S&M before de Sade...the rebel academic speaks
- Thread starter RisiaSkye
- Start date
Marquis
Jack Dawkins
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2002
- Posts
- 10,462
Never said:
This is so hilarious to me its ridiculous. I actually have the student government position at my university of managing the student clubs and approving new ones (student activities commisioner), and I could just imagine the reaction of the administration if someone tried to start a BDSM club. That would be WILD!
Anyway, getting back to the topic. The Marquis de Sade is someone I like a lot (you might have gathered this from my name, avatar and sig line), but he in no way STARTED sadism, or even sadism as represented in literary terms. Someone mentioned Chaucer, and The Wife of Bath certainly was a story about a sadist.
No one in recent history did it quite as well or as explicit as the Marquis de Sade though. Valmont may have been a sadistic character, but Dangerous Liasons was not ABOUT sadism. Justine was almost a manual of sadism.
In the same way, there are many stories about characters who enjoy suffering, but Venus in Furs by Leopold von Sacher-Masoch was almost explicitly about the joys of suffering
Marquis
Jack Dawkins
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2002
- Posts
- 10,462
RisiaSkye said:
Well, thats arguable. Unlike Jefferson, the Marquis de Sade was never a great statesmen and pretty much never tried to do a bit of service in his life. He was actually a pretty deplorable character and I am quite sure most of us would hate him if we knew him.
RisiaSkye said:
That was incredibly insightful and I couldn't agree more.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
To Risia Skye
The book I had in mind was the first, but in searching for it, a couple other titles came up. Perhaps they are of interest. As I said, the first contains a translation of one of the more popular pieces of porn literature.
PQ 265 .D37 1996
Darnton, Robert.
The forbidden best-sellers of pre-revolutionary France / Robert Darnton.
Includes bibliographical references (p. 391-428) and index.
New York : W.W. Norton, 1996.
Goulemot, Jean Marie.Ces livres qu'on ne lit que d'une main. English.Forbidden texts : erotic literature and its readers in eighteenth-century France / Jean Marie Goulemot ; translated by James Simpson.Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994.
Rosario, Vernon A.The erotic imagination : French histories of perversity / Vernon A. Rosario.New York : Oxford University Press, 1997.
Bachman, Albert, 1893-Censorship in France from 1715 to 1750: Voltaire's opposition.New York B. Franklin [1971]
The book I had in mind was the first, but in searching for it, a couple other titles came up. Perhaps they are of interest. As I said, the first contains a translation of one of the more popular pieces of porn literature.
PQ 265 .D37 1996
Darnton, Robert.
The forbidden best-sellers of pre-revolutionary France / Robert Darnton.
Includes bibliographical references (p. 391-428) and index.
New York : W.W. Norton, 1996.
Goulemot, Jean Marie.Ces livres qu'on ne lit que d'une main. English.Forbidden texts : erotic literature and its readers in eighteenth-century France / Jean Marie Goulemot ; translated by James Simpson.Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994.
Rosario, Vernon A.The erotic imagination : French histories of perversity / Vernon A. Rosario.New York : Oxford University Press, 1997.
Bachman, Albert, 1893-Censorship in France from 1715 to 1750: Voltaire's opposition.New York B. Franklin [1971]
Mr Wolf
'Til Valhalla
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2002
- Posts
- 1,142
RisiaSkye said:
"Third, the cultural acceptance of lesbian sex doesn't seem to have much to do with the history of lesbianism--it's not as though it's inherently less passionate, potentially violent, or culturally destabilizing to hetero-normativity. Certainly the writings of Sappho, the mythology of the Diana & Athena cults & Amazonian lore are just as outside-the-mainstream as deSade & Masoch's. They are also often violent. They also contest, strongly, the male domination of public power. None of those things make people real comfy, by and large."
Risia, yet again I find myself nodding my head as I read your post. Is it perhaps because, as you say "the male domination of public power"and with it public image, demands that women are soft, gentle and loving with strong maternal and homely instincts perfect for the raising of children and supporting of their men?
Curiously though in the reign of Queen Victoria although homosexuality was illegal Lesbianism was not, now although the Prime Minister was male as were all though people of influence was this in defference to the Queen? Was it the idea of it being a softer less physical and socially corrupting sex?
"Fourth, the contemporary cultural embrace of lesbianism isn't really about lesbians, is it? Isn't it more about the performance of lesbian sexuality for the consumption of a hetero-male audience? Isn't that acceptance pretty much predicated on the fantasy that all that's missing is the spectator--who imagines him/herself right in there, eagerly accepted by the women? Isn't that "acceptance" largely a spectacular one--a voyeuristic gaze that empowers the watcher more than the participant?"
It is interesting to note that very few articles on the subject of Lesbianism mention the harder/darker side of the topic. I have been recently watching a series on Channel 4(UK) about the Lesbian scene in Sydney, Australia. It is remarkable how different the truth is from the preconceived ideas and opinions that people have in the mainstream about Lesbians.
Now from my own personal experiences I was aware that most Lesbian couples act as a male or female role, something that always makes me laugh when Lesbian feminists start bang their drum, but there was so much more to the lifestyle that I could not have guessed at.
"And, finally: BDSM (especially the S & M components) really challenge our understanding of victimhood, empowerment, and consent. I think those are the elements that make people most uncomfortable. While many people are still busily trying to figure out what "creates" homosexuality, others simply accept it without explanation as part of life's fabric. I think that the violence of BDSM sets it up as a "problem" for an even wider audience--as something to be solved, fixed, and eradicated, even more so than homosexuality. Goofy, but there it is: lesbianism looks like love to more people than S & M does. Many people seem to have a hard time reconciling violence with love--including many people who say "it doesn't matter who you love, only *that* you love."
I think that this is all wrapped up in our current victim culture. By that I mean that we seem obsessed with finding excuses for everything that people do rather than excepting that that is what they are and then finding a solution to the problem. For example:
I came from a one parent family, lived in releative poverty with little time with my mother as she had to work to feed and house us both. When she married my step father I was 10, he was an alcholoic and would get verbaly and physically abusive when drinking. He died when I was 14, no loss to me but I then had a step brother who was 3. My mother raised him differently to me and he had alot more time spent with her but we are close as a family and he has followed me into the Army, yet he has not got the same violence or sexual views within him that I have. I'm sure that if I was a violent criminal this would be blamed as the reason behind it all.
However although I have served in the Army and as a Bouncer amongst other things I am not a criminal nor do I have a criminal conviction. I have got into violent confrontaions and revelled in them and I have dabbled in the grey area of collections/enforcement, my violence is under control at all times as it is with most people. This is due to mental and moral strength from within and also from external influences.
So from who/where do I get my Dominant nature? Why am I so different from my mum/brother in sexual outlook? Why am I the black sheep of the family, the lovable rogue so to speak? It is just me, it is what I am and I except it and enjoy it.
Well that is enough of that, and shall go sit in the corner and watch as that is probably more than I have ever posted in one go.
Last edited:
DRxBlue
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2002
- Posts
- 891
Damn, Mr. Wolf!
That was incredible! i'm glad i got here in time to catch that post "hot off the press".
You express yourself very well, and obviously have a lot worth listening to. Although it's off topic, the part i found most fascinating was the part about the lesbian scene in Sydney.
i saw a Canadian picture called "Forbidden Love" which covered a lot of the lesbian scene as it developed in the US and Canada, and as you say there's little resemblence to what one would extrapolate from the main stream media.
My interest in this has been renewed lately by my association with a formerly hard-core lez, who has gifted me with a deep and loving friendship.
Thanks for your insights!
Blue
That was incredible! i'm glad i got here in time to catch that post "hot off the press".
You express yourself very well, and obviously have a lot worth listening to. Although it's off topic, the part i found most fascinating was the part about the lesbian scene in Sydney.
i saw a Canadian picture called "Forbidden Love" which covered a lot of the lesbian scene as it developed in the US and Canada, and as you say there's little resemblence to what one would extrapolate from the main stream media.
My interest in this has been renewed lately by my association with a formerly hard-core lez, who has gifted me with a deep and loving friendship.
Thanks for your insights!
Blue
Never
Come What May
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2000
- Posts
- 23,234
RisiaSkye:
“Well, that's just it: the mythical forefathers were *accused* of being murderers and rapists. And, as anyone who watches contemporary court cases can tell you, once accused of such crimes, the reputation sticks no matter what the final verdict.”
Seriously?
In 1768, Sade held a prostitute called Rose Keller captive. He whipped her with knotted cord, slashed her with a knife, and poured molten wax on to her wounds. He was charged and imprisoned for it.
Your quote begins:
“So tell me, my faint-hearted swain, do you really think that all those women you've had were raped?”
Yes, it goes on to say that some of them might have enjoyed it but neither the Viscomte de Valmont or the Marquise de Merteuil seem to have a problem with rape.
Now, Choderlos de Laclos was never imprisoned for rape or assault, but no one calls himself or herself a Laclist. Why? I don’t know, maybe it’s more fun to associate yourself with a violent criminal who writes about beheading young women and inviting your friends over to sodomize your 13-year-old daughter.
Right now, sexy-girl has a thread on the GB complaining about ‘her group’ being portrayed as murderers and rapists, you on the other hand are promoting such a work. If you want to believe that change in the way mainstream America views lesbians verses they way they did fifty years ago is due to heterosexual men suddenly, magically, discovering this great jerk off material then have at it, it’s all yours. Maybe you’ll get lucky and suddenly, magically, heterosexual men will think BDSM is great jerk off material and all that shame will lift like mist when the sunrises.
Alternatively, you could decide that the onus to change public perception is yours.
“Well, that's just it: the mythical forefathers were *accused* of being murderers and rapists. And, as anyone who watches contemporary court cases can tell you, once accused of such crimes, the reputation sticks no matter what the final verdict.”
Seriously?
In 1768, Sade held a prostitute called Rose Keller captive. He whipped her with knotted cord, slashed her with a knife, and poured molten wax on to her wounds. He was charged and imprisoned for it.
Your quote begins:
“So tell me, my faint-hearted swain, do you really think that all those women you've had were raped?”
Yes, it goes on to say that some of them might have enjoyed it but neither the Viscomte de Valmont or the Marquise de Merteuil seem to have a problem with rape.
Now, Choderlos de Laclos was never imprisoned for rape or assault, but no one calls himself or herself a Laclist. Why? I don’t know, maybe it’s more fun to associate yourself with a violent criminal who writes about beheading young women and inviting your friends over to sodomize your 13-year-old daughter.
Right now, sexy-girl has a thread on the GB complaining about ‘her group’ being portrayed as murderers and rapists, you on the other hand are promoting such a work. If you want to believe that change in the way mainstream America views lesbians verses they way they did fifty years ago is due to heterosexual men suddenly, magically, discovering this great jerk off material then have at it, it’s all yours. Maybe you’ll get lucky and suddenly, magically, heterosexual men will think BDSM is great jerk off material and all that shame will lift like mist when the sunrises.
Alternatively, you could decide that the onus to change public perception is yours.
RisiaSkye
Artistic
- Joined
- May 1, 2000
- Posts
- 4,387
Pure: Great biblio. Thanks. I've actually read The Erotic Imagination, and can recommend it highly. Also, the book I mentioned a while back about deSade is just called Sade, and it's by Marcel Henaff. The original is in French, but I believe it's available in translation.
Wolf: I'm not *espousing* these ideas, just exposing them. I hear you about the victim-culture and the feeling of determinism in contemporary culture, though.
Marquis: Great post, as usual. Though I completely disagree that Les Liaisons Dangereuses isn't a book about masochism and sadism. That's exactly what it is, a book about S & M seduction.
Interestingly, the second woman he was alleged to have raped and assaulted (his "M," to whom he left what remained of his estate) was his long-time companion. Guess she was the forgiving sort.
Not necessarily true. First, she's mocking him for believing he's "seduced" women; she suggests they only feign reluctance in order to encourage his Domliness and to escape blame for the sexual act. Second, they don't have a problem with rape per se--so long as it's of the lower classes. Infringement upon *their* rights, however, is a different question.
Of course, I'm also not sure how this is relevant, other than because it raises the question of consent. Verbal & legal consent are both fairly new obsessions in BDSM circles, too. (Though arguably long overdue.) That's part of why BDSMers are typically cast as rapists & psychos.
Ah, so true. The cachet of the fanatic, the extremist, and the lunatic fringe.
How am I "promoting" any work? Is discussion automatically endorsement?
I never said that the change in cultural perceptions about lesbians is due to hetero-men "suddenly" getting off on it, kiddo, so don't get your knickers in a twist. However, the relatively common presence of actively sexual lesbian characters in film & contemporary television vs. the scarcity of similarly active bisexual and gay-male characters (not to mention non-psychotic BDSMers) has much to do with hetero-male viewing preferences. They own the media machine, for better or (often) worse. That's all I'm saying. And familiarity breeds not only contempt, but also comfort, for the wider audience.
Also, I don't give a damn if the popular audience accepts BDSMers, so long as they don't come after us with pointed sticks brandishing law books. My contention isn't that all BDSMers throughout history are great people, just that their treatment in society has less to do with their mental stability or actual criminality than with the social barriers to free sexual expression in repressive cultures.
Wolf: I'm not *espousing* these ideas, just exposing them. I hear you about the victim-culture and the feeling of determinism in contemporary culture, though.
Marquis: Great post, as usual. Though I completely disagree that Les Liaisons Dangereuses isn't a book about masochism and sadism. That's exactly what it is, a book about S & M seduction.
Charged? Yes. Held? Yes, for years. Convicted? Not so much.Never said:
Interestingly, the second woman he was alleged to have raped and assaulted (his "M," to whom he left what remained of his estate) was his long-time companion. Guess she was the forgiving sort.
Not necessarily true. First, she's mocking him for believing he's "seduced" women; she suggests they only feign reluctance in order to encourage his Domliness and to escape blame for the sexual act. Second, they don't have a problem with rape per se--so long as it's of the lower classes. Infringement upon *their* rights, however, is a different question.
Of course, I'm also not sure how this is relevant, other than because it raises the question of consent. Verbal & legal consent are both fairly new obsessions in BDSM circles, too. (Though arguably long overdue.) That's part of why BDSMers are typically cast as rapists & psychos.
Ah, so true. The cachet of the fanatic, the extremist, and the lunatic fringe.
I don't think there's *any* obligation to change public perception. I'm interested in its existence and forms more than controlling it. Beyond that, it's none of my concern. Those who "get it" get it, those who don't aren't invited to the party anyway. You know?
How am I "promoting" any work? Is discussion automatically endorsement?
I never said that the change in cultural perceptions about lesbians is due to hetero-men "suddenly" getting off on it, kiddo, so don't get your knickers in a twist. However, the relatively common presence of actively sexual lesbian characters in film & contemporary television vs. the scarcity of similarly active bisexual and gay-male characters (not to mention non-psychotic BDSMers) has much to do with hetero-male viewing preferences. They own the media machine, for better or (often) worse. That's all I'm saying. And familiarity breeds not only contempt, but also comfort, for the wider audience.
Also, I don't give a damn if the popular audience accepts BDSMers, so long as they don't come after us with pointed sticks brandishing law books. My contention isn't that all BDSMers throughout history are great people, just that their treatment in society has less to do with their mental stability or actual criminality than with the social barriers to free sexual expression in repressive cultures.
Never
Come What May
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2000
- Posts
- 23,234
RisiaSkye:
"I don't think there's *any* obligation to change public perception. I'm interested in its existence and forms more than controlling it. Beyond that, it's none of my concern. Those who "get it" get it, those who don't aren't invited to the party anyway. You know?"
No. Nevertheless, if that's true that my comments are supererogatory. I humbly withdraw them.
"I don't think there's *any* obligation to change public perception. I'm interested in its existence and forms more than controlling it. Beyond that, it's none of my concern. Those who "get it" get it, those who don't aren't invited to the party anyway. You know?"
No. Nevertheless, if that's true that my comments are supererogatory. I humbly withdraw them.
UCE
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2002
- Posts
- 498
"Sexual submission, Domination, and violence go way back in our westernized literature."
You might find it interesting to look at the Romans and their practices in this regard. I used to know a female scholar in England who knew a great deal about this subject (kinky Romans), apparently there's a lot of material out on it. From talking to her, I know SM practices have been documented at least as far back as then.
You might find it interesting to look at the Romans and their practices in this regard. I used to know a female scholar in England who knew a great deal about this subject (kinky Romans), apparently there's a lot of material out on it. From talking to her, I know SM practices have been documented at least as far back as then.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
S/M before Sade, after Rome (in the Western world)
from Tony De Blase (most items, below)
Leather History Timeline
{{11/04:
http://www.leatherarchives.org/exhibits/deblase/timeline.htm }}
"History of Femdom" (items with **)
http://www.angelfire.com/zine/fedo/
===================================
ca. 1480: Pico of Mirandola in "Against the Astrologists", describes a male acquaintance who is sexually excited by being whipped before sex. This is the first known case history of a masochist. [wd]
1564, Feb 26: Birth of English playwright Christopher Marlowe. "All they that love not tobacco and boys are fools." [Greif 82]
**ca. 1580
English poet Christopher Marlowe writes this epigramm: "When Francus comes to solace with his whore, / He sends for rods and strips himself stark naked; / For his lust sleeps, and will not rise before / By whipping of the wench it be awaked. / I envy him not, but wish I had the power, / To make his wench but one half hour."
(D? Eugen (Iwan Bloch) "Englische Sittengeschichte", 2. new edition, Berlin, Louis Marcus Verlagsbuchhandlung 1912, Band I, S. 441f.)
1585: In one of the earliest recorded cases of masochism, Sister Mary Magdalene de Pazzi begs other nuns to tie her up and hurl hot wax at her. She also made a novice at the convent thrash her. [AA]
1639: The German doctor Johann Heinrich Meibom describes the sexual excitement of some men when whipped in De usu flagrorum. He reasons that this is because the sperm fluid in the kidneys is heated by whipping and then descends to the testicles. Variations on this theory will dominate the thinking on SM until the 19th century. [wd]
**1676
In the theatreplay "The Virtuoso", written by british dramatist Thomas Shadwell, old man Snarl wants to be whipped, which is done by a young prostitute. He likes it because it reminds him of his schooldays-punishments.
(D? Eugen (Iwan Bloch) "Das Geschlechtsleben in England")
**1682
Premiere of theatreplay "Venice Preserv'd" of british dramatist Thomas Otway. Drama contains a scene, where prostitute Aquilina fullfills the wish of Senator Antonio and spits on him, treats him like a dog, kicks and whips him.
(Noyes, John K. "the mastery of submission", Cornell University Press 1997, S. 85f.) (Website www.britannica.com)
1698, Kristian Franz Paullini confirms Meibom's theory in Flagellum salutis, but claims that blood is warmed by whipping, which then excites the sperms in the testicles. [wd]
**1704
Edward Ward, author of "London Spy", describes a scene in a whorehouse. A sixty year old man asks for whipping equipment, because he wants to be whipped. This was the first time Ward heard of the flogging cullies, male lovers of passive flagellation.
(D? Eugen (Iwan Bloch) "Das Geschlechtsleben"
1712, June 28: Birth of Jean Jacques Rousseau (death July 2, 1778). By his own reports, except for one relationship, the artist was a lifelong unfulfilled masochist, dating from a school spanking when he was 11. In one affair, he had a Mistress who dominated him thoroughly, but even she refused to re-enact his much desired spanking. [JWB]
1749, Jan. 29: Birth of King Christian VII of Denmark, whose physician assigned him a sadistic male lover who beat him regularly. [Greif 82]
[Post Script]
1882, Feb. 2: Birth of James Joyce, avant -garde novelist who made his lover, Nora Barnacle, into a dominant of whom he begged beatings and floggings "in earnest." We don't know if she said yes or no. [JWB]
from Tony De Blase (most items, below)
Leather History Timeline
{{11/04:
http://www.leatherarchives.org/exhibits/deblase/timeline.htm }}
"History of Femdom" (items with **)
http://www.angelfire.com/zine/fedo/
===================================
ca. 1480: Pico of Mirandola in "Against the Astrologists", describes a male acquaintance who is sexually excited by being whipped before sex. This is the first known case history of a masochist. [wd]
1564, Feb 26: Birth of English playwright Christopher Marlowe. "All they that love not tobacco and boys are fools." [Greif 82]
**ca. 1580
English poet Christopher Marlowe writes this epigramm: "When Francus comes to solace with his whore, / He sends for rods and strips himself stark naked; / For his lust sleeps, and will not rise before / By whipping of the wench it be awaked. / I envy him not, but wish I had the power, / To make his wench but one half hour."
(D? Eugen (Iwan Bloch) "Englische Sittengeschichte", 2. new edition, Berlin, Louis Marcus Verlagsbuchhandlung 1912, Band I, S. 441f.)
1585: In one of the earliest recorded cases of masochism, Sister Mary Magdalene de Pazzi begs other nuns to tie her up and hurl hot wax at her. She also made a novice at the convent thrash her. [AA]
1639: The German doctor Johann Heinrich Meibom describes the sexual excitement of some men when whipped in De usu flagrorum. He reasons that this is because the sperm fluid in the kidneys is heated by whipping and then descends to the testicles. Variations on this theory will dominate the thinking on SM until the 19th century. [wd]
**1676
In the theatreplay "The Virtuoso", written by british dramatist Thomas Shadwell, old man Snarl wants to be whipped, which is done by a young prostitute. He likes it because it reminds him of his schooldays-punishments.
(D? Eugen (Iwan Bloch) "Das Geschlechtsleben in England")
**1682
Premiere of theatreplay "Venice Preserv'd" of british dramatist Thomas Otway. Drama contains a scene, where prostitute Aquilina fullfills the wish of Senator Antonio and spits on him, treats him like a dog, kicks and whips him.
(Noyes, John K. "the mastery of submission", Cornell University Press 1997, S. 85f.) (Website www.britannica.com)
1698, Kristian Franz Paullini confirms Meibom's theory in Flagellum salutis, but claims that blood is warmed by whipping, which then excites the sperms in the testicles. [wd]
**1704
Edward Ward, author of "London Spy", describes a scene in a whorehouse. A sixty year old man asks for whipping equipment, because he wants to be whipped. This was the first time Ward heard of the flogging cullies, male lovers of passive flagellation.
(D? Eugen (Iwan Bloch) "Das Geschlechtsleben"
1712, June 28: Birth of Jean Jacques Rousseau (death July 2, 1778). By his own reports, except for one relationship, the artist was a lifelong unfulfilled masochist, dating from a school spanking when he was 11. In one affair, he had a Mistress who dominated him thoroughly, but even she refused to re-enact his much desired spanking. [JWB]
1749, Jan. 29: Birth of King Christian VII of Denmark, whose physician assigned him a sadistic male lover who beat him regularly. [Greif 82]
[Post Script]
1882, Feb. 2: Birth of James Joyce, avant -garde novelist who made his lover, Nora Barnacle, into a dominant of whom he begged beatings and floggings "in earnest." We don't know if she said yes or no. [JWB]
Last edited:
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
EARLY!
Leaving aside the degenerate Romans, lanscivious E. Indians, the following is often cited as the first clear Western reference to SM practice.
1496 the Italian Humanist and philosopher pico della Mirandola writes in "Disputationum adversus astrologos" ("Against the Astrologers"):
"I know a man of amorous temperament, who nevertheless cannot make love to any woman without being whipped beforehand.
[...]
Only if the pain has completely exhausted him, will the lust ease within him."
[This part of a machine translation (online) from the German, adjusted and smoothed by me, looking up some of the words not translated. ]
http://www.datenschlag.org/dachs/dachs_vor1800.html
Leaving aside the degenerate Romans, lanscivious E. Indians, the following is often cited as the first clear Western reference to SM practice.
1496 the Italian Humanist and philosopher pico della Mirandola writes in "Disputationum adversus astrologos" ("Against the Astrologers"):
"I know a man of amorous temperament, who nevertheless cannot make love to any woman without being whipped beforehand.
[...]
Only if the pain has completely exhausted him, will the lust ease within him."
[This part of a machine translation (online) from the German, adjusted and smoothed by me, looking up some of the words not translated. ]
http://www.datenschlag.org/dachs/dachs_vor1800.html
Last edited:
hurtme
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2003
- Posts
- 443
Someone mentioned Romans, and i thought i would contribute, I did a paper once, and lightly touched on the subject, so I went back some time later and did some research on my own...there was some pretty fucked up shit involving sadism going on even then....Tiberius Caesar (the guy that was in power when jesus was crucified) built elaborate pleasure places, complete with dungeons, and torture chambers on an island named...um, Capri, and frequently enjoyed breaking the bones of his...playthings...and hen there was Caligula, who was heard to comment "And this beautiful throat will be cut whenever i please" when he kissed the neck of one of his mistresses...and from what I gather, he regularly did...
s'lara
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2002
- Posts
- 2,248
What will remain a mystery to me is why RS stopped posting on this board with as much substance as she showed in this thread.
Excellent subject matter given the fact that S/M practices permeate much of history (thanks Pure for the interesting bibliography) and have to some extent been demonized or romanticized to make S/M practices more palatable or unpalatable for the masses.
i have 'Juliette' at home and it is not a book that those in my vanilla circles instantly recognize as a book of de Sade's or as erotic literature. As Nancy Friday was so popular for an age, it is likely that her collection of men and women's fantasies will be spied out more quickly on my shelf than anything of de Sade's.
It's interesting how nowadays, his work, to an extent, has survived as a taboo piece of literature. iirc, there was also movie done about de Sade's life and imprisonment within the last few years. Regrettably, i have not seen it.
imho, S/M has come to a point of fashionability in our modern day culture. Granted, in the time of De Sade, such "deviant" practices were punishable by law or garnered the accused a stigma that lasted a lifetime. However, i notice a certain infusement of BDSM related ... well everything (attire, toys, references to D/s, etc.) in many of the arts related fields. Television, movies, music, literature, etc. all seem to have softened (not quite an opening of the gate and a hearty "hey come on in") their borders in relation to BDSM. Yes, often times the references are tinged with a mocking undertone or moreso with a warning, but still ... the references are there. Is this indicative of a future where S/M is no longer considered risque but instead de rigeur for the sexually conscious?
i haven't been BDSM "aware" for as long as some, but it would be interesting to see some other perceptions of how far S/M has come since the time of de Sade and where it might lead in terms of acceptance from greater society.
Thoughts anyone?
lara
Excellent subject matter given the fact that S/M practices permeate much of history (thanks Pure for the interesting bibliography) and have to some extent been demonized or romanticized to make S/M practices more palatable or unpalatable for the masses.
i have 'Juliette' at home and it is not a book that those in my vanilla circles instantly recognize as a book of de Sade's or as erotic literature. As Nancy Friday was so popular for an age, it is likely that her collection of men and women's fantasies will be spied out more quickly on my shelf than anything of de Sade's.
It's interesting how nowadays, his work, to an extent, has survived as a taboo piece of literature. iirc, there was also movie done about de Sade's life and imprisonment within the last few years. Regrettably, i have not seen it.
imho, S/M has come to a point of fashionability in our modern day culture. Granted, in the time of De Sade, such "deviant" practices were punishable by law or garnered the accused a stigma that lasted a lifetime. However, i notice a certain infusement of BDSM related ... well everything (attire, toys, references to D/s, etc.) in many of the arts related fields. Television, movies, music, literature, etc. all seem to have softened (not quite an opening of the gate and a hearty "hey come on in") their borders in relation to BDSM. Yes, often times the references are tinged with a mocking undertone or moreso with a warning, but still ... the references are there. Is this indicative of a future where S/M is no longer considered risque but instead de rigeur for the sexually conscious?
i haven't been BDSM "aware" for as long as some, but it would be interesting to see some other perceptions of how far S/M has come since the time of de Sade and where it might lead in terms of acceptance from greater society.
Thoughts anyone?
lara
denis hale
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- May 4, 2003
- Posts
- 416
School Me!
R S:
Your acumen is so keen it could draw blood. Truly impressive, encyclopedic store of knowledge!
I've been coming to these threads to learn (and lurk, a little!), and there is enough material in your posts to keep me busy for quite awhile.
Oh, and I have no doubt you will write a kick-ass paper!
humbly,
DH
R S:
Your acumen is so keen it could draw blood. Truly impressive, encyclopedic store of knowledge!
I've been coming to these threads to learn (and lurk, a little!), and there is enough material in your posts to keep me busy for quite awhile.
Oh, and I have no doubt you will write a kick-ass paper!
humbly,
DH
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
Marquis, Hi, nice to see ya,
you said,
Well, thats arguable. Unlike Jefferson, the Marquis de Sade was never a great statesmen and pretty much never tried to do a bit of service in his life. He was actually a pretty deplorable character and I am quite sure most of us would hate him if we knew him.
He in fact held a public office, something like justice of the peace, iirc, after the revolution, in the brief period where some aristocrats were trusted. It's said he spared the lives of some aristocrats, including his worst enemy, his mother in law. He did not believe in the death penalty. In short the revolutionaries like Robespierre found him too 'soft'!!
Many who met him found him rather polite and cultivated, and his last mistress was quite so. I think we'd find him a rather self-indulgent aristocrat--- you should see the lists of delicacies he liked to eat in prison.
It's by no means clear that his private life was that out of the ordinary. Conduct toward women of the so called 'lower classes' were simply in a different category of relationship. Forcing oneself on prostitutes was probably not unheard of among the elite, and the 'servant girls' were there for the taking (see the ref to Strom Thurmond, below).
Even the beating(whipping) of a prostitute (who's paid to undergo it) is not exactly unheard of, and it should be remembered that he had them whip him, as well.
Likewise, fucking the available women besides ones wife is not exactly unheard of--- have you forgotten John F Kennedy? Wilt Chamberlain? Warren Beatty? (on a slightly different angle, Strom Thurmond, at 21, had the family's housemaid.)
I think comparisons with Jefferson or Franklin are not wholly out of line, and certainly comparisons with the aristocratic elites of France and England do not make him look 'deplorable.' They were quite nice to many of their equals; the men fucked anything that moved, and were sometime generous--but often beastly-- to those, esp. women of the 'lower orders.'
Added: the comparison with Jefferson, as already mentioned, is a good one in respect of sex. Jefferson fucked his slave. As RS said, it's not exactly consensual as we'd think; OTOH it's not rape by the standards of those days and not something a 'gentleman' lost sleep over. An item of property cannot be 'raped'. I do not believe there was any law against taking whatever slave woman one pleased (of one's own). This might be the least of her worries, since the master could separate her from her husband or children by selling her and them to different people, or sell the kids and keep her, etc.
Sade had a similar attitude toward prostitutes: by definition, as long as you pay, there cannot be any crime done to them, such as rape: their job is sexual service as the patron wishes and pays for. Sade explicitly scorns the idea that a whore has 'rights' that can be legally enforced, regarding sex acts done to her. (This attitude is not exactly rare today, btw.)
you said,
Well, thats arguable. Unlike Jefferson, the Marquis de Sade was never a great statesmen and pretty much never tried to do a bit of service in his life. He was actually a pretty deplorable character and I am quite sure most of us would hate him if we knew him.
He in fact held a public office, something like justice of the peace, iirc, after the revolution, in the brief period where some aristocrats were trusted. It's said he spared the lives of some aristocrats, including his worst enemy, his mother in law. He did not believe in the death penalty. In short the revolutionaries like Robespierre found him too 'soft'!!
Many who met him found him rather polite and cultivated, and his last mistress was quite so. I think we'd find him a rather self-indulgent aristocrat--- you should see the lists of delicacies he liked to eat in prison.
It's by no means clear that his private life was that out of the ordinary. Conduct toward women of the so called 'lower classes' were simply in a different category of relationship. Forcing oneself on prostitutes was probably not unheard of among the elite, and the 'servant girls' were there for the taking (see the ref to Strom Thurmond, below).
Even the beating(whipping) of a prostitute (who's paid to undergo it) is not exactly unheard of, and it should be remembered that he had them whip him, as well.
Likewise, fucking the available women besides ones wife is not exactly unheard of--- have you forgotten John F Kennedy? Wilt Chamberlain? Warren Beatty? (on a slightly different angle, Strom Thurmond, at 21, had the family's housemaid.)
I think comparisons with Jefferson or Franklin are not wholly out of line, and certainly comparisons with the aristocratic elites of France and England do not make him look 'deplorable.' They were quite nice to many of their equals; the men fucked anything that moved, and were sometime generous--but often beastly-- to those, esp. women of the 'lower orders.'
Added: the comparison with Jefferson, as already mentioned, is a good one in respect of sex. Jefferson fucked his slave. As RS said, it's not exactly consensual as we'd think; OTOH it's not rape by the standards of those days and not something a 'gentleman' lost sleep over. An item of property cannot be 'raped'. I do not believe there was any law against taking whatever slave woman one pleased (of one's own). This might be the least of her worries, since the master could separate her from her husband or children by selling her and them to different people, or sell the kids and keep her, etc.
Sade had a similar attitude toward prostitutes: by definition, as long as you pay, there cannot be any crime done to them, such as rape: their job is sexual service as the patron wishes and pays for. Sade explicitly scorns the idea that a whore has 'rights' that can be legally enforced, regarding sex acts done to her. (This attitude is not exactly rare today, btw.)
Last edited:
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
lara said,
Granted, in the time of De Sade, such "deviant" practices were punishable by law or garnered the accused a stigma that lasted a lifetime.
This is generally true, though whipping wouldn't be a deviance.
Sade asked to give and receive anal intercourse; there was a death penalty attached, and the girls swore it didn't happen.
As today, the think the gap of law and practice existed, so I'm not sure about this 'stigma' thing you speak. Further, it would be a prostitute he anally had, so my guess is that most aristocrats wouldn't give a fig.
Granted, in the time of De Sade, such "deviant" practices were punishable by law or garnered the accused a stigma that lasted a lifetime.
This is generally true, though whipping wouldn't be a deviance.
Sade asked to give and receive anal intercourse; there was a death penalty attached, and the girls swore it didn't happen.
As today, the think the gap of law and practice existed, so I'm not sure about this 'stigma' thing you speak. Further, it would be a prostitute he anally had, so my guess is that most aristocrats wouldn't give a fig.
Never
Come What May
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2000
- Posts
- 23,234
s'lara
"What will remain a mystery to me is why RS stopped posting on this board with as much substance as she showed in this thread."
The mystery reveled!
The general amount of bullshit to noise ratio on this board was too high and there were distractions in her own life.
No finder's fee needed... this time.
"What will remain a mystery to me is why RS stopped posting on this board with as much substance as she showed in this thread."
The mystery reveled!
The general amount of bullshit to noise ratio on this board was too high and there were distractions in her own life.
No finder's fee needed... this time.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
Netzach said,
//I kind of prefer Bataille's messy mayhem to De Sade's. I just feel less displaced in late-modernity than early.//
There are a many better prose stylists than Sade, especially in the novels.
It's in the ideas and imagination *esp. in relation to the times* that are striking.
Sade was a dissolute nobleman, mostly writing in prision; though the dissoluteness in life was *not a reflection of the violent depravity of the *fictional characters.*
Bataille was a cultured librarian, firmly encounced in a French bourgeois setting and certain literary circles, less for his literary creations, than for his exceptional gifts in literary criticism. I have no idea whether his private life contained anything out of the ordinary.
//I kind of prefer Bataille's messy mayhem to De Sade's. I just feel less displaced in late-modernity than early.//
There are a many better prose stylists than Sade, especially in the novels.
It's in the ideas and imagination *esp. in relation to the times* that are striking.
Sade was a dissolute nobleman, mostly writing in prision; though the dissoluteness in life was *not a reflection of the violent depravity of the *fictional characters.*
Bataille was a cultured librarian, firmly encounced in a French bourgeois setting and certain literary circles, less for his literary creations, than for his exceptional gifts in literary criticism. I have no idea whether his private life contained anything out of the ordinary.
