|
Article 614 of exactly 1426 |
<< Previous Article |
>> Next Article |
/\ Current Results |
|
|
|
|
Subject: Re: Salo - The 120 Days of Sodom - question From: cx955@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Dylan David Wagner) Date: 1997/05/25 Message-ID: <5m8dsk$j10@freenet-news.carleton.ca> Newsgroups: alt.cult-movies [More Headers] [Subscribe to alt.cult-movies] (692609@ican.net) writes: Good day! > I'm interested in hearing any opinions on Pasolini's Salo. Anyone who > has seen it please let me know what this film is really like. > > I read the Marquis de Sade's 120 days of sodom and although it gets > incredibly revolting, extreme, and offensive I find it a fascinating > piece of literature and I was wondering if the film even comes close? > > I would also like to know if this flic is legal in Canada/Ontario? This message brought back memories! I used to be qutie keen on the old 120 Days as well. In fact I have an old research paper on the book and film (examining it's artistic value) that I'll throw on the end... Now let's see... I saw the film before I read the book, but then again I wasn't totally unarmed, I had read some Sade before. I saw the film at -get this- The National Film Archives (on Wellington, in Ottawa) it was part of a Passolini festival. Now the film is supposed to be banned in Canada, but they got permission to show it as part of that festival... Yet I have my doubts as to wether it's really banned since a fellow Ontarian had the Criterion edition Laserdisc of the film... So if it is banned, it's not very well enforced... > Any comparisons between de Sade's book and Pasolini's film would be of > great interest to me. I'll let the paper deal with that... > > Just so you all know - I dont get off on this type of crap in the > least - I'm fascinated by the behaviour of the libertines and am > trying to get a better understanding of how anyone could derive > pleasure like the four vile fiends depicted in de Sade's work. Most people who read Sade don't quite get off on it either. Though I'm sure some do, after all I've seen Sade books at a bondage store once!!! Personally I was/am in it for the philosophy... > (For anyone not familiar with the Marquis de Sade's 120 days of sodom > - I recommend it if you want a truly shocking reading experience - > just make sure you have a damn strong stomach). Strong stomach! Ha! More like strong eyes! I love Sade, but he's a horrid writers! His tales can be so bloody borring! 120 Days nearly killed me! I found the excess in 120 days just got to absurd after awhile and one was so dessensitized that it hardly shocked you... And I was only 17 when I read it... Well here's the paper... Keep in mind it was written a year ago, and I wrote it the day before handing it in and didn't really proof read it... Also the Annexes and footnotes are mysteriously absent! (actually I never typed them, I added them on in ink during lunch period before handing this sucker in). In case you were wondering what I got, I got 95% Lost most of my points because the paper was too biased (hard to criticize Sade and Passolini when you like their work!) Well here goes! Table of Contents Preface.......................................................... ........................................................1 A. Sade............................................................. .....................................................2 1. The Man ................................................................. ..................................2 2. The Writer........................................................... .....................................3 3. The Philosopher...................................................... ..................................4 B. The 120 Days of Sodom............................................................ .......................5 C. Salo: The 120 Days of Sodom............................................................ .............7 D. Artisitic Value............................................................ ......................................9 Conclusion....................................................... ......................................................11 Bibliographie.................................................... .....................................................13 Appendix......................................................... ......................................................14 Preface Oct 29 1994, 8:40pm... Having paid our 6,50$, we entered the small glorified screening room that they here called a theater. Here being the National Canadian Archives. Word of my mouth is what brought us there, the word that Salo:120 Days of Sodom is one of the best horror films ever made. An absurd statement; I'd like to find that person and set them straight. Salo is definitely not what we expected, and it's definitely not a horror film either. Renowned poet, artist and filmmaker Pier Paolo Pasolini's film adaptation and modernization of the Marquis de Sade's 120 days of Sodom, is an exploration of human depravity. Two hours of the darkest, cruelest sexual fantasies of four libertines whom gather to celebrate their loss, as Fascist Italy disintegrates during the end of WWII. But I didn't come to the film empty headed, I had an idea of what to expect. I had first heard of Sade roughly 2 months before seeing the film, a friend haven introduced me to his extreme philosophy, thereafter I purchased a book of his early writings to see what there was to be seen. But Sade's "Misfortunes of Virtue" and Sade's "120 Days of Sodom" are so extremely different in terms of content; the underlying themes and philosophy are the same, but the way it is expressed is incredibly different. Whereas Misfortunes of Virtue hides behind the semblance of a virtuous novel, 120 Days of Sodom goes all out and leaves nothing -NOTHING- to the imagination. And neither does the film: "This film contains disturbing material which may offend" the caption said. Rather an understatement, indeed the film WILL offend, that is half of its charm! From the time the film began, 'til the time the film ended, I would say at least half -if not more- of the original ticket payers left. And these are people who had a pretty good idea what to expect, people who enjoy fringe/art films. Imagine the reaction of the regular film goer? After seeing the film, and being properly numbed by it, my interest in Sade grew but not for the eroticism, if needs be there is much better erotic literature out there than his. But for the extremes depicted and of course for his libertine philosophy. And now a year and a half later, after having read most of Sade's great works, including 120 Days of Sodom, I think it's time to figure it out. The matter is clear on his other books, they all have merit, be it philosophical, satirical or other. But the matter is more difficult when evaluating 120 Days of Sodom. There is no new Sadean revelations in the book, no truly great philosophical discourses, just a lot of torture and sex. And the film is no different, whereas other Pasolini films are similar, they have a clearer social/political element (be it mockery, satire, or other), Salo is a little more difficult to analyze, the satirical element not being especially strong. So the grand question as come: Is 120 Days of Sodom (and Salo, it's film version) Pornography? Or does it have some merit? Enough to justify it? Through the use of my personal library, including the many essays that are always included before Sade's tales; the university's and local libraries; the internet; and my great analytical mind; I will attempt to answer, in a suitable form, weither or not 120 Days as enough merit to pull it out of the dark pit of pornography and into the radiance cast only by art... It is perhaps best that, before we study the book and the film, that we learn a little about the man who started it all. The person behind the name, the man "more talked about than read"1 Sade 1. The Man: At first glance an average aristocrat: cultured and handsome. He takes part in the seven year war and comes out with the rank of captain. There is nothing of the extreme rebel of his later days found in this young man. He obeys and respects his father, accepts the parent's arranged marriage to a rich young girl of the petty aristocracy. Yet all of this was on the surface, Sade was indeed waging war. A war that took place inside the brothels. He was known as being a violent one, who would ask for odd, often painful favors. One of these encounters landed him in jail, his first of many stays, accused of debauchery and blasphemy. But his moderately influential family intervened and this 23 year old Marquis was sentenced to a year's banishment. Sade's first official crime produced quite the effect in him; he cried, he prayed, he begged that no one tell his wife of his betrayal. But never would he give up his disturbing pleasures, already they had taken an important place in his life. Many have debated over what Sade's original attraction was to Sadism, why he so liked to hurt women. Famous Sade admirer and critic, Pierre Klowssowski, who decided upon discovering Sade not through the relatively obscure facts about his life but through his works. There he has found that Sade's hatred for women seems to stem from an original hatred of his mother2 And why not? Mothers do indeed take a quite a bashing in Sade's works. A mother's genitalia is mutilated by her once virtuous daughter, turned Sadean women in Philosophy in the Boudoir. Or in the Misfortunes of Virtue, the young Marquis De Bressac poisons his mother in order to gain her wealth. But the renowned author Simone de Beauvoir takes this one step further; she says it is not Sade's original mother he despises, but his ruthless mother in law3. Indeed he has reason to. After Sade as gained a reputable name, after he has turned his wife into a faithful and loyal accomplice, after Sade seduces the woman's young daughter, Sade's own sister in law; she uses her power to get a lettre de cachet, guaranteeing that Sade will be behind bars indefinatly. Of course no one planned for the French Revolution. The revolution that saw Sade not only free, but put him in a place of power. Power because of the grande injustice of the lettre de cachet, something the revolutionaries found to be the ultimate example of the ancienne regime's tyranny. The Revolution was a time of great aristocrat slaughters. And who else but Sade was appointed judge. The decision of who to execute and who not execute was in his hands. Sade's Sadism finally found a means of expression that was socially acceptable. What did Sade do? He tried to save as many families as he could, among them, the Montreils, who are not only his wife's family, but also the ones who had him imprisoned in the Bastille for so long. Sade saved them... To Sade murder for pleasure was justifiable, but murder, on a grand scale, in the name of justice was against his principles. Of course this angered the extremists who cried for blood and Sade was again imprisoned. Sade narrowly escapes the mass executions of traitors and is released; whereupon he finds he has been put on a list of ‚migr‚s and no longer has access to his money. For the next few years he works in theater productions and writes. His books are published but are often seized. In 1801 Sade is arrested and incarcerated, due to his obscene writings. While in prison he attempts to seduce some new arrivals and is sent to Charenton, that popular asylum for the insane, where Sade lives out the last decade of his life. A decade spent writing unsuccessful plays, requesting freedom of Napoleon and always a being met by a refusal. Labeled unreformable and described as lost "in a permanent state of libertine dementia."4 There Sade dies( though not before having an affair with a 16 year old, a girl 47 younger than he), his final will asking that he be buried in an unmarked grave and that bushes be planted above him so as to be forever forgotten... This first part of his will was carried out, but never has he been forgotten... 2.The Writer Unreadable, excessive, repetitive, tedious catalogues of contradictory ideas and excess. Sade wrote long confessions, revealing his own personal beliefs and reasons. However much of a clich‚ it has become, Sade wished to be accepted has he is: A sadistic, adulterous, sodomite, libertine. He might have been asking too much... Most of Sade's major works were written in prison, under the worst of conditions: microscopic writing on scrolls, forever fearful that the guards will come and tear his work to shreds. Sade became a writer late in life, he was 42 when he wrote his first work: Dialogue between a priest and a dying man , a short work that sets the stage for the novels to come. Among Sade's many novels and short stories, there was one that he never seemed satisfied with. The short novella called the Misfortunes of Virtue, later expanded and revised and called Justine, or the Misfortunes of Virtue, 6 years later he expands it again and calls it The New Justine, or the Misfortunes of Virtue, followed by The History of Juliette, her sister, or the Properties of Vice. It would truly be absurd to read all of the novels that are so similar. Sade also wrote many plays, most of which were unsuccessful, all except for Oxitern, which tells the tale of a malicious older man in love with the young Ernestine. But this man is no normal man, he is a Sadean character, larger than life and twice as evil! He has Ernestine's lover hanged as a traitor, in front of his castle's window as he deflowers the poor Ernestine. Who later wishing Oxitern's blood agrees to a duel with him. But Oxitern is wickedly smart and as arranged things so that Ernestine's father who also wishes a duel with Oxitern, goes to the meeting place and actually fights his daughter. Things are dark and he mortally wounds her before noticing it is not Oxitern at all... Sade also wrote political pamphlets, some supporting the revolution (though it is believed he did this to save his own life, for he was, after all, an aristocrat), others giving France guidelines to become a great country. One of these last pamphlets was worked into his story The Crimes of Love, a truly desperate gimmick. But as said before, Sade wrote to change the world so that he could walk free, without fear of persecution because of his wild tastes. His works are justifications, using philosophy as a tool... 3. The Philosopher "I am a Philosopher" says Sade, "those who know me can have no doubt that I am proud to be known to profess as much"6 If anything Sade's books should be read for the philosophy. Something that as been to often overlooked or ignored. The eroticism, the excess, the violence, are all just a shell, a vehicle through which Sade promotes his philosophy; the justification for his deviant passions. Sade is perhaps one of the earliest true materialist, perhaps even the only true materialist. Like many other materialist Sade argues that life is but a continual, unstoppable flow of matter; unending movement. Through this Sade paints mother nature as a careless, indifferent force, whose only wish is to create, create, create! And in order to create, she needs matter, and the easiest way to free up matter is through destruction. This is how Sade justifies all acts of evil he does, or might do. To him Society is an "unnatural construct, designed to thwart nature"6, by helping the dying, by imposing constraints on violent behavior, society prevents the freeing up of matter. Sade also likes to disprove right and wrong through the use of Nature as ultimate judge. For something to be wrong, it would have to go against Nature. For something to go against Nature it would have to take place outside of the Nature's laws. Therefore it follows that because we are all a part of Nature, and are subject to her laws, nothing we do can be wrong because we were capable of doing it! Sade found all of this very liberating, it justified all sorts of atrocities that him, or his characters could commit. Which indirectly brings us to the idea of what came first? His taste for cruel pleasures? Or the philosophy that justified them? The 120 Days of Sodom While locked away in the Bastille, a writer was born, this writer's first major work was to fill a scroll twelve meters long and 12 cm wide with a microscopic writing that easily surpasses 250 000 words. The writer is Sade, the tale: The 120 Days of Sodom. Written in 20 days, under fear of confiscation, this book is Sade's lost masterpiece. When Sade was transferred to the Charenton asylum, he firmly instructed his wife not to forget his possessions, mainly his manuscript. But ten days later, the Bastille was stormed by Revolutionaries, and all of Sade's belongings went up in flames. Sade shed "tears of blood" 7 when he learnt of its loss <Appendix > . If not Sade's masterpiece, it was at least a cornerstone in his evolution as a writer, an entry into the giant epics like Justine that would make him famous, or rather, infamous. But more than that it is a huge work, that if completed, would have filled volumes with Sade's vile deviancies. As it remains, the work is but a rough draft. A book separated into four sections and preceded by a long introduction that introduces the characters and the setting. Only the Introduction and the first part were completed, the rest it but rough notes, describing in brief detail what the tortures of the day are to be. The book itself is about 4 men, wealthy and powerful, who all share the same consuming desire. The desire for absolute pleasure, found only in sexual tyranny. These four libertines pool their money and prepare for 4 months of absolute debauchery; 120 days of Sodom. Eight of the most beautiful young men and women -many of them sons and daughters of noblemen, something the libertines find exciting and heighten the worth of the child- to use as sex slaves. Then four of the most well endowed men in France are found in order to bugger the libertines when they so choose. As well four of the most experienced whores and four of the vilest, ugliest old women are brought along. The whores to lead their months recitals with erotic tales all based around a theme, in order to arouse the four libertines. The old hags to take care of the young boys and girls. The libertines and their company leave for the Duke's (the Duke being one of the Libertines) castle. From here on the story nears a fairy tale: the castle is atop a giant mountain, surrounded at all sides by sheer cliffs, separated by a ravine, whose bridge is cut after the libertines pass, the castle itself is well fortified and surrounded by a moat, and below lies a village of thieves all in the employment of the Duke. How could anyone, if anyone knew of the place, come and rescue the slaves? Complete isolation! There is no escaping the fate prepared, all the reader can do is sit and watch... in horror.<Annex > It is perhaps interesting to note, while still on the topic of the book's history, that earlier in Sade's life he attempted to arrange an "orgy" of similar setting at his chateau of La Coste. He assembled pretty maids, cooks, and some men. But La Coste is not as well fortified as the Duke's Castle. Sade's servants refused to play the roles he asked of him, some escaped, another went on to give birth to child she attributed to Sade, and yet another told her father who then came to La Coste to shoot Sade. As we said earlier, the manuscript for 120 Days of Sodom was thought lost in the fires. But it wasn't, a soldier later found it in Sade's cell, and it henceforth came into the possession of the Villneuve-Trans family who sold it to German collector in 1904. Where it was published by the German Psychiatrist Dr. Iwan Bloch under a pseudonym. But this first edition was filled with thousands of errors which served only to distort the original manuscript. Later in 1929, a certain Mister Maurice Heine went to Berlin to purchase the manuscript, whereupon he published what is considered the definitive, original edition. Though after the Napoleon era, all of Sade's books were banned, 120 Days of Sodom was not yet published at that time. But more recently, due to the Custom Laws Consolidation Act of 1876 (which prohibited the importation of material deemed "obscene"), England was without any books by Sade, save a few booksellers who dared defy the law. Even the American translations that were severely edited and censored were refused entry. It was not until 1983, that England redefined Sade's works and allowed them entry into England. Similarly, in the United States, Sade was also banned, until a revision to the Tariffs Act in the 1930's allowed books deemed as literature classics to be allowed entry. Though this was mainly for Joyce's Ulysses, Sade's works also benefited from this. Then of course there is Canada's customs system, that has blacklisted many books. Among them, is Sade's 120 Days of Sodom, though not banned, the book will sometimes be denied entry. Salo: 120 Days of Sodom Indeed a productive man: poet, novelist, playwright, cultural critic and filmmaker. Not only this but he was a profoundly religious homosexual and perhaps Italy's leading 20th century intellectual. But above all, he is known for his films. Social criticisms, revisions of popular myths; always controversial, always explicit, always successful and well received. That is until Salo. Now at then end of his career, Pasolini had complete artistic freedom on any work he did. Producers weren't even allowed on the set, and no dialogue needed be shown. For Salo, Passolini wished to convey an extreme sense of realism, and for this he hired unprofessional actors. People off the streets, teachers, writers, small theater actors. And while shooting he had only the sketchiest script, and this he never shows his actors. He told them there lines, and how to move mere seconds before they were to be in a scene. Salo was an easy film to make, Passolini was big name and financing was no problem. As well the film was inexpensive to make: no stars, travel, and one constant interior. The Press got wind of some of the content of Passolini's "next film" and were often around the set during the films thirty seven days of shooting (March 1st to April 14th -1975). The film itself is based on Sade's 120 Days of Sodom, and is very similar, except for the exclusion of one of the four narrators, and the transportation of Salo from a protected castle in France, to an Italian mansion in the republic of Salo. But still the context is similar, whereas 120 Days was near the Revolution, Salo takes place during the last days of the Fascist Regime in Italy, the four libertines taking advantage of their last chance to exploit their power. At the time of the film's released, Passolini was facing a trial, accusations of seducing a young boy were brought against him, and the release of Salo did nothing if not strengthen these claims. When the film was ready for release, the Ministry of Tourism and Spectacle looked it over, and though the producer was ready to make some cuts, they unanimously voted that it be banned from Italian screens, because: "In all its tragedy, it brings to screen images that are so aberrant and repugnant of sexual perversion as certainly to offend community standards"8. Yet Salo was a joint production between Italy and Paris, and though the film was now banned it Italy, it was still shown in Paris. Little if any of critics hailed it, one said: "I hope Salo will be shown to empty theatres"9. Meanwhile the makers of Salo appealed its banning, and won. The film was released onto the Italian public, bringing in a total of 40 million Lire. In contrast the film cost 800 million Lire to make. Some 3 weeks after its initial release, the film was sequestered and the producer brought up on charges of "commerce in obscene publications" as well as "corruption of minors" and "obscene acts in a public place". The reasons for these charges are not that he ran some sort of child pornography ring, but because he is responsible for the release of Salo. The film was viewed by the court, and banned. A few months later, the prosecution dropped the charges. Meanwhile Salo was also playing in other countries, but was often cut short, as in Frankfurt and Stuttgart were protests by the Catholic Parents Association, managed to close down the film. Closer to home and 2 years later, Salo premiered in New York for the 1977 New York Film Festival. The New York Times reported: "At the Saturday night screening, gagging noises from spectators were heard... about two dozen members of the largely male audience walked out. Still at the end of the film, the cheers and applause drowned out the hisses and boos"10 More recently, in America, the film as surfaced again in courts. This time used in charges against to men who own a homosexual oriented store called "The Pink Pyramid". Furthermore it is still unsure whether the actors used by Passolini were under age, if so these men could face child pornography charges as well. What is needed to bring all of this together is proof that Salo is obscene, that it lacks "Serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value". This may be difficult to prove since the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) will be present to challenge any argument that attempts to prove the Salo is not art. Artistic Value Both Sade and Passolini have objectionable characters. Sade, as shown, was a man of ferocious passions which ruled him throughout his life. As indeed is shown by his stays in prison, were he couldn't deliver himself to debauches, so he ate and ate, and gained considerable weight. And Passolini was known to solicit male prostitutes, in fact it was a young 17 year old prostitute who bludgeoned him to Death shortly after the completion of Salo. With this in mind it might prove difficult to separate these men's sexual appetites from the films they made. It might in fact prove impossible. 1. Book We are now well aware of Sade's situation when he wrote 120 Days: alone, locked away in a prison. A man of considerable passions, it is quite conceivable that he would submit his desires to paper as a means of titillation. In fact where there not proof to the contrary, 120 Days could easily be brushed aside. But though this titillation aspect might come into play, it is not the sole reason for Sade's writing of The 120 Days of Sodom. Though there is little of the long, almost exhaustive philosophical diatribes that can be found in his later books; and although 120 Days is still unfinished; and even though it is a repetitious, almost tedious catalogue of excess; there is still some literary value. One could begin by mentioning the excellently crafted setting: a lone castle, atop an impenetrable cliff guarded by a city of thieves. It all has the feel and tone to a fairy tale. Then there is Sade's intent; imprisoned for his tastes he wished to rebel and destroy. And this he did: the 120 days of Sodom is an attack on all of humanity. We are debased, objectified and ultimately used as tools by the tyrannical four; the libertines who so mirror Sade. As says Geoffrey Gover: His aim is no less than to strip every covering, both mental and physical, of man and expose him to our disgusted gaze as the mean and loathsome creature he is. 11 Indeed through excess, Sade wishes to turn man into the animal he is, and show us all, once and for all, what we really look like. For indeed it is disquieting when near the end of the four months, certain slaves begin to participate more than their duty requires, others seem to almost enjoy themselves. On the psychological level, this book precedes not only the work of Freud in the area of sex in relation to power. But also is a century ahead of Kraft-Ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis. Sade indeed is the first to catalogue man's sexual deviencies. He even admitted to having a "scientific" reason for writing the book. Then one could look at it in the context of the evolution of the Sadean novel. It is after all a turning point; his first major work, that sets the philosophical and sexual basis for works to come. It as been said that when Sade lost this, he wept tears of blood for his masterpiece. His best work it might not be, but it is his first, and for the Sadean scholar, it is indispensable in understanding Sade. 2.Film Some critics have accused Passolini of using Salo to exploit not only the youth of Italy, whom he admittedly looked upon with disgust (Annex ), but to place his own sexual fantasies on film. An act of tyranny that Sade would be proud of. Others have accused him of hiding behind an attack on Fascism as a means of showing acts of sadomasochism, something that has been done many times in exploitational cinema. Yet all of these comments don't give Pasolini the credit he deserves. He was after one of Italy's leading intellectuals. Salo can be seen on many levels. Superficially it's a film of pornographic excess. A little deeper and it is an attack on the absolute power wielded by the Fascist regime. Some ways deeper, it can be seen as the Fascist's objectification of it's people, their transformation into tools. If the fascist use them as dispensable toys to wage war with, why not use them for sexual purposes as well? Looking yet deeper, we perhaps see another of Passolini's attempts, this one told outright to a reporter: "Sex today is the satisfaction of a social obligation, not a pleasure taken against social duty. Sex in Salo is a representation or a metaphor of this situation: sex as obligation and ugliness."12 And still further down, perhaps at the bottom, perhaps Passolini's true intent, lies an attack on consumerism. Passolini heartily felt that the youth of his time would eat any old thing the government or the media would feed them. And to these last two, the youth were but objects waiting to be used. Like Sade, Passolini's film attempts to show humans objectified. And even beyond that lies Pasolini's sheer talent as director. The way he presents some of his deeper meanings is awe inspiring. For instance, we are shown the ending scenes where the young slaves are executed in the courtyard, through binoculars held by a Libertine. We are looking down, through a pair of binoculars, on torture and murder. Yet it is easy to disassociate yourself with these acts, for one is so distant, one is behind the binoculars. Or even the silent victims themselves, rarely putting up a fight. On this Passolini reflects: "If I made them likable victims, who cried and tore at the heart, then everyone would leave the movie house after five minutes"13. Art? Even though Sade had a great influence on many 20th century thinkers, does that mean his work is not pornography? How much style and worthy content does it take for a book to be saved from the label of pornography? A page? Ten? Artaud admitted that his Theater of Cruelty came from Sade, most likely from Sade's 120 Days of Sodom. And if any movement in modern theater is most important it is Artaud's Theater of Cruelty. Or what of the homage by Camus, Beaudelaire, Battailles? What of the surrealists who saw Sade as their founding father? Or the famous 1930's surrealist film "L'age D'or" that borrowed scenes from 120 Days of Sodom? Indeed Sade as had a heavy influence, in art, in psychology and in criminology. Rarely does a trial go by where Sade is not somehow involved. Yet is all this enough? Does 120 Days of Sodom have enough value, be it philosophical, psychological or literary? The answer is -of course- yes. The 120 Days of Sodom is indeed one of the most explicit and excessive books ever to be published. But so is Kraft-ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis, for that matter so is any medical textbook. And 120 days is similar to a medical textbook, at least for psychologist. Indeed it is true the book had little worth now, but early in the century, when it was first discovered, the ideas in it were still new. On other levels the book's value is perhaps less apparent. It is after all a first draft, so literary style, though at times masterful lines do pop up, is rather scarce. The philosophical content is also sparse and nowhere near as complete as his other books. The satirical element, though obvious, is not well enough explored for it to save the book. So why do people attempt to justify it? Why do I justify it? Could it be that there is some sadistic element involved? Vicarious pleasure found in others pain? Or maybe it is the books power to repulse. An almost universal quality about the book, there is little room for the titillation ascribed to pornography here. This book was made to shock not "turn on"... Similarly the film Salo also has many of the same petty justifications running for it. But again there is that universal repulsive quality to the matter. Something recognized by many censors, some ban the film for this reason, others pass it through without cutting. Like the censors in Sweden who say that Salo is: "so repugnant, that every normal human must turn away from it.... What we judge isn't the film, but the effect on the audience.... There will be no teenagers who will watch Salo and say "wow that was great, I gotta see that again"."14 The generally agreed upon definition of art seems to be, art as something that conveys a meaning, and ideal. If we accept this definition, then both book and film are indeed art. For though they have faults, they do convey a meaning. The book wishes us to realize that the naked human, untamed, uncultured, is nothing if not repugnant; we are all as disgusting as Sade. Whereas the film focuses more on how we objectify people in not only a Fascist, but a democratic, capitalist society. But for all our theorizing, we forget that Sade has beaten us. What are we talking about art for? There is no universal definition of anything. Good, evil, it's all a part of nature. There is no art, only the perpetual movement of molecules. God bless the "Divine Marquis", the "freest spirit"!... -- Urg Burglle Splatch? Just another solution to ALL of life's problems from Dylan David Wagner at: cx955@Freenet.Carleton.CA
|
<< Previous Article |
>> Next Article |
/\ Current Results |
|
|
|
|
Directories |
Classifieds |
Yellow Pages |
Register Your Domain Name
New Users ·
About Deja News ·
Ad Info ·
Our Advertisers ·
How are we doing?
Copyright © 1995-98 Deja News, Inc. All rights reserved. Conditions of use. |