Paul’s review of The Immoralist > Likes and Comments
108 likes · Like
I’ll tell you why it gets four or five stars: This is a gay classic that concisely presents the crisis most gay men have in their lives: reject bourgeois complacency (whether with a wife or a partner) and face empty hedonistic disipation. The hero is not a pedophile; Gide is describing the toxic attraction so many urban gay Peter Pans develop about young men, unable to appreciate themselves or the ageing process frantically chasing their own youth through pursuit of younger lovers. As a novel it has interesting structure using the various settings from the orchards to the deserts to convey the hero’s progress into an empty life. It’s weird yes that Gide uses the wife as a cipher, but she’s just representing a lifestyle. This book serves up a real crisis, not just for gay men, but for everyone who thinks they want to reject basic adulthood. I don’t think the hero is happy in the end, and the space Gide leaves for the reader to decide that is also the reason its a classic. Chase this with Isak Denisen’s Seven Gothic Tales, two if which novelist Louise Erdich wrote she reads obsessively-The Deluge at Norderly and The Monkey- and cover this same philosophical crisis that we all face between living life as its laid out for us, or chasing pleasure?/self-actualization?/passions? to their logical end.
well, that's a sterling defence and I appreciate that, thanks. It begs the question whether the five star ratings would only be dished out by gay readers as they can particularly appreciate the dilemma you describe; the corollary of that being readers like myself who don't really get the said dilemma.
Then again, youth obsession infiltrates all social groups and sexualities, and for straight men is formalised by the quest for the trophy wife (see : Rod Stewart, Donald Trump, ten thousand business executives, etc).
Then again again - The Immoralist seems to fixate on teenage boys in the pastoral section and actual boys (age not stated but seemingly younger than teenage) in the Arabic sections. As Michel's account ends with the gangs of boys in Algeria, I could only conclude that Michel was a paedophile.
Oh my god this is horrific. This sounds like a story of pedophile glorified.. i haven't read it and will stay clear of it
I think that a distinction needs to be made between the term paedophilia and pederasty, the latter being associated with Gide. The Immoralist references in many ways Gide's own life and marriage and it was a work, published in 1902, that transgressed all society's norms of the time. For this it has to be considered a classic and is far better, perhaps because a little more explicit, than Maurice by E.M. Foster. It does indeed explore the fears, needs, insecurities and Peter Pan behaviour associated with homosexual desire and it strongly alludes to Ancient Greek pederasty in Athens in the 6th century, much as does the work of Walter Pater. I think that there is a need to situate a work of literature in order to appreciate its value, and a need to try and understand what was like, and is still like, to be homosexual. Perhaps difficult if you are heterosexual, but not impossible.
agreed, but the definition of pederasty is I believe "sexual activity between a man and a boy" and so would also be defined as paedophilia, right?
Hi Everyone and Peter
Happy Christmas and its going to be Nagia's Birthday Yay
Is this ebook scary ;-")
Lovely review Peter
;-")
No Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder and is the desire for prepubescent children. Pederasty is desire for adolescent youth and is not considered a psychiatric disorder. Paedophilia also has the overtones of sexual abuse, which pederasty does not. Pederasty does not involve coercion or abuse of the love object. Paedophilia does. Thus terms need to be applied with care and better understanding.
This is one of those issues of evolving definitions. For years I muttered darkly when news broadcasters and others used the word "decimate" incorrectly. As we know it means "to kill one in ten of a group of people to punish the entire group". But everyone seemed to think it meant something like "to destroy utterly". They were all wrong. But eventually I had to realise that words only mean anything at all because there is a general agreement about what they mean. Decimate had changed its meaning. It no longer meant what it used to mean. Likewise the enormous coverage of crimes referred to as being committed by paedophiles in recent years. The child grooming gangs exposed in the UK in recent years were routinely described as paedophiles - they targeted 12 to 15 year olds mostly.
I think you are right to make the distinction you do, but it's not one that is made in the press and in general conversation. I think that right now a child is defined as someone below the age of consent & any adult who targets children of any age for sex is thought of as a paedophile.
If only the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism had been around when Gide was being Immoral. Article 2.3 plainly states:
agreed. there was a lot of admittedly underground gay lit in 1902 and well before.. why is gide so coy about it ? what shocked me only a little though, was his giving away his fortune .. i guess I'm super lacking in good citizenship then. I thought everybody did more or less what they want ... i guess i didnt get the memo.
so glad i never had a fortune in the first place.
Quite the long-winded way of saying Gide was a paedophile.
In Algeria, Gide met his pal Oscar W., who shared the same hobby.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Padraig
(new)
Nov 22, 2018 11:30AM
I’ll tell you why it gets four or five stars: This is a gay classic that concisely presents the crisis most gay men have in their lives: reject bourgeois complacency (whether with a wife or a partner) and face empty hedonistic disipation. The hero is not a pedophile; Gide is describing the toxic attraction so many urban gay Peter Pans develop about young men, unable to appreciate themselves or the ageing process frantically chasing their own youth through pursuit of younger lovers. As a novel it has interesting structure using the various settings from the orchards to the deserts to convey the hero’s progress into an empty life. It’s weird yes that Gide uses the wife as a cipher, but she’s just representing a lifestyle. This book serves up a real crisis, not just for gay men, but for everyone who thinks they want to reject basic adulthood. I don’t think the hero is happy in the end, and the space Gide leaves for the reader to decide that is also the reason its a classic. Chase this with Isak Denisen’s Seven Gothic Tales, two if which novelist Louise Erdich wrote she reads obsessively-The Deluge at Norderly and The Monkey- and cover this same philosophical crisis that we all face between living life as its laid out for us, or chasing pleasure?/self-actualization?/passions? to their logical end.
reply
|
flag
well, that's a sterling defence and I appreciate that, thanks. It begs the question whether the five star ratings would only be dished out by gay readers as they can particularly appreciate the dilemma you describe; the corollary of that being readers like myself who don't really get the said dilemma.Then again, youth obsession infiltrates all social groups and sexualities, and for straight men is formalised by the quest for the trophy wife (see : Rod Stewart, Donald Trump, ten thousand business executives, etc).
Then again again - The Immoralist seems to fixate on teenage boys in the pastoral section and actual boys (age not stated but seemingly younger than teenage) in the Arabic sections. As Michel's account ends with the gangs of boys in Algeria, I could only conclude that Michel was a paedophile.
Oh my god this is horrific. This sounds like a story of pedophile glorified.. i haven't read it and will stay clear of it
I think that a distinction needs to be made between the term paedophilia and pederasty, the latter being associated with Gide. The Immoralist references in many ways Gide's own life and marriage and it was a work, published in 1902, that transgressed all society's norms of the time. For this it has to be considered a classic and is far better, perhaps because a little more explicit, than Maurice by E.M. Foster. It does indeed explore the fears, needs, insecurities and Peter Pan behaviour associated with homosexual desire and it strongly alludes to Ancient Greek pederasty in Athens in the 6th century, much as does the work of Walter Pater. I think that there is a need to situate a work of literature in order to appreciate its value, and a need to try and understand what was like, and is still like, to be homosexual. Perhaps difficult if you are heterosexual, but not impossible.
agreed, but the definition of pederasty is I believe "sexual activity between a man and a boy" and so would also be defined as paedophilia, right?
Hi Everyone and Peter Happy Christmas and its going to be Nagia's Birthday Yay
Is this ebook scary ;-")
Lovely review Peter
;-")
No Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder and is the desire for prepubescent children. Pederasty is desire for adolescent youth and is not considered a psychiatric disorder. Paedophilia also has the overtones of sexual abuse, which pederasty does not. Pederasty does not involve coercion or abuse of the love object. Paedophilia does. Thus terms need to be applied with care and better understanding.
This is one of those issues of evolving definitions. For years I muttered darkly when news broadcasters and others used the word "decimate" incorrectly. As we know it means "to kill one in ten of a group of people to punish the entire group". But everyone seemed to think it meant something like "to destroy utterly". They were all wrong. But eventually I had to realise that words only mean anything at all because there is a general agreement about what they mean. Decimate had changed its meaning. It no longer meant what it used to mean. Likewise the enormous coverage of crimes referred to as being committed by paedophiles in recent years. The child grooming gangs exposed in the UK in recent years were routinely described as paedophiles - they targeted 12 to 15 year olds mostly. I think you are right to make the distinction you do, but it's not one that is made in the press and in general conversation. I think that right now a child is defined as someone below the age of consent & any adult who targets children of any age for sex is thought of as a paedophile.
If only the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism had been around when Gide was being Immoral. Article 2.3 plainly states:The exploitation of human beings in any form, particularly sexual, especially when applied to children, conflicts with the fundamental aims of tourism and is the negation of tourism.The negation, note. I bet you thought the negation was staying at home or something.
agreed. there was a lot of admittedly underground gay lit in 1902 and well before.. why is gide so coy about it ? what shocked me only a little though, was his giving away his fortune .. i guess I'm super lacking in good citizenship then. I thought everybody did more or less what they want ... i guess i didnt get the memo.
so glad i never had a fortune in the first place.
Quite the long-winded way of saying Gide was a paedophile.
In Algeria, Gide met his pal Oscar W., who shared the same hobby.
