importance? Ted Bundy, who killed 30 or more women, would perform sexual acts with the corpses and severed body parts of his victims. It is difficult to comprehend what could drive someone kill and mutilate another person (let alone do it repeatedly), but this confusion evaporates when you realise that his motive, as is so often the case, was sexual. John Wayne Gacy, after his first murder (which he claimed to be accidental) described experiencing a mind-numbing orgasm as he killed the boy, which likely encouraged him to subsequent acts. If these figures seem extreme in comparison to the Marquis, know that their acts are in fact described and exceeded in The 120 Days of Sodom.
Such is the power of sexual desire that it has the capability to overpower all other natural tendencies. What's fascinating is that human sexuality is composed along such a wide and multi-dimensional spectrum, by which the same natural tendency in one case may lead to stable and normal family relationships - the very perpetuation of life - and in others can lead to atrocities such as those referred to above, and described in this novel. I suspect the number of people living with sexual proclivities that may impel them to do harm to others is much higher than might be imagined; these people prevented from acting by their own moral inhibition, or fear of legal or social repercussions, or perhaps solely due to lack of opportunity.
For examples perhaps less extreme than Bundy and Gacy, we need look no further for evidence than the recent examples of Geoffrey Epstein or Harvey Weinstein, whose power over others was for a time able to shield them from accountability. It may therefore be the case that power does not corrupt, it simply overcomes the barriers and inhibitions one faces, facilitating the actualisation of one's existing proclivities. Those who are able to control themselves against their instincts are pitiable in a different way: they are condemned to a life of dissatisfaction and self-loathing. We should indeed be thankful for this self-sacrifice.
The existence of people who are driven to criminal behaviour by their sexual preferences - take even your garden-variety pedophiles, sadists and zoophiles - is a reminder of our own moral luck in not having been born with such desires. While condemning their actions, we must also remember that, "there but for the grace of God go I", or in the Marquis' own words (p41):
It is important not to overlook the horror of the crimes described in this novel (that would be a failure to imagine the totality of the scenes being depicted), or dismiss them as idle fantasy (the Marquis was able to act on some of them, and there have been others to later take up his mantle), or to romanticise the Marquis de Sade as some sort of enlightened sexual adventurer. He was a deranged man whose education, wealth and position afforded him the freedom to act upon his desires with some success. His offences were not limited to upsetting the delicate mores and moral sensibilities of his time: he was unequivocally a rapist, and likely a murderer. His sexual preferences are today classified in the DSM as a mental condition which bears his name (sexual sadism disorder). He is certainly not a man to be admired. And yet The 120 Days of Sodom has a place in literature as a rare, comprehensive and unfiltered account of this dark part of the range of human experience. It is a reminder of what the human mind is sometimes capable. And what is perhaps most unsettling, is that though our proclivities may differ, we all share with the Marquis this same underlying sexual impulse, and occupy points within a common spectrum of sexual desire.
The novel's structure is a sort of twisted Decameron, set in a remote castle during the months of November to February, with each day delivering increasing levels of degradation and depravity ("increasing" here being perhaps a little misleading, for the novel begins with allusions to murder, abduction and child-rape, but it does indeed manage to escalate considerably even from this starting point).
Understandably, given the conditions of its composition, The 120 Days of Sodom is an incomplete work. There are only 30 or so fully fledged days, with the remainder presented only in outline (as they are stated directly without context, some of these outlines are actually quite hilarious. I had considered quoting some of them here, but have decided to spare you). Even the "completed" sections are unfinished, containing many marginal notes, abbreviations and grammatical inconsistencies. The novel as it exists today was intended to be a draft for a much longer work, which was never completed (it is said that the Marquis cried tears of blood upon learning his manuscript was lost). I doubt, however that the completed version of this novel would have been the comprehensive encyclopaedia of sexuality that the Marquis may have envisioned; so fixated was he on his own proclivities - those of sodomy, violence and manipulation of bodily discharges - that the work consistently hits only a few tones, disturbing as those tones may be. The four hundred extant pages are more than enough for the reader to get the idea.
So why read these ramblings of a deranged mind, and why lend them literary importance? Ted Bundy, who killed 30 or more women, would perform sexual acts with the corpses and severed body parts of his victims. It is difficult to comprehend what could drive someone kill and mutilate another person (let alone do it repeatedly), but this confusion evaporates when you realise that his motive, as is so often the case, was sexual. John Wayne Gacy, after his first murder (which he claimed to be accidental) described experiencing a mind-numbing orgasm as he killed the boy, which likely encouraged him to subsequent acts. If these figures seem extreme in comparison to the Marquis, know that their acts are in fact described and exceeded in The 120 Days of Sodom.
Such is the power of sexual desire that it has the capability to overpower all other natural tendencies. What's fascinating is that human sexuality is composed along such a wide and multi-dimensional spectrum, by which the same natural tendency in one case may lead to stable and normal family relationships - the very perpetuation of life - and in others can lead to atrocities such as those referred to above, and described in this novel. I suspect the number of people living with sexual proclivities that may impel them to do harm to others is much higher than might be imagined; these people prevented from acting by their own moral inhibition, or fear of legal or social repercussions, or perhaps solely due to lack of opportunity.
For examples perhaps less extreme than Bundy and Gacy, we need look no further for evidence than the recent examples of Geoffrey Epstein or Harvey Weinstein, whose power over others was for a time able to shield them from accountability. It may therefore be the case that power does not corrupt, it simply overcomes the barriers and inhibitions one faces, facilitating the actualisation of one's existing proclivities. Those who are able to control themselves against their instincts are pitiable in a different way: they are condemned to a life of dissatisfaction and self-loathing. We should indeed be thankful for this self-sacrifice.
The existence of people who are driven to criminal behaviour by their sexual preferences - take even your garden-variety pedophiles, sadists and zoophiles - is a reminder of our own moral luck in not having been born with such desires. While condemning their actions, we must also remember that, "there but for the grace of God go I", or in the Marquis' own words (p41):
"All these things depend upon our constitution, our organs, the manner in which these react, and we are no more able to command our tastes to change in this than we are to vary the shape of our bodies"
It is important not to overlook the horror of the crimes described in this novel (that would be a failure to imagine the totality of the scenes being depicted), or dismiss them as idle fantasy (the Marquis was able to act on some of them, and there have been others to later take up his mantle), or to romanticise the Marquis de Sade as some sort of enlightened sexual adventurer. He was a deranged man whose education, wealth and position afforded him the freedom to act upon his desires with some success. His offences were not limited to upsetting the delicate mores and moral sensibilities of his time: he was unequivocally a rapist, and likely a murderer. His sexual preferences are today classified in the DSM as a mental condition which bears his name (sexual sadism disorder). He is certainly not a man to be admired. And yet The 120 Days of Sodom has a place in literature as a rare, comprehensive and unfiltered account of this dark part of the range of human experience. It is a reminder of what the human mind is sometimes capable. And what is perhaps most unsettling, is that though our proclivities may differ, we all share with the Marquis this same underlying sexual impulse, and occupy points within a common spectrum of sexual desire.
October 23, 2012
Okay. Good lord. Where the hell do I start.
I hesitated before reading this book because I despise the concept of Libertinism and saw myself throwing my iphone across the room. I do like Sade's views on homosexuality and women's sexual freedom. But the rest of his work is just a clusterfuck of coprophagia, pedophilia, homocide, incest, sodomy, torture, sacriligion, disembowling, rape, orgies, spilled seed and horribleness.
With that being said, I read both 120 Days of Sodom and La Philosophie dans le boudoir because I probably have some unresolved mental issues I have to work through, but in both books he unapologetically highlighted the monstrous side of humanity and not only ran with it but glorified it and gave it a name too (libertinism)
To say I'll ever pick up one of his books again would be an overzealous statement. But I think it did an interesting job at showing us what libertinism is all about and why he was in jail most of his life.
I hesitated before reading this book because I despise the concept of Libertinism and saw myself throwing my iphone across the room. I do like Sade's views on homosexuality and women's sexual freedom. But the rest of his work is just a clusterfuck of coprophagia, pedophilia, homocide, incest, sodomy, torture, sacriligion, disembowling, rape, orgies, spilled seed and horribleness.
With that being said, I read both 120 Days of Sodom and La Philosophie dans le boudoir because I probably have some unresolved mental issues I have to work through, but in both books he unapologetically highlighted the monstrous side of humanity and not only ran with it but glorified it and gave it a name too (libertinism)
To say I'll ever pick up one of his books again would be an overzealous statement. But I think it did an interesting job at showing us what libertinism is all about and why he was in jail most of his life.
Read
December 18, 2022THANK GOD THAT’S OVER
I have no idea how to rate it.
I have no idea how to rate it.
January 19, 2020
Didn't like it,
didn't care about the imagery,
think it overrated, boring and a distasteful mess, badly written at that,
believe that it became notorious only due to lack of good porn at that time,
etc etc etc. Meh.
didn't care about the imagery,
think it overrated, boring and a distasteful mess, badly written at that,
believe that it became notorious only due to lack of good porn at that time,
etc etc etc. Meh.
October 7, 2012
One of the things that I like most about good literature is its ability to break the confines of conventionalism. Literature, in that sense, is tantamount to being a libertine.
This novel takes the reader to the darkest of the darkest corners of possible, degrading, violent, scatological behaviour. And yet, the fact that it creates a certain fascination that will not allow the reader to halt his or her reading the text, is an achievement in itself.
The 120 Days of Sodom is a voyage of cruelty, the same that the Marquis received on his end of the rainbow, and serves also as a dark reflection of his times. Let us not forget that the times he had to live in were exceedingly dark, bloody, violent and quite monstruous in itself. Let us not be fooled by our hurt sensibilities when we read this magnum opus. For it is one of humanity's best texts, one of the most illuminating, and certainly one of the 20 or 30 books I would gladly take with me were I to live in a deserted island.
This novel takes the reader to the darkest of the darkest corners of possible, degrading, violent, scatological behaviour. And yet, the fact that it creates a certain fascination that will not allow the reader to halt his or her reading the text, is an achievement in itself.
The 120 Days of Sodom is a voyage of cruelty, the same that the Marquis received on his end of the rainbow, and serves also as a dark reflection of his times. Let us not forget that the times he had to live in were exceedingly dark, bloody, violent and quite monstruous in itself. Let us not be fooled by our hurt sensibilities when we read this magnum opus. For it is one of humanity's best texts, one of the most illuminating, and certainly one of the 20 or 30 books I would gladly take with me were I to live in a deserted island.
November 5, 2009
A word to those who put this on their to-read list: I'm fairly certain this version of the book is the watered down version. If you want to read the original, there's an e-book version floating around online. That's what I read.
Of course I didn't like it. This was the most disgusting book I've ever read, and I doubt there is any as vile out there in the world. For grammar and wording it would receive 5 stars; de Sade is certainly intelligent...the more to fear him.
The book is about four disgusting men who decide to assign men to kidnap hundreds of children, choose from ten young boys and girls (the others are sold as prostitutes), then hole themselves in a secluded location. Along with them are four old women (employed to keep watch over the chilren), several well-endowed men used for the purpose of you-guess-what to the four men in charge and the children, and four women storytellers who amuse the main men (the self-proclaimed libertines) by recalling stories from their lives of prostitution.
The libertines are disgusting...in the introduction we are told of how they've killed their own children and raped all of them, as well as killed many others, so you know what's in store for later. However, they like to prolong everything, which is why they don't deflower the children from the very beginning, and why the stories start out only slightly shocking. As time goes on, the stories get more disgusting (bodily functions come into play), but still readable. After the stories are told, the libertines like to re-enact much of that told in the stories.
Over time one begins to feel like Sade exhausted all of his perverse ideas...this is a false security. The real horrors begin in the second-to-last chapter, the forty-third day, in which violence begins to mingle with sexual acts. It's like a Saw series from the 1700s, but with violence AND sex, which makes it all the worse in my opinion. There are innumerable horrors done to pregnant women, toddlers and even an infant mentioned to have been raped, teeth being pulled out to be replaced with red-hot nails, arms twisted...I'm only scratching the surface here.
As I read, I felt like I was going to faint from horror, disgust, and shock, or puke...whichever came first. There was even a point where I felt like screaming in terror because of what I read. I had to use my courage to press on, and even then I had to skim sometimes. The whole thing is more terrifying if you imagine what went through the children's minds during those months of sexual and violent torture. Of course, the libertines can't control their violent lust, so the elders, the studs, the storytellers, their own wives, and even some of the hired help are tortured. They start declaring who's to die each day: one of the deaths is described in great detail and is probably one of the most squeamish events in the book. At the very end, de Sade lists the number of all those holed up in this secluded place, and the number who survived: 16 out of 46, and not one of those survivors left without missing some fingers, an eye, a broken bone, etc.
Most who end up reading this story, like me, did so just to prove they can finish. I sincerely hope there weren't any who got enjoyment out of it...if you can masturbate to this, you should feel guilty. This is one of the books people read and come away feeling a complete despair for humanity; most can only stomach a chapter a day. If you want to sicken your friends at a party, whip the book out and have them read a certain portion out loud.
Of course I didn't like it. This was the most disgusting book I've ever read, and I doubt there is any as vile out there in the world. For grammar and wording it would receive 5 stars; de Sade is certainly intelligent...the more to fear him.
The book is about four disgusting men who decide to assign men to kidnap hundreds of children, choose from ten young boys and girls (the others are sold as prostitutes), then hole themselves in a secluded location. Along with them are four old women (employed to keep watch over the chilren), several well-endowed men used for the purpose of you-guess-what to the four men in charge and the children, and four women storytellers who amuse the main men (the self-proclaimed libertines) by recalling stories from their lives of prostitution.
The libertines are disgusting...in the introduction we are told of how they've killed their own children and raped all of them, as well as killed many others, so you know what's in store for later. However, they like to prolong everything, which is why they don't deflower the children from the very beginning, and why the stories start out only slightly shocking. As time goes on, the stories get more disgusting (bodily functions come into play), but still readable. After the stories are told, the libertines like to re-enact much of that told in the stories.
Over time one begins to feel like Sade exhausted all of his perverse ideas...this is a false security. The real horrors begin in the second-to-last chapter, the forty-third day, in which violence begins to mingle with sexual acts. It's like a Saw series from the 1700s, but with violence AND sex, which makes it all the worse in my opinion. There are innumerable horrors done to pregnant women, toddlers and even an infant mentioned to have been raped, teeth being pulled out to be replaced with red-hot nails, arms twisted...I'm only scratching the surface here.
As I read, I felt like I was going to faint from horror, disgust, and shock, or puke...whichever came first. There was even a point where I felt like screaming in terror because of what I read. I had to use my courage to press on, and even then I had to skim sometimes. The whole thing is more terrifying if you imagine what went through the children's minds during those months of sexual and violent torture. Of course, the libertines can't control their violent lust, so the elders, the studs, the storytellers, their own wives, and even some of the hired help are tortured. They start declaring who's to die each day: one of the deaths is described in great detail and is probably one of the most squeamish events in the book. At the very end, de Sade lists the number of all those holed up in this secluded place, and the number who survived: 16 out of 46, and not one of those survivors left without missing some fingers, an eye, a broken bone, etc.
Most who end up reading this story, like me, did so just to prove they can finish. I sincerely hope there weren't any who got enjoyment out of it...if you can masturbate to this, you should feel guilty. This is one of the books people read and come away feeling a complete despair for humanity; most can only stomach a chapter a day. If you want to sicken your friends at a party, whip the book out and have them read a certain portion out loud.
April 1, 2022
مارکی دو ساد بدنام، که این ترکیب شهوت و ظلم «سادیسم» به نام او نامگذاری شده است چنین هیولایی بود. رابطهی جنسی فقط زمانی او را هیجانزده میکرد که به خون ریختن منتهی شود. بزرگترین لذت او زخمی کردن فاحشه های برهنه و پانسمان زخم های آن ها بود.
Richard von Krafft-Ebing
آیا آزادی باید محدود باشه؟ اگر آزادی حد و مرزی نداشته باشه، انسان تا کجا پیش میره؟ انسان بدون محدودیت به چه موجودی تبدیل میشه؟ برای پیروان مکتبی که بدنبال آزادی مطلق انسانن، اخلاق فقط حکم زنجیری رو داره که دست و پای آدم رو میبنده و به همین دلیل ساد هم برای رسیدن به آرزوهای خودش بی پروا ترین مکتب ممکن رو انتخاب میکنه.
احتمالا دو ساد بخاطر شرایط زندگیش و رفتارهای اطرافیانش، قانع شده بود که فطرت انسان کاملا بد و تاریکه و این کتاب هم بازتاب همین باورشه و در بدترین دوران زندگی دو ساد هم نوشته شده پس اگه قصد خوندنش رو دارید ببینید با چی طرفید. اصلا نمیشد از این کتاب لذت ببرم! اصلا راه نداشت! بینی و بین الله اصلا با وجدان خودم کنار نمیومدم!
اما آیا این کتاب واقعا بی ارزشه؟ مطمئن نیستم. از نظر روانشناسی و روانپزشکی که نمونه خیلی خوبی برای آشنا شدن با یک ذهن بیماره؛ به قول مترجم مسائل و انحرافات جنسی که تو این کتاب مطرح شده، از بخش پارافیلیای جنسی کتاب DSM فوق العاده قوی تره. از نظر ادبی هم که متخصصینش باید نظر بدن. در هر صورت بنظر من اگه دنبال پلیدترین کتاب روی زمین میگردید میتونید ۱۲۰ روز در سدوم رو انتخاب کنید.
«و چه کسی میتواند در آن شک کند؟ طبیعت هر روز در ما خشنترین و بیرحمانه ترین میل ها را القا میکند. به این ضعف که همیشه به خاطر آن سرزنش شدهام ضعف دیگری هم اضافه کنید؛ قساوت قلب. اما آیا این تقصیر من است؟ آیا این طبیعت نیست که رذایل یا خصوصیات منحصر به فرد ما را به ما اعطا کرده است؟ آیا میتوانم این قلبی را که طبیعت مانند سنگ ساخته است را نرم کنم؟»
Richard von Krafft-Ebing
آیا آزادی باید محدود باشه؟ اگر آزادی حد و مرزی نداشته باشه، انسان تا کجا پیش میره؟ انسان بدون محدودیت به چه موجودی تبدیل میشه؟ برای پیروان مکتبی که بدنبال آزادی مطلق انسانن، اخلاق فقط حکم زنجیری رو داره که دست و پای آدم رو میبنده و به همین دلیل ساد هم برای رسیدن به آرزوهای خودش بی پروا ترین مکتب ممکن رو انتخاب میکنه.
احتمالا دو ساد بخاطر شرایط زندگیش و رفتارهای اطرافیانش، قانع شده بود که فطرت انسان کاملا بد و تاریکه و این کتاب هم بازتاب همین باورشه و در بدترین دوران زندگی دو ساد هم نوشته شده پس اگه قصد خوندنش رو دارید ببینید با چی طرفید. اصلا نمیشد از این کتاب لذت ببرم! اصلا راه نداشت! بینی و بین الله اصلا با وجدان خودم کنار نمیومدم!
اما آیا این کتاب واقعا بی ارزشه؟ مطمئن نیستم. از نظر روانشناسی و روانپزشکی که نمونه خیلی خوبی برای آشنا شدن با یک ذهن بیماره؛ به قول مترجم مسائل و انحرافات جنسی که تو این کتاب مطرح شده، از بخش پارافیلیای جنسی کتاب DSM فوق العاده قوی تره. از نظر ادبی هم که متخصصینش باید نظر بدن. در هر صورت بنظر من اگه دنبال پلیدترین کتاب روی زمین میگردید میتونید ۱۲۰ روز در سدوم رو انتخاب کنید.
«و چه کسی میتواند در آن شک کند؟ طبیعت هر روز در ما خشنترین و بیرحمانه ترین میل ها را القا میکند. به این ضعف که همیشه به خاطر آن سرزنش شدهام ضعف دیگری هم اضافه کنید؛ قساوت قلب. اما آیا این تقصیر من است؟ آیا این طبیعت نیست که رذایل یا خصوصیات منحصر به فرد ما را به ما اعطا کرده است؟ آیا میتوانم این قلبی را که طبیعت مانند سنگ ساخته است را نرم کنم؟»
![Profile Image for [P].](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.gr-assets.com%2Fimages%2FS%2Fcompressed.photo.goodreads.com%2Fusers%2F1486240560i%2F40516522._UY200_CR13%2C0%2C200%2C200_.jpg&w=128&q=75)
March 17, 2018
I never thought that I would become tired of sex. In the last twelve months, however, I’ve done it more times, and with more women, than I had in all the previous years of my life combined; and recently I’ve noticed a change, a hint of boredom creeping into my lovemaking, like the shadow of a pot-bellied man crawling up a bedroom wall. I had once been so easy to please, so straightforward in my tastes, but now? If someone were to suggest the missionary position I would be horrified. The shadow of the pot-bellied man looms ever larger, and between his legs dangles a most flaccid and unimpressive cock. I have a preference for certain acts, of course, but I’ve never really had any kinks or fantasies. I’ve always found that sort of thing ridiculous, for it suggests to me a mind gone awry, a defect, a glitch in the system. Sex but not sex. Sex incognito. Yet last week I was talking to an underwear and fetish model. She was fresh off a job in which only her feet were of interest. ‘It’s because they’re forbidden, because they’re not the norm, because they’re kind of ugly and dirty; you’re not meant to sexualise them and so they become sexy,’ she said, and while I still didn’t feel any stirrings myself, for the first time I, in my jaded state, understood.
The Marquis de Sade’s 120 Days of Sodom appears to be one of those works that many people have heard of but know little about in terms of the specifics of the story. I was one of the many. In fact, I was under the impression that there was no narrative at all, that it was simply a catalogue of sexual deviancy. And it is that, but there is a frame around the kinks and perversions, in which four libertines gather together – some by way of abduction – a group of men and women, but mostly boys and girls, in a remote castle. There, they have a number of aged prostitutes recount their experiences, which are progressively more extreme, and which they then re-enact with the other inhabitants. This is, indeed, one of the most fascinating aspects of the novel, because it makes an audience of the libertines, almost in the same way that you, the reader, are; and just as the power of suggestion works upon them, there is the chance it will work upon you too. Certainly, not everything contained within will appeal to everyone, or I would sincerely hope not, but there is such a range, and it is so imaginative, that I’d be surprised if there wasn’t something. I think there is a misconception about pornography that people only go to it with, and looking for, pre-established ideas about what turns them on. There is some of that, no doubt, but I also think that, for better or worse, it also suggests, it teaches, it moulds.
While 120 days of Sodom is not a character study, the four libertines are sketched in some detail, to the extent that one is informed of both the length and circumference of their dicks. The Duc de Blangis is fifty years old, and ‘may be regarded as the repository of all vices and all crimes.’ His brother is a Bishop, who is, we’re told, ‘treacherous and cunning,’ and a ‘loyal devotee of active and passive sodomy.’ The President de Curval is ‘the walking image of debauchery and libertinage,’ who has a ‘dreadful squalor about his person that he finds sensual.’ This gentleman’s erections ‘are rare and only achieved with difficulty.’ Finally, Durcet, a financier. He has a ‘woman’s build and all of her tastes.’ In considering the four men a number of interesting ideas and similarities emerge, many of which are expanded upon, or given more weight, as the book progresses. First of all, one may have noticed that each of the men are rich or of noble birth. While de Sade doesn’t explicitly discuss the issue of class, it cannot be a coincidence that every anecdote involves people in a position of power and prosperity. One might say that these are the only people who can afford to use prostitutes, but I believe there is more to it than that.
Throughout, the small number of peasants are the only characters shown in a positive, or sympathetic, light. They are pious, good-hearted, downtrodden, or happy-go-lucky, while the rich have peculiar tastes or are simply monstrous. For example, one poor old woman is dragged from her sickbed and abused by a wealthy man; her daughter, who her mother very much loves and who cares for her, is abducted by the man and likely murdered as part of a sexual act. In another anecdote a working man shits, not for his own gratification, but for a rich man who has paid for this service. So what, if anything, is de Sade saying, indirectly at least, about class? The rich are the only people who have the time and the means and the imagination for these kinds of perversions, that in fact the free time and great wealth enables their imaginations. Secondly, if one can buy whatever one wants, if one can (by virtue of one’s power and wealth) have whomever one wants, then one is likely to become jaded very quickly. Therefore, to be a libertine, to be aroused by, to engage in, extreme or unusual sexual acts is, in this instance, an end point, it is arrived at as a way of reinvigorating dulled senses.
I have already used the term libertine multiple times, and that is because it is insisted upon in the text. Barely a page goes by in which it doesn’t appear more than once. To be a libertine is to indulge oneself, sensually, to excess, without regard to conventional moral principles. This is both the way of life and the philosophy of the four central characters; it is this that bonds them together. Far from having one particular kink, the men are interested in anything that is unconventional, anything that conventional society would deem wrong or disgusting, including rape, torture, incest, and murder. Indeed, anything criminal adds to their enjoyment, by virtue of how shocking, how frowned upon it would be. Perhaps this anti-conventional attitude is the reason why women are so scorned by the four libertines (and by the majority of the men in the book). Make no mistake, they are vehement misogynists, to an almost laughable degree. For example, there are numerous instances where a woman showing her vagina or breasts to a man sends him into a rage. It is, in almost every story, the arse they want! Always the arse! There are, indeed, several rhapsodic speeches on the subject, such as when one of the libertines salutes ‘divine arses! How I reproach myself for the tributes I stole from you! I promise you an expiatory sacrifice – I swear on your alters never to stray again for the rest of my life!’ The arse is of course not uniquely feminine.
As I sat down to write about 120 Days of Sodom there were a large number of themes that I intended to explore. My notes, in fact, totalled over a thousand words, and much of that I still haven’t touched upon, and will not, including the topics of nature and religion. I realise now that it is inadvisable, if not impossible, to discuss everything of note in detail. This review will have to serve as a kind of introduction, if it has any use at all. Bearing in mind the name of the author, one thing that it seems necessary to include is the role of sadism within the book. Surprisingly, sexual torture, and the pleasure gained from it, makes up only a small part of the prostitutes’ stories. However, the main reason for this is because the book is unfinished, and only one whore – she who is tasked with outlining the simpler pleasures – is able to give a fully fleshed account of her experiences. One is left in no doubt – and de Sade’s own notes attest to this – that there were greater horrors to come. Yet there is still, even within the ‘finished’ part of the manuscript, much that is disturbing, certainly when removed from the atmosphere of the text as a whole. For example, the inhabitants of the castle, aside from the four libertines of course, are not allowed to shit unless given permission and are not allowed to wipe or clean themselves. This is because the men have designs upon the shit, but also because they enjoy the power, they enjoy how unhappy it makes the boys and girls.
Throughout the book, de Sade makes it clear that almost none of the young people, nor the men’s wives, are willing participants. They shit in the captives’ mouths, and have them shit in theirs. They fondle, maul, and have them suck and swallow them, they rape and fuck arses and cunts. The disgust and pain their victims feel during these abuses is commented upon, albeit only in passing. It is this, more than the acts themselves, that turns the old lechers on. Within the castle there is a system of punishment, which the reader never has full access to, but which we are informed will be barbaric, potentially fatal. The victims, who are innocent both in terms of their overall situation and often in terms of the ‘crime’ they are charged with, are constantly reminded of the compassionless nature of their judges. The situation within the castle is, therefore, absolutely not the form of sadism that is currently en vogue, it is not a consensual exploration of mutual fantasies involving a master and a slave, a dom and a sub, although there is some of that within the stories the first prostitute tells. In any case, there were occasions when, rather than providing a libertines manual, I felt as though it was de Sade’s aim to torture his reader, to make them his victim; and yet, if so, he failed.
Before I finish, I want to return to a word I used earlier, which may have struck you as strange, or even concerning, given the context, which was ‘laughable.’ There is, without question, nothing funny about kidnapping, misogyny and sexual abuse. When I was reading A Sentimental Novel by Alain Robbe-Grillet last year I was deeply troubled by its contents and had to quit before the end. 120 days of Sodom is, however, or was for me, in places extremely amusing, because it is ridiculous. There is a marked difference of tone between this book and Robbe-Grillet’s. First of all, one never believes in the characters or the situation. I could not buy into de Sade’s reality. The four libertines are cartoonish, vaudeville, over-the-top; they stop just short of twirling their moustaches and laughing in an exaggeratedly sinister fashion. Moreover, consider again some of what de Sade tells you about them: one of them can’t get an erection, one of them only fucks arses and has his own fucked, and two of them have prodigiously large dicks. It’s terribly hard to take any of them seriously.
These men all have an insatiable sexual appetite, to the extent that they appear to be turned on, to be able to fool around, all day, every day; and most of them come multiple times. They are truly Herculean! Consider also, some of the acts, the shitting in particular. It is no exaggeration to say that the libertines devour three or four turds a day each, and none of them end up unwell. They even put their captives on a special diet in order to have them produce especially tasty shit. I don’t want to labour over the scat too much, but it dominates the book, and there came a point when, despite having no interest in shit myself, be it sexual or otherwise, I started to gleefully anticipate the ceremony. de Sade had put me into a state of near delirium or hysteria. Every anecdote would end, I knew, with one person shitting in another’s mouth. It was like being locked in a room where someone tells you the same joke over and over again until you’re on the point of insanity and joyously shouting out the punchline in unison with your captor.
In other areas, the repetition was more of a issue. I am aware that de Sade wrote the book in prison, and that it is, at noted previously, unfinished. It is likely, therefore, that even the ‘completed’ part of the text is only a draft of sorts, and so it feels churlish to criticise, but there are frequent passages that are interminable. For example, I do not know how many times one needs to be told that the Duc thigh-fucked Zelmire, but it is certainly less than forty. Nor does one really need to be told, over and over again, who took who into the cupboard, especially as you are never informed as to what happens in there. There are, moreover, other instances of this sort, whereby de Sade will keep things, certain acts or events, from the reader, because, he states, they are too extreme for this particular part of his narrative and would be out of place. Which begs the obvious question: why tell us at all then? Why hint, why suggest? In any case, my enjoyment was not spoiled by these flaws. I did not think, even for long periods during which I read it, that I would be able to say that I love 120 days of Sodom; and yet I do. Perhaps I am even more jaded than I thought. The shadow of the pot-bellied man looms ever larger.
The Marquis de Sade’s 120 Days of Sodom appears to be one of those works that many people have heard of but know little about in terms of the specifics of the story. I was one of the many. In fact, I was under the impression that there was no narrative at all, that it was simply a catalogue of sexual deviancy. And it is that, but there is a frame around the kinks and perversions, in which four libertines gather together – some by way of abduction – a group of men and women, but mostly boys and girls, in a remote castle. There, they have a number of aged prostitutes recount their experiences, which are progressively more extreme, and which they then re-enact with the other inhabitants. This is, indeed, one of the most fascinating aspects of the novel, because it makes an audience of the libertines, almost in the same way that you, the reader, are; and just as the power of suggestion works upon them, there is the chance it will work upon you too. Certainly, not everything contained within will appeal to everyone, or I would sincerely hope not, but there is such a range, and it is so imaginative, that I’d be surprised if there wasn’t something. I think there is a misconception about pornography that people only go to it with, and looking for, pre-established ideas about what turns them on. There is some of that, no doubt, but I also think that, for better or worse, it also suggests, it teaches, it moulds.
While 120 days of Sodom is not a character study, the four libertines are sketched in some detail, to the extent that one is informed of both the length and circumference of their dicks. The Duc de Blangis is fifty years old, and ‘may be regarded as the repository of all vices and all crimes.’ His brother is a Bishop, who is, we’re told, ‘treacherous and cunning,’ and a ‘loyal devotee of active and passive sodomy.’ The President de Curval is ‘the walking image of debauchery and libertinage,’ who has a ‘dreadful squalor about his person that he finds sensual.’ This gentleman’s erections ‘are rare and only achieved with difficulty.’ Finally, Durcet, a financier. He has a ‘woman’s build and all of her tastes.’ In considering the four men a number of interesting ideas and similarities emerge, many of which are expanded upon, or given more weight, as the book progresses. First of all, one may have noticed that each of the men are rich or of noble birth. While de Sade doesn’t explicitly discuss the issue of class, it cannot be a coincidence that every anecdote involves people in a position of power and prosperity. One might say that these are the only people who can afford to use prostitutes, but I believe there is more to it than that.
Throughout, the small number of peasants are the only characters shown in a positive, or sympathetic, light. They are pious, good-hearted, downtrodden, or happy-go-lucky, while the rich have peculiar tastes or are simply monstrous. For example, one poor old woman is dragged from her sickbed and abused by a wealthy man; her daughter, who her mother very much loves and who cares for her, is abducted by the man and likely murdered as part of a sexual act. In another anecdote a working man shits, not for his own gratification, but for a rich man who has paid for this service. So what, if anything, is de Sade saying, indirectly at least, about class? The rich are the only people who have the time and the means and the imagination for these kinds of perversions, that in fact the free time and great wealth enables their imaginations. Secondly, if one can buy whatever one wants, if one can (by virtue of one’s power and wealth) have whomever one wants, then one is likely to become jaded very quickly. Therefore, to be a libertine, to be aroused by, to engage in, extreme or unusual sexual acts is, in this instance, an end point, it is arrived at as a way of reinvigorating dulled senses.
I have already used the term libertine multiple times, and that is because it is insisted upon in the text. Barely a page goes by in which it doesn’t appear more than once. To be a libertine is to indulge oneself, sensually, to excess, without regard to conventional moral principles. This is both the way of life and the philosophy of the four central characters; it is this that bonds them together. Far from having one particular kink, the men are interested in anything that is unconventional, anything that conventional society would deem wrong or disgusting, including rape, torture, incest, and murder. Indeed, anything criminal adds to their enjoyment, by virtue of how shocking, how frowned upon it would be. Perhaps this anti-conventional attitude is the reason why women are so scorned by the four libertines (and by the majority of the men in the book). Make no mistake, they are vehement misogynists, to an almost laughable degree. For example, there are numerous instances where a woman showing her vagina or breasts to a man sends him into a rage. It is, in almost every story, the arse they want! Always the arse! There are, indeed, several rhapsodic speeches on the subject, such as when one of the libertines salutes ‘divine arses! How I reproach myself for the tributes I stole from you! I promise you an expiatory sacrifice – I swear on your alters never to stray again for the rest of my life!’ The arse is of course not uniquely feminine.
As I sat down to write about 120 Days of Sodom there were a large number of themes that I intended to explore. My notes, in fact, totalled over a thousand words, and much of that I still haven’t touched upon, and will not, including the topics of nature and religion. I realise now that it is inadvisable, if not impossible, to discuss everything of note in detail. This review will have to serve as a kind of introduction, if it has any use at all. Bearing in mind the name of the author, one thing that it seems necessary to include is the role of sadism within the book. Surprisingly, sexual torture, and the pleasure gained from it, makes up only a small part of the prostitutes’ stories. However, the main reason for this is because the book is unfinished, and only one whore – she who is tasked with outlining the simpler pleasures – is able to give a fully fleshed account of her experiences. One is left in no doubt – and de Sade’s own notes attest to this – that there were greater horrors to come. Yet there is still, even within the ‘finished’ part of the manuscript, much that is disturbing, certainly when removed from the atmosphere of the text as a whole. For example, the inhabitants of the castle, aside from the four libertines of course, are not allowed to shit unless given permission and are not allowed to wipe or clean themselves. This is because the men have designs upon the shit, but also because they enjoy the power, they enjoy how unhappy it makes the boys and girls.
Throughout the book, de Sade makes it clear that almost none of the young people, nor the men’s wives, are willing participants. They shit in the captives’ mouths, and have them shit in theirs. They fondle, maul, and have them suck and swallow them, they rape and fuck arses and cunts. The disgust and pain their victims feel during these abuses is commented upon, albeit only in passing. It is this, more than the acts themselves, that turns the old lechers on. Within the castle there is a system of punishment, which the reader never has full access to, but which we are informed will be barbaric, potentially fatal. The victims, who are innocent both in terms of their overall situation and often in terms of the ‘crime’ they are charged with, are constantly reminded of the compassionless nature of their judges. The situation within the castle is, therefore, absolutely not the form of sadism that is currently en vogue, it is not a consensual exploration of mutual fantasies involving a master and a slave, a dom and a sub, although there is some of that within the stories the first prostitute tells. In any case, there were occasions when, rather than providing a libertines manual, I felt as though it was de Sade’s aim to torture his reader, to make them his victim; and yet, if so, he failed.
Before I finish, I want to return to a word I used earlier, which may have struck you as strange, or even concerning, given the context, which was ‘laughable.’ There is, without question, nothing funny about kidnapping, misogyny and sexual abuse. When I was reading A Sentimental Novel by Alain Robbe-Grillet last year I was deeply troubled by its contents and had to quit before the end. 120 days of Sodom is, however, or was for me, in places extremely amusing, because it is ridiculous. There is a marked difference of tone between this book and Robbe-Grillet’s. First of all, one never believes in the characters or the situation. I could not buy into de Sade’s reality. The four libertines are cartoonish, vaudeville, over-the-top; they stop just short of twirling their moustaches and laughing in an exaggeratedly sinister fashion. Moreover, consider again some of what de Sade tells you about them: one of them can’t get an erection, one of them only fucks arses and has his own fucked, and two of them have prodigiously large dicks. It’s terribly hard to take any of them seriously.
These men all have an insatiable sexual appetite, to the extent that they appear to be turned on, to be able to fool around, all day, every day; and most of them come multiple times. They are truly Herculean! Consider also, some of the acts, the shitting in particular. It is no exaggeration to say that the libertines devour three or four turds a day each, and none of them end up unwell. They even put their captives on a special diet in order to have them produce especially tasty shit. I don’t want to labour over the scat too much, but it dominates the book, and there came a point when, despite having no interest in shit myself, be it sexual or otherwise, I started to gleefully anticipate the ceremony. de Sade had put me into a state of near delirium or hysteria. Every anecdote would end, I knew, with one person shitting in another’s mouth. It was like being locked in a room where someone tells you the same joke over and over again until you’re on the point of insanity and joyously shouting out the punchline in unison with your captor.
In other areas, the repetition was more of a issue. I am aware that de Sade wrote the book in prison, and that it is, at noted previously, unfinished. It is likely, therefore, that even the ‘completed’ part of the text is only a draft of sorts, and so it feels churlish to criticise, but there are frequent passages that are interminable. For example, I do not know how many times one needs to be told that the Duc thigh-fucked Zelmire, but it is certainly less than forty. Nor does one really need to be told, over and over again, who took who into the cupboard, especially as you are never informed as to what happens in there. There are, moreover, other instances of this sort, whereby de Sade will keep things, certain acts or events, from the reader, because, he states, they are too extreme for this particular part of his narrative and would be out of place. Which begs the obvious question: why tell us at all then? Why hint, why suggest? In any case, my enjoyment was not spoiled by these flaws. I did not think, even for long periods during which I read it, that I would be able to say that I love 120 days of Sodom; and yet I do. Perhaps I am even more jaded than I thought. The shadow of the pot-bellied man looms ever larger.
January 11, 2009
Repugnant. Disgusting. Shocking. Extreme. No-one can mix eroticism and horror like Sade, and here he is at his best. Definitely not for the faint of heart. So appalling you can't put it down.
June 27, 2024
The 120 Days of Sodom is pornography gone all wrong.
An iconoclast, Marquis de Sade gets satisfaction out of attacking the system and his entire book is a giant negative sideswipe at the establishment and its morals.
This is the ultimate sojourn into sexual depravity, BDSM, torture porn, necrophilia and murder. There is very little to make you horny or aroused in any way.
Perhaps revolutionary in its day, but out of date by current standards.
It's neither erotic or sexy, but a vulgar tongue-in-cheek attempt to be as controversial and offensive as possible and I can't think of any one person in the world to whom I would recommend this book.
I know who this book was written for, Marquis de Sade, as the mightiest backstab to corrupt power, as the ultimate sacrilegious ode to fuck-you-all and nobody else in particular, but especially to the church and its pious morals, and sodomizing children with the Host, for example.
I learned some new words though:
Crapulous (drunkenness)
Pucelage (virginity)
Depucelate (take someone's virginity, especially anally)
Encuntment (penetration)
Even though this is a behind-the-doors snapshot into the private lives of upper-class society, does anyone actually care what other people do in private and how they get their kicks and jollies?
After reading this book, I certainly couldn't care less of a fig.
Marquis de Sade discusses things that sometimes occur to us but learn to extinguish before they ripen into mature thoughts or ideas. There's no room in our lives for that level of sordidity, which is why such notions sometimes seem funny when expressed openly, as an internal way of dealing with shock. I spat back my breakfast onto the countertop a few times!
We don't need to deal with such filth and feel happier gulping down junk media thrust down our throats by wily marketing organisations because it's easier to digest.
We prefer to see the Prince of Wales and his perfect family standing on the royal balcony and enjoying the flyover with a cheesy-looking Taylor Swift as popstar adornment for fresh coolz lurking in the background, but look into their royal eyes and you see forced smiles from people unprepared to give up their seats of power anytime soon, which we all secretly aspire to, the ultimate recognition of publicly accepted and legally esteemed wealth irrespective of whether it makes you happy, like looking out from within while everyone gawps in awe.
120 Days of Sodom is the ultimate stab at the modern-day dream of happiness through excessive power and wealth, instead of being happy at who you are and simply by having enough. It's not necessary to spend, spend, spend, nor ejaculate after every sexual thought in an attempt to be happy and fulfilled. Being an ostentatious libertine will satiate your desires but never make you happy, just as taking drugs, for example, gets boring if you do it too often.
The essential message behind this book is look at me I'm grotesquely rich and can do whatever I want with no consequences, even if it hurts, offends, maims or even kills other people, but remaining on a permanent high is impossible as it repeats and ultimately becomes mundane.
It's a farce and the royal family and the local bishops are probably rogering iguanas and experimenting with butt plugs in the background just like everyone else?
This book uncovers that sham. The reality that no-one cares how you get your highs and lows. But the way it goes about it. OMG!
If you can survive the onslaught of this filth until the final page, congratulations, while perpetually living in a sewer with no light at the end.
The book is sordid, extreme, unbelievably gross, and even sometimes laugh-out-loud funny when it takes you unawares, as overly descriptive and way too honest for its own good.
I don't even know why I decided to read this book, it's that bad. Some peculiar penchant I suppose for the worst toilet literature written by man, to indulge in the depths of depravity and somehow feel better about myself afterwards? I have no explanation and it certainly didn't work, nor make me a better person, but it does make you think that this type of behavior is perhaps normal for some people?
Perhaps a deluded belief that this is somehow important literature and worth the effort? Knowing already that you're going to feel worse about yourself afterwards and permanently polluted.
This is the ultimate tale of horror in many ways because it makes you feel like total garbage.
Neither important, rewarding or profound, but oddly fascinating and even laugh-out loud hilarious in places because of how descriptive and ridiculous it is, at how every type of perversion is described in minute detail, and that's only the introduction!
Imagine every type of sexual depravity you've ever heard of and add a hundred more to that you've never even dreamed of and then multiply by 100, and you're halfway-ish to describing this book.
There's even a dull chapter called Statutes at the beginning, outlining all the rules and regulations to be obeyed at sodomy chateau, to emphasize the level of bureaucracy and corruption even more.
The book describing four months of punishment, torture and filth-swilling in every type of imaginable permutation, depicting a hierarchical structure in which the rich enjoy every minute while the poor and exploited suffer every second. Someone sh*ts from above, literally, while someone else has to deal with it AND gobble it up!
Life is not fair.
It's a dog-eat-dog world.
Que Sera, Sera (whatever will be, will be).
If you can get past all of that and see the bigger picture, the book is about power and dictatorship and how the mighty literally defecate on the weak for their own pleasure because there's nothing the inferior or frail can do about it.
It's beyond belief and what's described in this book can never realistically be made into a modern movie because of the extreme mix of torture porn, child abuse, paedophilia, scat, snuff, grave digging, torture, murder, and defecating on corpses, plus other activities that can't legally be recorded. The book doesn't spare an ounce of detail and no matter what you've read or seen in the past, this goes beyond it, which is the beauty of the reading experience if you can tolerate the ugly content, as the right to tell things as they really are with no censors or filters, which makes the book all the more remarkable for how talented a writer Marquis de Sade is - an extremely educated and eloquent man with an incredibly fetid and fertile imagination; in fact, we should treasure this type of material for the guts needed to put it into words, to be reviled and condemned for centuries to come because of what the author's NOT afraid to say, knowing that mainstream society will pigeonhole it as mad or deranged forever.
This is one of the weirdest reviews to write because it's possible to identify with the writer in a way that's difficult to explain, not because I agree with his sadistic viewpoints or his level of sick debauchery, as only the truly demonic can stoop to that level - but because I respect how untethered you need to be to get it out there and how you need to look the world in the eye and say I don't care what you think about me or my opinion. Hate me if you will, but you're here reading my story and probably rolling your eyes at my crazily depraved outlook. A viewpoint that doesn't deserve love or recognition and certainly no shining pathway to the pearly gates, but deserving of our respect for being bonkers enough to commit long-term to that level of depravity.
I wish I had the guts to say out loud even a tenth of what de Sade spews out in his pages, but maybe that restraint is what keeps me out of prison or the funny farm or from being universally hated. I don't rightly know?
It's also frightening to read about corruption in the church and the abuse of sexual power that has been going on unchecked for hundreds of years, with adults only speaking up about it in recent decades and their negative childhood experiences, in an attempt to stop it happening to future generations and to rid the world once and for all of paedophiles and their ilk. This book feels like a sordid joke or an attempt by a madman to provoke interest in the lowest levels of smut for abstract personal reasons, when he's maybe trying to tell us about political and religious corruption hundreds of years before anybody was even listening, and even today this is a book that people will write off and avoid as sick sordidness purely for the sake of it, which in many ways it is, but when it has a deeper message, advises us to beware the powers above as self-invested for their own benefit instead of the wider good.
This book is too severe, though, and all you end up doing is absorbing ever-increasing amounts of filth.
I never imagined a book about buggering and sh*t-eating to essentially be a swipe at corrupted power, whether political or religious or both, but 99% of the world won't be interested in the subliminal message behind the disgusting nightmare.
It's astonishing that this was first published in 1785! The level of pornographic detail goes beyond anything you will ever see in porno movies, involving small kids, anal sex and constant defecation. You think modern porn is new or revolutionary? Rubbish! The only thing revolutionary about it is the modern technology to openly disseminate it over the internet, but it's been going on in the background and much worse since time began and always will be, and what shocks us is seeing or hearing about it, the gutter press, the attitudes of the young and the libertines, not the content itself, but the gradual reveals of all the celebrities and coaches who have been entrusted with our social welfare, discovered later as paedophiles, when we know it's still happening all over the place but somehow pretend it's not, to brush what we can't see under the carpet, but inexplicably rise up on our haunches at public indiscretions as new to mankind and ultimately evil.
None of what happens in this book is excusable, though, especially anything involving young kids and the destruction of their innocence, but getting shocked about it is silly when it's been going on for thousands of years, but only recently exposed to the public eye, social media and CCTV cameras.
The reality is, as The 120 Days unfold it gets more and more repetitive and less shocking as you become desensitized to the debauchery and smut, which happens a lot quicker than let's say in Hogg by Samuel R. Delaney. There's something almost religious about the way it endlessly thrusts the same sordidness down your throat, and by 30% of the way through I found it non-erotic and almost sterile in a surgical way because of the way it's described in an unemotional third-party manner, like a fly-on-the-wall perspective instead of actually being there, which is one of the reasons accounts are told from a multiple storyteller viewpoint instead of first-person POV, alternating every few days, about dozens of different people and events so that you never feel any emotional attachment to anyone, no matter their age, situation or gender because it's always impersonal and generic. People get f*cked, shat on and sodomized from beginning to end, but so what, It's like stamping on a swarm of ants to squash out their collective lives, it means nothing.
After this realization I really struggled with the remainder of the book and approached it systematically as what are you going to throw at me next? I just wanted to get through it.
After 50% I was utterly bored and depressed and totally bogged down because there is no story, no plot, no heroes or characters worth rooting for, but endless and pointless sordidness and yawns because of it. When you put the book down and come back to it, it's shake your head revolutionary again for a while, but quickly turns into garbage.
Should you pick up this book for any reason whatsoever? Honestly, no! Maybe because of levels of depravity you should know about, as an eyeopener maybe, but not for enjoyment or feel-good factors or anything like that.
Maybe every politician should read this book to better understand what the proletariat actually think about them deep down and darkly inside.
This is the ultimate and darkest form of dystopia, the scum of the earth, the filthiest and most corrupt version of your worst nightmare.
I thank the book for its insight and beyond-belief surprises at times, but only two stars from me for the utter amount of filth that I do not want to repeat or recommend to anyone, ever.
Read it, like I did out of curiosity, and leave it at that.
Final words (honestly).
There are only 30 days of proper Sodom, not 120; instead we go into pointless Part The Second with 150 brief descriptions of how to eat sh*t, where even the remotest storyline during the first month is lost.
What's even more amazing are the author's personal notes in italics to remind him/us that person A could be interchanged with person B for a bit of sh*t-eating variety so that point 46 of pointless Part Two doesn't conflict with point 47, like any of it matters?
Was this book a joke? I have no idea anymore, but I know I hated it as much as I hated the movie, for all sorts of different reasons.
Oh, please let something happen, let everyone die in a nasty earthquake or in an organized police extermination raid, or die of pestilence or absolutely anything, let absolutely ANYTHING happen, I have rarely struggled so much to get through a book because it's so damned BORING!
In Part Three and the summarized 150 points describing the third month, we explore torture porn, and in Part Four, the final month, we go full circle into murder porn, with 150 weird and disturbing descriptions of that.
My particular 'favorite' was a girl glued to a toilet seat, followed by a Bunsen burner heating up her bottom, forcing the girl to rip herself away and all her skin. You can't make this stuff up!
Now I have FINALLY finished the longest review I have ever written, thank God this awful mess is over, I can't think of any redeeming qualities, but why not give it 1 star then instead of 2 I hear you retort? Because of the political aspect and how de Sade hits the corrupt society nail on the head.
But I did not enjoy this as entertainment AT ALL, except for smutty laughs and eye-opening unbelievability now and again.
https://www.addictivewriter.com/revie...
An iconoclast, Marquis de Sade gets satisfaction out of attacking the system and his entire book is a giant negative sideswipe at the establishment and its morals.
This is the ultimate sojourn into sexual depravity, BDSM, torture porn, necrophilia and murder. There is very little to make you horny or aroused in any way.
Perhaps revolutionary in its day, but out of date by current standards.
It's neither erotic or sexy, but a vulgar tongue-in-cheek attempt to be as controversial and offensive as possible and I can't think of any one person in the world to whom I would recommend this book.
I know who this book was written for, Marquis de Sade, as the mightiest backstab to corrupt power, as the ultimate sacrilegious ode to fuck-you-all and nobody else in particular, but especially to the church and its pious morals, and sodomizing children with the Host, for example.
I learned some new words though:
Crapulous (drunkenness)
Pucelage (virginity)
Depucelate (take someone's virginity, especially anally)
Encuntment (penetration)
Even though this is a behind-the-doors snapshot into the private lives of upper-class society, does anyone actually care what other people do in private and how they get their kicks and jollies?
After reading this book, I certainly couldn't care less of a fig.
Marquis de Sade discusses things that sometimes occur to us but learn to extinguish before they ripen into mature thoughts or ideas. There's no room in our lives for that level of sordidity, which is why such notions sometimes seem funny when expressed openly, as an internal way of dealing with shock. I spat back my breakfast onto the countertop a few times!
We don't need to deal with such filth and feel happier gulping down junk media thrust down our throats by wily marketing organisations because it's easier to digest.
We prefer to see the Prince of Wales and his perfect family standing on the royal balcony and enjoying the flyover with a cheesy-looking Taylor Swift as popstar adornment for fresh coolz lurking in the background, but look into their royal eyes and you see forced smiles from people unprepared to give up their seats of power anytime soon, which we all secretly aspire to, the ultimate recognition of publicly accepted and legally esteemed wealth irrespective of whether it makes you happy, like looking out from within while everyone gawps in awe.
120 Days of Sodom is the ultimate stab at the modern-day dream of happiness through excessive power and wealth, instead of being happy at who you are and simply by having enough. It's not necessary to spend, spend, spend, nor ejaculate after every sexual thought in an attempt to be happy and fulfilled. Being an ostentatious libertine will satiate your desires but never make you happy, just as taking drugs, for example, gets boring if you do it too often.
The essential message behind this book is look at me I'm grotesquely rich and can do whatever I want with no consequences, even if it hurts, offends, maims or even kills other people, but remaining on a permanent high is impossible as it repeats and ultimately becomes mundane.
It's a farce and the royal family and the local bishops are probably rogering iguanas and experimenting with butt plugs in the background just like everyone else?
This book uncovers that sham. The reality that no-one cares how you get your highs and lows. But the way it goes about it. OMG!
If you can survive the onslaught of this filth until the final page, congratulations, while perpetually living in a sewer with no light at the end.
The book is sordid, extreme, unbelievably gross, and even sometimes laugh-out-loud funny when it takes you unawares, as overly descriptive and way too honest for its own good.
I don't even know why I decided to read this book, it's that bad. Some peculiar penchant I suppose for the worst toilet literature written by man, to indulge in the depths of depravity and somehow feel better about myself afterwards? I have no explanation and it certainly didn't work, nor make me a better person, but it does make you think that this type of behavior is perhaps normal for some people?
Perhaps a deluded belief that this is somehow important literature and worth the effort? Knowing already that you're going to feel worse about yourself afterwards and permanently polluted.
This is the ultimate tale of horror in many ways because it makes you feel like total garbage.
Neither important, rewarding or profound, but oddly fascinating and even laugh-out loud hilarious in places because of how descriptive and ridiculous it is, at how every type of perversion is described in minute detail, and that's only the introduction!
Imagine every type of sexual depravity you've ever heard of and add a hundred more to that you've never even dreamed of and then multiply by 100, and you're halfway-ish to describing this book.
There's even a dull chapter called Statutes at the beginning, outlining all the rules and regulations to be obeyed at sodomy chateau, to emphasize the level of bureaucracy and corruption even more.
The book describing four months of punishment, torture and filth-swilling in every type of imaginable permutation, depicting a hierarchical structure in which the rich enjoy every minute while the poor and exploited suffer every second. Someone sh*ts from above, literally, while someone else has to deal with it AND gobble it up!
Life is not fair.
It's a dog-eat-dog world.
Que Sera, Sera (whatever will be, will be).
If you can get past all of that and see the bigger picture, the book is about power and dictatorship and how the mighty literally defecate on the weak for their own pleasure because there's nothing the inferior or frail can do about it.
It's beyond belief and what's described in this book can never realistically be made into a modern movie because of the extreme mix of torture porn, child abuse, paedophilia, scat, snuff, grave digging, torture, murder, and defecating on corpses, plus other activities that can't legally be recorded. The book doesn't spare an ounce of detail and no matter what you've read or seen in the past, this goes beyond it, which is the beauty of the reading experience if you can tolerate the ugly content, as the right to tell things as they really are with no censors or filters, which makes the book all the more remarkable for how talented a writer Marquis de Sade is - an extremely educated and eloquent man with an incredibly fetid and fertile imagination; in fact, we should treasure this type of material for the guts needed to put it into words, to be reviled and condemned for centuries to come because of what the author's NOT afraid to say, knowing that mainstream society will pigeonhole it as mad or deranged forever.
This is one of the weirdest reviews to write because it's possible to identify with the writer in a way that's difficult to explain, not because I agree with his sadistic viewpoints or his level of sick debauchery, as only the truly demonic can stoop to that level - but because I respect how untethered you need to be to get it out there and how you need to look the world in the eye and say I don't care what you think about me or my opinion. Hate me if you will, but you're here reading my story and probably rolling your eyes at my crazily depraved outlook. A viewpoint that doesn't deserve love or recognition and certainly no shining pathway to the pearly gates, but deserving of our respect for being bonkers enough to commit long-term to that level of depravity.
I wish I had the guts to say out loud even a tenth of what de Sade spews out in his pages, but maybe that restraint is what keeps me out of prison or the funny farm or from being universally hated. I don't rightly know?
It's also frightening to read about corruption in the church and the abuse of sexual power that has been going on unchecked for hundreds of years, with adults only speaking up about it in recent decades and their negative childhood experiences, in an attempt to stop it happening to future generations and to rid the world once and for all of paedophiles and their ilk. This book feels like a sordid joke or an attempt by a madman to provoke interest in the lowest levels of smut for abstract personal reasons, when he's maybe trying to tell us about political and religious corruption hundreds of years before anybody was even listening, and even today this is a book that people will write off and avoid as sick sordidness purely for the sake of it, which in many ways it is, but when it has a deeper message, advises us to beware the powers above as self-invested for their own benefit instead of the wider good.
This book is too severe, though, and all you end up doing is absorbing ever-increasing amounts of filth.
I never imagined a book about buggering and sh*t-eating to essentially be a swipe at corrupted power, whether political or religious or both, but 99% of the world won't be interested in the subliminal message behind the disgusting nightmare.
It's astonishing that this was first published in 1785! The level of pornographic detail goes beyond anything you will ever see in porno movies, involving small kids, anal sex and constant defecation. You think modern porn is new or revolutionary? Rubbish! The only thing revolutionary about it is the modern technology to openly disseminate it over the internet, but it's been going on in the background and much worse since time began and always will be, and what shocks us is seeing or hearing about it, the gutter press, the attitudes of the young and the libertines, not the content itself, but the gradual reveals of all the celebrities and coaches who have been entrusted with our social welfare, discovered later as paedophiles, when we know it's still happening all over the place but somehow pretend it's not, to brush what we can't see under the carpet, but inexplicably rise up on our haunches at public indiscretions as new to mankind and ultimately evil.
None of what happens in this book is excusable, though, especially anything involving young kids and the destruction of their innocence, but getting shocked about it is silly when it's been going on for thousands of years, but only recently exposed to the public eye, social media and CCTV cameras.
The reality is, as The 120 Days unfold it gets more and more repetitive and less shocking as you become desensitized to the debauchery and smut, which happens a lot quicker than let's say in Hogg by Samuel R. Delaney. There's something almost religious about the way it endlessly thrusts the same sordidness down your throat, and by 30% of the way through I found it non-erotic and almost sterile in a surgical way because of the way it's described in an unemotional third-party manner, like a fly-on-the-wall perspective instead of actually being there, which is one of the reasons accounts are told from a multiple storyteller viewpoint instead of first-person POV, alternating every few days, about dozens of different people and events so that you never feel any emotional attachment to anyone, no matter their age, situation or gender because it's always impersonal and generic. People get f*cked, shat on and sodomized from beginning to end, but so what, It's like stamping on a swarm of ants to squash out their collective lives, it means nothing.
After this realization I really struggled with the remainder of the book and approached it systematically as what are you going to throw at me next? I just wanted to get through it.
After 50% I was utterly bored and depressed and totally bogged down because there is no story, no plot, no heroes or characters worth rooting for, but endless and pointless sordidness and yawns because of it. When you put the book down and come back to it, it's shake your head revolutionary again for a while, but quickly turns into garbage.
Should you pick up this book for any reason whatsoever? Honestly, no! Maybe because of levels of depravity you should know about, as an eyeopener maybe, but not for enjoyment or feel-good factors or anything like that.
Maybe every politician should read this book to better understand what the proletariat actually think about them deep down and darkly inside.
This is the ultimate and darkest form of dystopia, the scum of the earth, the filthiest and most corrupt version of your worst nightmare.
I thank the book for its insight and beyond-belief surprises at times, but only two stars from me for the utter amount of filth that I do not want to repeat or recommend to anyone, ever.
Read it, like I did out of curiosity, and leave it at that.
Final words (honestly).
There are only 30 days of proper Sodom, not 120; instead we go into pointless Part The Second with 150 brief descriptions of how to eat sh*t, where even the remotest storyline during the first month is lost.
What's even more amazing are the author's personal notes in italics to remind him/us that person A could be interchanged with person B for a bit of sh*t-eating variety so that point 46 of pointless Part Two doesn't conflict with point 47, like any of it matters?
Was this book a joke? I have no idea anymore, but I know I hated it as much as I hated the movie, for all sorts of different reasons.
Oh, please let something happen, let everyone die in a nasty earthquake or in an organized police extermination raid, or die of pestilence or absolutely anything, let absolutely ANYTHING happen, I have rarely struggled so much to get through a book because it's so damned BORING!
In Part Three and the summarized 150 points describing the third month, we explore torture porn, and in Part Four, the final month, we go full circle into murder porn, with 150 weird and disturbing descriptions of that.
My particular 'favorite' was a girl glued to a toilet seat, followed by a Bunsen burner heating up her bottom, forcing the girl to rip herself away and all her skin. You can't make this stuff up!
Now I have FINALLY finished the longest review I have ever written, thank God this awful mess is over, I can't think of any redeeming qualities, but why not give it 1 star then instead of 2 I hear you retort? Because of the political aspect and how de Sade hits the corrupt society nail on the head.
But I did not enjoy this as entertainment AT ALL, except for smutty laughs and eye-opening unbelievability now and again.
https://www.addictivewriter.com/revie...
June 6, 2013
**Spoilers ahead**
I know, how could this book have spoilers? Well I'm listing most of what the books covers in case anyone is dying of curiosity to read it, and upon getting the gist will maybe decide it's not worth the time.
The book covers incest, pedophilia, shit (more than anything else, shit), vomit, piss, sodomy, rape, gang rape, whipping, bondage, forced orgasms, humiliation, prostitution, kidnapping, burning, dressing up like animals, bone breaking, bestiality, drugging/poisoning, sexual blasphemy, pony play, exhibitionism, enemas, blood drinking, choking, starvation, human animal hybrid offspring rape (yeah, that's a thing apparently), necrophilia, orgies, genital mutilation, forced abortions/miscarriages, shootings, beatings, cannibalism, amputation, live burials, lightning, rockets, bombs, impaling, murder, mass murder, sharkskin condoms, marrow being replaced with molten lead, and so on and so forth into more extreme forms of torture.
But to be honest all of that falls flat. The book is a laundry list, not much more complex than the one I provided. There are metal songs that go more in-depth then this book. Since the cover had naked folks on it I couldn’t read it on the subway to work (not out of a sense of shame, but because I really don’t feel like striking up conversations based on this particular book), which meant I was mostly reading it before bed. It took me a solid 2 weeks to get through because it kept putting me to sleep without fail. While the actions in the book were horrific, they weren’t described vividly and there’s little connection to the victims, and basically zero character development, never mind anything as ambitious as a plot. As awful as it is to read an entire book of "The girl was disemboweled as she screamed and blood splashed everywhere", it's also tedious.
Though I had to laugh at the idea of shoving a host up a swans ass and then having sex with it because it was so outrageously ridiculous. One has really reached the bottom of the barrel in terms of fetishes at that point. And I also got a kick out of some of the exclamations, “Fuck my eyes!” just has a nice ring to it.
One of the only things I found truly disturbing was a quote by one of the 4 masters. He’s describing how he’s limited in his pleasure even by nature- while his imagination always expands on new ways to achieve arousal there are physical limits to what he can do. He would love to annihilate the sun, burn it into darkness, and destroy the entire universe in a sadistic display of intense suffering. I wish this has been explored more deeply, the philosophy of libertinage seemed superficial at best, but maybe that’s not the fault of the book. I also know that this was meant to be more of a pornographic catalogue than anything else, but that is so boring, so I would have enjoyed a deeper exploration of the psychology behind swan fucking, or whatever. I mean, why not, as long as I’m here?
In the end I gained nothing from this. But I think I can effectively cross off the other books on my list that I have on there simply because they’re infamous for being shocking. It’s hard to do well and I think even if it’s done well, it’s just boring. And honestly, I’m tired of reading about feces anyway. Seriously, so much feces.
I know, how could this book have spoilers? Well I'm listing most of what the books covers in case anyone is dying of curiosity to read it, and upon getting the gist will maybe decide it's not worth the time.
The book covers incest, pedophilia, shit (more than anything else, shit), vomit, piss, sodomy, rape, gang rape, whipping, bondage, forced orgasms, humiliation, prostitution, kidnapping, burning, dressing up like animals, bone breaking, bestiality, drugging/poisoning, sexual blasphemy, pony play, exhibitionism, enemas, blood drinking, choking, starvation, human animal hybrid offspring rape (yeah, that's a thing apparently), necrophilia, orgies, genital mutilation, forced abortions/miscarriages, shootings, beatings, cannibalism, amputation, live burials, lightning, rockets, bombs, impaling, murder, mass murder, sharkskin condoms, marrow being replaced with molten lead, and so on and so forth into more extreme forms of torture.
But to be honest all of that falls flat. The book is a laundry list, not much more complex than the one I provided. There are metal songs that go more in-depth then this book. Since the cover had naked folks on it I couldn’t read it on the subway to work (not out of a sense of shame, but because I really don’t feel like striking up conversations based on this particular book), which meant I was mostly reading it before bed. It took me a solid 2 weeks to get through because it kept putting me to sleep without fail. While the actions in the book were horrific, they weren’t described vividly and there’s little connection to the victims, and basically zero character development, never mind anything as ambitious as a plot. As awful as it is to read an entire book of "The girl was disemboweled as she screamed and blood splashed everywhere", it's also tedious.
Though I had to laugh at the idea of shoving a host up a swans ass and then having sex with it because it was so outrageously ridiculous. One has really reached the bottom of the barrel in terms of fetishes at that point. And I also got a kick out of some of the exclamations, “Fuck my eyes!” just has a nice ring to it.
One of the only things I found truly disturbing was a quote by one of the 4 masters. He’s describing how he’s limited in his pleasure even by nature- while his imagination always expands on new ways to achieve arousal there are physical limits to what he can do. He would love to annihilate the sun, burn it into darkness, and destroy the entire universe in a sadistic display of intense suffering. I wish this has been explored more deeply, the philosophy of libertinage seemed superficial at best, but maybe that’s not the fault of the book. I also know that this was meant to be more of a pornographic catalogue than anything else, but that is so boring, so I would have enjoyed a deeper exploration of the psychology behind swan fucking, or whatever. I mean, why not, as long as I’m here?
In the end I gained nothing from this. But I think I can effectively cross off the other books on my list that I have on there simply because they’re infamous for being shocking. It’s hard to do well and I think even if it’s done well, it’s just boring. And honestly, I’m tired of reading about feces anyway. Seriously, so much feces.
September 27, 2020
i nearly didn't rate this because giving it a good rating felt weird and giving it a bad rating felt undeserved. but fuck it, it was well-written and did exactly what it set out to do.
one star knocked off because the coprophagia was too much for me. yes, de sade says the point is that you can "pick and choose your pleasures" and skim over ones that you dislike, but that's pretty difficult when like 50% of the book is copro.
also, this translation included the verbs "incestify" and "saphotize", both of which i'm obsessed with and should enter common usage. although hopefully one won't have much usage for the former.
one star knocked off because the coprophagia was too much for me. yes, de sade says the point is that you can "pick and choose your pleasures" and skim over ones that you dislike, but that's pretty difficult when like 50% of the book is copro.
also, this translation included the verbs "incestify" and "saphotize", both of which i'm obsessed with and should enter common usage. although hopefully one won't have much usage for the former.
October 13, 2017
'Sodom'un 120 Günü' birçok kez okuduğum kitaplardan bir tanesi. Yayınevinin tam metni, 200.yılı şerefine yayımlayacağını öğrendiğimde bir kere daha okuma kararını vermiş, uygun bir zamanı gözetmiştim. Sadizmin babası olarak anılan M.de Sade'ın eserlerini böyle kısa bir yorumda anlatmak ne yazık ki pek mümkün değil. Zira kitapların içeriği ne kadar sert ve aykırı olursa olsun, Sade her daim alttan altta felsefi sorgulamalar içindedir. Ben şahsım adına bunları düşündürücü ve aydınlatıcı buluyorum. Sanatla olan kişisel yolculuğumda, Sade ve Pasolini önemli yerlere sahip isimlerdir. Bazen en doğru yol insanların duymak istediği şeyleri söylemek ya da göstermek değildir. Bazen karşı tarafı duyarsızlaştıracak derece de yıpratmak gerekebilir. Öncelikle tabuları kırmak zorunluluk olabilir. Tüm ihtişamıyla cinsel, aykırı, çarpıcı bir kitap duruyor önünüzde, bir ara zaman ayırmanızı ve kitapla değil kendinizle bir kavgaya tutuşmanızı tavsiye ederim.
Herkese iyi okumalar!
9/10
Herkese iyi okumalar!
9/10
September 10, 2016
What should I say? Oh yes I bought this book, I haven't yet read to the end. But it's a thought provoking book, and Marquis de Sade's great sense of humor and satire is quite charming.
Well, if you don't want to chew through the full 1000 pages of this thick book, at least try Salo or The 120 Days of Sodom!! A "fearsome work of art" it is!
Well, if you don't want to chew through the full 1000 pages of this thick book, at least try Salo or The 120 Days of Sodom!! A "fearsome work of art" it is!
June 12, 2018
Thoroughly ridiculous and all the better for it.
May 12, 2013
I must confess, even as a very avid consumer of literature, I have never before been compelled to actually write a book review – this one did.
This book explores the absolute depths of human corruption, and is the most depraved piece of text I have ever read. Unlike many of the reviewers here, I endured the whole, and reached the end – day 120.
This sordid 450 page tome is divided across four stages or ‘passions’ equating to the level of depravity the libertines are allowed to explore: one, simple passions; two, complex passions; three, criminal passions; and four, murderous passions. As it is unfinished, the book is mostly based on the simple passions, with some of the more complex as well. The rest of the complex and all of the criminal and murderous are not in full prose, but only note form. Everything is included, with no taboo avoided: bestiality, sodomy, incest, paedophilia, buggery, necrophilia, sapphotizing, depucelation, rape, flagellation, sacrilege, kidnap, torture and mutilation all with lashings of coprophagia; ending with the final pages devoted to murder. In all, the culmination of 600 (or there about) separate soirees.
As a previous reviewer said, I do think this text is a bit of a mind game for Sade, he challenges you to finish the book, always exploring further depravity expecting you to reel away in final disgust. If you put the book down he wins! – Though I can’t say you feel you have won anything if you make it to the final page.
I’m sure this is the most horrible book I will ever read (content wise), but enjoyed the boundaries Sade explored with the content, especially considering he was writing in 1785, and whilst being imprisoned in the Bastille. That said, I wouldn’t read it again.
This book explores the absolute depths of human corruption, and is the most depraved piece of text I have ever read. Unlike many of the reviewers here, I endured the whole, and reached the end – day 120.
This sordid 450 page tome is divided across four stages or ‘passions’ equating to the level of depravity the libertines are allowed to explore: one, simple passions; two, complex passions; three, criminal passions; and four, murderous passions. As it is unfinished, the book is mostly based on the simple passions, with some of the more complex as well. The rest of the complex and all of the criminal and murderous are not in full prose, but only note form. Everything is included, with no taboo avoided: bestiality, sodomy, incest, paedophilia, buggery, necrophilia, sapphotizing, depucelation, rape, flagellation, sacrilege, kidnap, torture and mutilation all with lashings of coprophagia; ending with the final pages devoted to murder. In all, the culmination of 600 (or there about) separate soirees.
As a previous reviewer said, I do think this text is a bit of a mind game for Sade, he challenges you to finish the book, always exploring further depravity expecting you to reel away in final disgust. If you put the book down he wins! – Though I can’t say you feel you have won anything if you make it to the final page.
I’m sure this is the most horrible book I will ever read (content wise), but enjoyed the boundaries Sade explored with the content, especially considering he was writing in 1785, and whilst being imprisoned in the Bastille. That said, I wouldn’t read it again.
November 5, 2023
Well, that escalated. Probably a good thing this guy was imprisoned.
Read
July 29, 2017I honestly don't know if I can finish this book. I was recommended this book after reading "American Psycho". I was looking for something that would feed my craving for a gore fest thriller. I don't know what this is. The first couple of pages left me questioning my sanity as to if I should finish it (a question that I thought would be a clear NO for someone who was mentally healthy). But I continued. I bought this book about a year ago and am still grappling with how gross and utterly dehumanizing this book is. I keep on picking it up to see if these children will have some sort of vengeance in there favor. But I cant finish. The defecting and raping related torture they put these victims through is just too much. The only reason why I would try to finish it is because I have a craving for banned books. But if you think a book written in 1785 cannot be bad, just know the word sadistic sprung from the authors name de Sade. I WAS EMBARRASSED TO BE SEEN WITH THIS BOOK ON THE TRAIN! I felt like everyone was judging me lol
Read
May 7, 2024“Now, dear reader, you must prepare your heart and your mind for the most impure story that has ever been written since the world existed, such a book being found neither among the ancients nor among the moderns.”
It sounds like a very cheap excuse (like reading Playboy for the interviews), but I read this primarily out of historical interest (and okay, maybe a little curiosity too). I'm just going to say it straight: this is gross, but really gross, extremely gross, in ways you can barely imagine. And it are not only the unimaginable sexual escapades that de Sade describes, but more the ever-increasing violence, and the sickening way in which other people (especially women and children) are degraded to mere objects.
To be honest: I mainly read the run-up to the book and most of the 'stories' of the first cycle (the first of 4), and even then, gradually I began to read diagonally, skipping the worst passages. I didn't have the stomach for it to begin with (some scenes really make you feel sick), and also, after a while the endless descriptions of the excesses really started to get boring. That also says something. Moreover, according to de Sade, that first cycle only contains a description of the “simple passions”. From the schematic overviews of the next three cycles (which he did not write out, thanks heaven), it can be concluded that after that first ‘simple’ cycle, it only goes crescendo into gruesome torture, up to and including the most beastly mutilations and even murder, all connected to sexual acts.
Curiously, all this is presented by de Sade as a kind of scientific experiment. The core of the story is that 4 friends (rich and powerful men) isolate themselves in a Swiss castle, together with about 30 victims, and for 4 months indulge themselves in an endless series of sexual and violent deeds, and while doing that, meticulously recording and sharing all their emotions and experiences. Notice that the focus always is on the own emotions and experiences of the 'masters', never on those of the victims. And regularly they debate on, for instance, what brings them the greatest pleasure (the act or the desire for it), and its moral implications (or rather, the lack thereof). At these moments, it's almost like you're reading a Platonic dialogue.
So, even amidst the disgusting excesses occasionally interesting things can be found, I mean on a philosophical level (imagine!). For instance, the 'masters' conclude that their happiness comes from the fact that others (their victims) cannot enjoy what they can, in other words: for them inequality and brutal domination are basic goods, provided by Nature. Or that good and evil are completely arbitrary, and that therefore everything is allowed. Not unexpected are the fierce attacks against the church and against religion in general: only Nature (with a capital) counts, because, by making possible the most terrible acts, nothing (and certainly not God) stands in the way of doing just that, and therefor every evil is justified. It is the libertine “natural philosophy” that de Sade keeps coming back to.
Now, one of the points I was curious about is to what extent de Sade can be seen as an exponent of the Enlightenment of the 18th century, a much debated and thorny issue. Okay, he was part of the nobility, and therefore thoroughly rooted in the ‘Ancien Regime’, but so were other Enlightenment philosophers. And agreed, his focus was certainly not on higher reason, but on the contrary on the dark side of the human species. But even then his approach exudes the rationalistic-mechanistic view that is so typical of the French 'philosophes' of that period. Only look at the thoroughness with which the four ‘masters’ perform their brutal deeds, in a premeditated order, how systematically they report on them and discuss them. So, in a way you can indeed say that de Sade - willingly or not - also exposes the dark side of Enlightened rationalism, eventually leading to the Holocaust (I'm not saying anything new, here).
Naturally you wonder: what was the personal motivation of de Sade to write all this, and especially why in that excessively explicit way? I know: libraries have already been written about it. And the variegated views on this range from “de Sade just had a sick mind”, or "he just wanted to shock, to get even with the hypocritical 'tidy' society that put him in jail for so many years", to “he wanted to provide a brilliant insight into the seething, stinking pit that hides inside each of us, but which we usually keep hidden”. I guess, all these views are valid. And so I definitely came to understand why the figure of de Sade, and his writings, continue to fascinate, even after more than 2 centuries. But if you want my (completely non-binding) advice: beware, if you want to read this, know what you're getting into.
Annex: I have now also read his Justine ou Les Malheurs de la vertu, and I must say that it is on a much higher literary level (ok, also this sounds very “I read Playboy for the interviews”-ish), it is a bit less explicit, and, actually contains a little less violence, although it remains very rude and particularly derogatory of the female species. But above all it contains many more well-developed passages that philosophize about the (im)moral aspects of libertine behavior, and in that sense it is much more interesting from an historical point of view.
It sounds like a very cheap excuse (like reading Playboy for the interviews), but I read this primarily out of historical interest (and okay, maybe a little curiosity too). I'm just going to say it straight: this is gross, but really gross, extremely gross, in ways you can barely imagine. And it are not only the unimaginable sexual escapades that de Sade describes, but more the ever-increasing violence, and the sickening way in which other people (especially women and children) are degraded to mere objects.
To be honest: I mainly read the run-up to the book and most of the 'stories' of the first cycle (the first of 4), and even then, gradually I began to read diagonally, skipping the worst passages. I didn't have the stomach for it to begin with (some scenes really make you feel sick), and also, after a while the endless descriptions of the excesses really started to get boring. That also says something. Moreover, according to de Sade, that first cycle only contains a description of the “simple passions”. From the schematic overviews of the next three cycles (which he did not write out, thanks heaven), it can be concluded that after that first ‘simple’ cycle, it only goes crescendo into gruesome torture, up to and including the most beastly mutilations and even murder, all connected to sexual acts.
Curiously, all this is presented by de Sade as a kind of scientific experiment. The core of the story is that 4 friends (rich and powerful men) isolate themselves in a Swiss castle, together with about 30 victims, and for 4 months indulge themselves in an endless series of sexual and violent deeds, and while doing that, meticulously recording and sharing all their emotions and experiences. Notice that the focus always is on the own emotions and experiences of the 'masters', never on those of the victims. And regularly they debate on, for instance, what brings them the greatest pleasure (the act or the desire for it), and its moral implications (or rather, the lack thereof). At these moments, it's almost like you're reading a Platonic dialogue.
So, even amidst the disgusting excesses occasionally interesting things can be found, I mean on a philosophical level (imagine!). For instance, the 'masters' conclude that their happiness comes from the fact that others (their victims) cannot enjoy what they can, in other words: for them inequality and brutal domination are basic goods, provided by Nature. Or that good and evil are completely arbitrary, and that therefore everything is allowed. Not unexpected are the fierce attacks against the church and against religion in general: only Nature (with a capital) counts, because, by making possible the most terrible acts, nothing (and certainly not God) stands in the way of doing just that, and therefor every evil is justified. It is the libertine “natural philosophy” that de Sade keeps coming back to.
Now, one of the points I was curious about is to what extent de Sade can be seen as an exponent of the Enlightenment of the 18th century, a much debated and thorny issue. Okay, he was part of the nobility, and therefore thoroughly rooted in the ‘Ancien Regime’, but so were other Enlightenment philosophers. And agreed, his focus was certainly not on higher reason, but on the contrary on the dark side of the human species. But even then his approach exudes the rationalistic-mechanistic view that is so typical of the French 'philosophes' of that period. Only look at the thoroughness with which the four ‘masters’ perform their brutal deeds, in a premeditated order, how systematically they report on them and discuss them. So, in a way you can indeed say that de Sade - willingly or not - also exposes the dark side of Enlightened rationalism, eventually leading to the Holocaust (I'm not saying anything new, here).
Naturally you wonder: what was the personal motivation of de Sade to write all this, and especially why in that excessively explicit way? I know: libraries have already been written about it. And the variegated views on this range from “de Sade just had a sick mind”, or "he just wanted to shock, to get even with the hypocritical 'tidy' society that put him in jail for so many years", to “he wanted to provide a brilliant insight into the seething, stinking pit that hides inside each of us, but which we usually keep hidden”. I guess, all these views are valid. And so I definitely came to understand why the figure of de Sade, and his writings, continue to fascinate, even after more than 2 centuries. But if you want my (completely non-binding) advice: beware, if you want to read this, know what you're getting into.
Annex: I have now also read his Justine ou Les Malheurs de la vertu, and I must say that it is on a much higher literary level (ok, also this sounds very “I read Playboy for the interviews”-ish), it is a bit less explicit, and, actually contains a little less violence, although it remains very rude and particularly derogatory of the female species. But above all it contains many more well-developed passages that philosophize about the (im)moral aspects of libertine behavior, and in that sense it is much more interesting from an historical point of view.
August 13, 2018
What is there not to like about the new translation of Marquis de Sade's "The 120 Days of Sodom?" Will McMorran and Thomas Wynn translate it, and their work brings Sade's language/writing to the contemporary world. This doesn't mean it's full of Urban language slang words, but it reads extremely well. And oddly enough this is the first time I've read "The 120 Days of Sodom."
What's interesting is not the sex, which of course it is a big part of the book, but the Sade organized his series of narratives that reflect on a society falling apart. It's not precisely a turn-on type of book or even a 'dirty book,' but more of a work that deals with the structure and how it tells its tales. On one level, it's a book that takes place in an imaginary landscape, especially regarding the castle that the action takes place. One has to walk to the location, so therefore it is highly unlikely no one will come unannounced. Also, the four main libertines are a duke (royalty), a bishop (religion), a judge (the law) and a financier (economy). After that, then we have groupings of family members, Harem of young girls, Harem of young boys, and Eight fuckers (all well-hung men). It's very much a stage-set with everyone in the story playing an essential role in a social structure.
The sex is crazed and usually exposed in a frenzy mode of action, with lots of poop offerings of all sorts. So it demeans people which is part of the turn-on but also to expose the power system in place as well. Or at times, playing with the 'role' of power and it plays in a sexual context. For sure, Sade's book doesn't read like a sex book, but more of a critique of overall power, family structure, and political power. It's a dangerous book because it works on different levels. One as a sex book (which it is, but as mentioned not that sexy) and two, a political/social critique.
The Penguin edition (2016) is a handsome book, with a cover image by Surrealist/DADA Man Ray, and interesting endnotes at the end of the book. Very close to being an annotated edition, and readable. For those who admire narratives like Anthony Burgess' "A Clockwork Orange," or even a 1960s William S. Burroughs novel, Sade's work is very much a cousin to those works. Burroughs and Burgess expose a system in place, and Sade did that a few centuries ago. A brilliant book that needs to stay in print forever, because like "Gulliver's Travels," "Candide," and others of that style, this is a remarkable political / social observation.
What's interesting is not the sex, which of course it is a big part of the book, but the Sade organized his series of narratives that reflect on a society falling apart. It's not precisely a turn-on type of book or even a 'dirty book,' but more of a work that deals with the structure and how it tells its tales. On one level, it's a book that takes place in an imaginary landscape, especially regarding the castle that the action takes place. One has to walk to the location, so therefore it is highly unlikely no one will come unannounced. Also, the four main libertines are a duke (royalty), a bishop (religion), a judge (the law) and a financier (economy). After that, then we have groupings of family members, Harem of young girls, Harem of young boys, and Eight fuckers (all well-hung men). It's very much a stage-set with everyone in the story playing an essential role in a social structure.
The sex is crazed and usually exposed in a frenzy mode of action, with lots of poop offerings of all sorts. So it demeans people which is part of the turn-on but also to expose the power system in place as well. Or at times, playing with the 'role' of power and it plays in a sexual context. For sure, Sade's book doesn't read like a sex book, but more of a critique of overall power, family structure, and political power. It's a dangerous book because it works on different levels. One as a sex book (which it is, but as mentioned not that sexy) and two, a political/social critique.
The Penguin edition (2016) is a handsome book, with a cover image by Surrealist/DADA Man Ray, and interesting endnotes at the end of the book. Very close to being an annotated edition, and readable. For those who admire narratives like Anthony Burgess' "A Clockwork Orange," or even a 1960s William S. Burroughs novel, Sade's work is very much a cousin to those works. Burroughs and Burgess expose a system in place, and Sade did that a few centuries ago. A brilliant book that needs to stay in print forever, because like "Gulliver's Travels," "Candide," and others of that style, this is a remarkable political / social observation.
April 9, 2020
Neterminată, întrucât Sade a fost o victimă colaterală a Revoluției, fiind luat buimac din Bastilia în chiar noaptea precedentă căderii acesteia și abandonându-și manuscrisul acolo, Școala libertinajului a stârnit multe reacții de-a lungul timpului.
Poate cea mai grăitoare dovadă a pregnanței operei este faptul că autorul a reușit, fără voia sa, să instituie după numele său un cuvânt de o largă răspândire. Nu folosești "eminescian" și "dostoievskian" în orice frază, pe când "sadic"... mai des.
Lucrarea este, după cum spuneam, una neterminată, Sade neapucând să definitiveze decât prima dintre cele patru părți, ultimele trei părți rămânându-ne drept niște schițe a ceea ce ar fi avut să fie pasiunile duble, cele criminale și cele ucigașe.
Puterea absolută este, cu siguranță, elementul central al operei. Dacă facem abstracție de perversiunile sexuale și de crimele care sunt nelipsite din fiecare frază a romanului, ne rămâne fundalul puterii absolute. Există, într-adevăr, o constituție pe care o redactează și o impun cele patru personaje principale, dar aceasta este tot opera lor și rolul ei nu e acela de a limita absolutismul, ci de a-l institui (și) în mod formal.
Iată, de pildă, spre deosebire de Decameronul lui Boccaccio, unde personajele se retrag în mediul rural pe fondul ciumei care cuprinsese Florența, la Sade pornirea izolării survine exclusiv din dorința de a-l domina nestânjenit pe celălalt. În acest sens, este grăitoare descrierea minuțioasă a imposibilității de a pătrunde în castelul elvețian unde se retrag cei patru împreună cu alaiul lor. De altfel, Pădurea Neagră, unde este situat castelul, este, parcă, un nume predestinat acțiunii ce avea să urmeze. :) Dacă la Boccaccio izolarea survine pe fondul necesitații, la Sade ea este una voluntară.
Dincolo de a fi o "psychopathia sexualis", Școala libertinajului este un model filosofic: puterea absolută, discreționară și nedreptatea reprezintă izvorul fericirii.
Iată, în acest sens, cât de grăitoare este scena în care ducele îi taie singurul sân rămas al lui Fanchon, iar acesta obiectează, susținând că nu e drept. Ducele, inert, îi spune despre faptă că "Dacă ar fi dreaptă, nu ni s-ar scula p*la!" În această replică constă toată filosofia romanului.
Obiecții pe care le am de făcut (pe lângă cele pe care și le reproșează autorul la finalul fiecărei părți):
1. Prima parte, singura terminată, de altfel, este despre cum să mănânci căcat. La propriu. Pe bune, pe lângă niscai acte de pedofilie și incest, mâncarea materiei fecale se impune, ceea ce constituie un aspect nu tocmai plăcut pentru o persoană mai... sensibilă. Nu e tocmai cazul meu, însă Sade pare că reduce libertinajul primei părți la această singură pasiune: mâncatul de rahat. Dată fiind imaginația sa, acesta este un aspect care nu ar trebui scuzat.
2. În schițele ultimelor două părți nu mai este (aproape) deloc vorba despre sexualitate. E doar despre cum poți ucide oameni în moduri în care sigur ți-ai lua pedeapsa detențiunii pe viață pentru fiecare crimă în parte.
Pier Paolo Pasolini, unul dintre regizorii mei preferați (dacă mă pui să-ți numesc cinci regizori de geniu, patru ar fi italieni), s-a inspirat din opera lui Sade atunci când a făcut filmul omonim. Atâta tot că Pasolini a fost doar inspirat de idee, în sensul că el a făcut ceva mult mai realist și a adaptat personajele lui Sade ce au fost create pe fondul Vechiului Regim la Italia fascistă din ultimele zile ale războiului, atunci când a fost constituită republica de la Salo. Tot pe fondul sexualității, Pasolini face mai degrabă o alegorie politică, asimilând victimele din film cu victimele din rândul comuniștilor pe care le-au făcut fasciștii.
Concluzionând, scenele sexuale descrise sunt de-a dreptul oripilante, probabil și pentru cel mai pervers individ al secolului nostru. Problema puterii absolute este, însă, una care interesează realitatea imediată (și nu numai), iar cunoscându-i premisele, putem lupta împotriva ei.
Poate cea mai grăitoare dovadă a pregnanței operei este faptul că autorul a reușit, fără voia sa, să instituie după numele său un cuvânt de o largă răspândire. Nu folosești "eminescian" și "dostoievskian" în orice frază, pe când "sadic"... mai des.
Lucrarea este, după cum spuneam, una neterminată, Sade neapucând să definitiveze decât prima dintre cele patru părți, ultimele trei părți rămânându-ne drept niște schițe a ceea ce ar fi avut să fie pasiunile duble, cele criminale și cele ucigașe.
Puterea absolută este, cu siguranță, elementul central al operei. Dacă facem abstracție de perversiunile sexuale și de crimele care sunt nelipsite din fiecare frază a romanului, ne rămâne fundalul puterii absolute. Există, într-adevăr, o constituție pe care o redactează și o impun cele patru personaje principale, dar aceasta este tot opera lor și rolul ei nu e acela de a limita absolutismul, ci de a-l institui (și) în mod formal.
Iată, de pildă, spre deosebire de Decameronul lui Boccaccio, unde personajele se retrag în mediul rural pe fondul ciumei care cuprinsese Florența, la Sade pornirea izolării survine exclusiv din dorința de a-l domina nestânjenit pe celălalt. În acest sens, este grăitoare descrierea minuțioasă a imposibilității de a pătrunde în castelul elvețian unde se retrag cei patru împreună cu alaiul lor. De altfel, Pădurea Neagră, unde este situat castelul, este, parcă, un nume predestinat acțiunii ce avea să urmeze. :) Dacă la Boccaccio izolarea survine pe fondul necesitații, la Sade ea este una voluntară.
Dincolo de a fi o "psychopathia sexualis", Școala libertinajului este un model filosofic: puterea absolută, discreționară și nedreptatea reprezintă izvorul fericirii.
Iată, în acest sens, cât de grăitoare este scena în care ducele îi taie singurul sân rămas al lui Fanchon, iar acesta obiectează, susținând că nu e drept. Ducele, inert, îi spune despre faptă că "Dacă ar fi dreaptă, nu ni s-ar scula p*la!" În această replică constă toată filosofia romanului.
Obiecții pe care le am de făcut (pe lângă cele pe care și le reproșează autorul la finalul fiecărei părți):
1. Prima parte, singura terminată, de altfel, este despre cum să mănânci căcat. La propriu. Pe bune, pe lângă niscai acte de pedofilie și incest, mâncarea materiei fecale se impune, ceea ce constituie un aspect nu tocmai plăcut pentru o persoană mai... sensibilă. Nu e tocmai cazul meu, însă Sade pare că reduce libertinajul primei părți la această singură pasiune: mâncatul de rahat. Dată fiind imaginația sa, acesta este un aspect care nu ar trebui scuzat.
2. În schițele ultimelor două părți nu mai este (aproape) deloc vorba despre sexualitate. E doar despre cum poți ucide oameni în moduri în care sigur ți-ai lua pedeapsa detențiunii pe viață pentru fiecare crimă în parte.
Pier Paolo Pasolini, unul dintre regizorii mei preferați (dacă mă pui să-ți numesc cinci regizori de geniu, patru ar fi italieni), s-a inspirat din opera lui Sade atunci când a făcut filmul omonim. Atâta tot că Pasolini a fost doar inspirat de idee, în sensul că el a făcut ceva mult mai realist și a adaptat personajele lui Sade ce au fost create pe fondul Vechiului Regim la Italia fascistă din ultimele zile ale războiului, atunci când a fost constituită republica de la Salo. Tot pe fondul sexualității, Pasolini face mai degrabă o alegorie politică, asimilând victimele din film cu victimele din rândul comuniștilor pe care le-au făcut fasciștii.
Concluzionând, scenele sexuale descrise sunt de-a dreptul oripilante, probabil și pentru cel mai pervers individ al secolului nostru. Problema puterii absolute este, însă, una care interesează realitatea imediată (și nu numai), iar cunoscându-i premisele, putem lupta împotriva ei.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,733 reviews