S&M before de Sade...the rebel academic speaks

[s'lara]

Not too sure about that one.

Care to elaborate?

From my understanding of de Sade's history, as well as his predilection for the aberrant, the church and French society viewed his behavior beyond barbaric and acts of crime. As he was convicted of these "crimes", the stigma he attained, through his acts and subsequent incarcerations, were enough to last him through his lifetime. Or am i incorrect? Please let me know if i am because de Sade's controversial books and lifestyle (well ... controversial to the church primarily) have been food for thought for some time.

lara

 

[s'lara]

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.

Stigma in that he was condemned by his family (mother-in-law had him arrested or committed if i am not mistaken) and condemned by the church publicly as well as prosecuted under the law. Sure, i understand his extra-marital dalliances with prostitutes were not something to blink at during those times, however, the reputation he created for himself as a sexual 'deviant' would certainly would constitute his being stigmatized.

lara

 

[s'lara]

All this talking about de Sade has regenerated my interest in the man.

i've seen a few people mention some works by others on de Sade which they say are worth reading. Anyone care to give me their "best of" list (a couple would be good) and why? As the holiday's are here, i expect i can buy some gifts for myself from the bookstores without breaking the bank. Thanks in advance.

lara

 

[Pure]

Hi lara,

I enjoyed

_At Home with the Marquis de Sade_ by Francine du Plessix Gray,


http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=2YI66UGPHQ&isbn=0140286772&itm=9

also Schaeffer, Marquis de Sade,

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=2YI66UGPHQ&isbn=0674003926&itm=7


which is a bio concentrating on this relations with wife and mom in law. It is easily available.

As has been pointed out by Risia, Sade never got much by way of proper trial. Further by way of 'deviant', that is really a 19th century concept.

The politics of the situation should not be forgotten. Just as the biggest case in todays papers, Simpson or Peterson is not the vilest, so in Sades time.

He was charged with poisoning, but that's pretty clearly trumped up (and no one died).

The question of assaults on prostitutes is a tricky one also, since the question of consent comes up; I don't believe there were any serious injuries. There were alleged to be shallow knife wounds in one case, but it's my impression that this was what we call, 'edge' play, not slashing or stabbing.

There is the issue of 'confinement.' (keeping her in a room for a couple hours).

So it comes down to two things. Anal intercourse. Well, he asked for that, but the girls refused they say. He apparently wanted his servent to 'do' him that way. This would be a capital offense, but then as now, a lot of this outrage is hypocrisy, or very selective.

Lastly, what I think was key. Sacrilege. He liked to compel the whore to masturbate with a crucifix, or take in his dick with the heavenly 'host' on the tip, of have her uttering various obscenity involving jesus mary etc. Definitiely the Church did not like that.
That carries a death penalty.

So all this talk of 'stigma' has to be looked at carefully, and 'bad press' is not the same as reality based stigma. He was not bluebeard. No murders; no rapes (excluding the problem of 'underage' women).

If I were to list the acts of famous sex criminals, you'd find the above pretty tame stuff, amounting to indignities and minor injuries at best (possibly corruption of minors; which was not much of an issue then).

There are studies of Sade's ideas; among the best are the essay, "Must we burn Sade?" by de Beauvoir; and the small book, 'Sadeian Woman' by Angela Carter.

There are rather deep scholarly/philosophical studies like that by Henaff _Sade, the Invention of thee Libertine Body_;

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=2YI66UGPHQ&isbn=0816625379&itm=5

and by le Brun, _Sade, the Sudden Abyss_.

I've found most of these on the net, esp. through Amazon or Barnes and Noble, in some cases, the used book merchants linked to their sites (both major companies act as middlemen, and tell you the merchant to contact, and his price; he ships it.)

J.

 

[Pure]

G Bataille (1897-1952)

http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/bataille.htm


His best known novel:

_The Story of the Eye_, a classic of erotic literature, was written in 1928 under the pseudonym Lord Auch. It told a tale of a young couple, Simone and the narrator, who explore the boundaries of sexual taboos. They play with eggs, milk and all bodily fluids. During a champagne orgy, their friend Marcelle is left in a wardrobe. She becomes traumatized and is taken to a sanatorium. After she is brought back she hangs herself in the same wardrobe. Simone and 'the Cardinal', the narrator, escape to Spain, where their sexual fantasies become more blasphemous.

"I was not even satisfied with the usual debauchery, because the only thing it dirties is debauchery itself, while, in some way or other, anything sublime and perfectly pure is left intact by it. My kind of debauchery soils not only my body and my thoughts, but also anything I may conceive in its course, that is to say, the vast starry universe, which merely serves as a backdrop."

 

[Pure]

G Bataille (1897-1952)

http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/bataille.htm


His best known novel:

_The Story of the Eye_, a classic of erotic literature, was written in 1928 under the pseudonym Lord Auch. It told a tale of a young couple, Simone and the narrator, who explore the boundaries of sexual taboos. They play with eggs, milk and all bodily fluids. During a champagne orgy, their friend Marcelle is left in a wardrobe. She becomes traumatized and is taken to a sanatorium. After she is brought back she hangs herself in the same wardrobe. Simone and 'the Cardinal', the narrator, escape to Spain, where their sexual fantasies become more blasphemous.

"I was not even satisfied with the usual debauchery, because the only thing it dirties is debauchery itself, while, in some way or other, anything sublime and perfectly pure is left intact by it. My kind of debauchery soils not only my body and my thoughts, but also anything I may conceive in its course, that is to say, the vast starry universe, which merely serves as a backdrop."

Two other quotes from GB

I believe that truth has only one face: that of a violent contradiction.

The essence of morality is a questioning about morality; and the decisive move of human life is to use ceaselessly all light to look for the origin of the opposition between good and evil.

 

[s'lara]

Hi lara,

I enjoyed

_At Home with the Marquis de Sade_ by Francine du Plessix Gray,


http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=2YI66UGPHQ&isbn=0140286772&itm=9

also Schaeffer, Marquis de Sade,

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=2YI66UGPHQ&isbn=0674003926&itm=7


which is a bio concentrating on this relations with wife and mom in law. It is easily available.

As has been pointed out by Risia, Sade never got much by way of proper trial. Further by way of 'deviant', that is really a 19th century concept.

The politics of the situation should not be forgotten. Just as the biggest case in todays papers, Simpson or Peterson is not the vilest, so in Sades time.

He was charged with poisoning, but that's pretty clearly trumped up (and no one died).

The question of assaults on prostitutes is a tricky one also, since the question of consent comes up; I don't believe there were any serious injuries. There were alleged to be shallow knife wounds in one case, but it's my impression that this was what we call, 'edge' play, not slashing or stabbing.

There is the issue of 'confinement.' (keeping her in a room for a couple hours).

So it comes down to two things. Anal intercourse. Well, he asked for that, but the girls refused they say. He apparently wanted his servent to 'do' him that way. This would be a capital offense, but then as now, a lot of this outrage is hypocrisy, or very selective.

Lastly, what I think was key. Sacrilege. He liked to compel the whore to masturbate with a crucifix, or take in his dick with the heavenly 'host' on the tip, of have her uttering various obscenity involving jesus mary etc. Definitiely the Church did not like that.
That carries a death penalty.

So all this talk of 'stigma' has to be looked at carefully, and 'bad press' is not the same as reality based stigma. He was not bluebeard. No murders; no rapes (excluding the problem of 'underage' women).

If I were to list the acts of famous sex criminals, you'd find the above pretty tame stuff, amounting to indignities and minor injuries at best (possibly corruption of minors; which was not much of an issue then).

There are studies of Sade's ideas; among the best are the essay, "Must we burn Sade?" by de Beauvoir; and the small book, 'Sadeian Woman' by Angela Carter.

There are rather deep scholarly/philosophical studies like that by Henaff _Sade, the Invention of thee Libertine Body_;

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=2YI66UGPHQ&isbn=0816625379&itm=5

and by le Brun, _Sade, the Sudden Abyss_.

I've found most of these on the net, esp. through Amazon or Barnes and Noble, in some cases, the used book merchants linked to their sites (both major companies act as middlemen, and tell you the merchant to contact, and his price; he ships it.)

J.

Pure -

Thank you for the references. i'll start with Francine du Plessix Gray and Annie le Brun's works for now.

i have to agree the times were different (Napoleonic Era/French revolution) during de Sade's life and what he did is not applicable or even on the same level with the sexual crimes committed by individuals in the 20th century. But my statements were not made in comparison to our sexual criminals of today, rather they were made in relation to how society viewed him in during that time. The blasphemous acts by themselves were enough to create the stigma. i also agree there was much grey area in the accusations made against him, however, the commitment to the asylums and the books he wrote only served to compound his then shady/questionable reputation. Is it right that he was comdemned for acting out his fantasies and putting pen to paper about them as well? Not at all. But that was the climate of his era and he paid for it, unjust or not.

lara

 

[s'lara]

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.

puts the appropriate fee down for payment of the next mystery to be revealed.

And your excuse for discontinuing your substantive posts on this board as you did in this thread?

 

[Pure]

Hi Lara,

The plans sound good! I bought Gray at a local medium sized bookstore, and Le Brun over the net.

I admire your curiosity--as well as your perversion

As to your statements, I'm not sure I've been clear or gotten my point across:

i have to agree the times were different (Napoleonic Era/French revolution) during de Sade's life and what he did is not applicable or even on the same level with the sexual crimes committed by individuals in the 20th century. But my statements were not made in comparison to our sexual criminals of today, rather they were made in relation to how society viewed him in during that time. The blasphemous acts by themselves were enough to create the stigma. i also agree there was much grey area in the accusations made against him, however, the commitment to the asylums and the books he wrote only served to compound his then shady/questionable reputation. Is it right that he was comdemned for acting out his fantasies and putting pen to paper about them as well? Not at all. But that was the climate of his era and he paid for it, unjust or not.

I listed the acts of the Marquis. The only thing I left out was that sometimes several persons were involved. You will note that there were no murders or mutilations, not to say extreme torture or cannibalism. Even 'rape' is dubious, as far as a criminal charge, because of the 'consent' problem with prostitutes.

So, in comparison *with the sex criminals of his day* (and earlier), who certainly did such things, Sade is mild. And a good many 'noblemen' probably did the same assaults with prostitutes and defloration of serving maids.

Only the sacrilege angle puts things at all out of the norm for libertine noblemen, perhaps.

Your question "Is it right that he was comdemned for acting out his fantasies and putting pen to paper about them as well?"

is not quite well stated, or maybe I misread it. He 'acted out' only .01% of his fantasies, as stated above. What he put on paper, those fantasies, is *quite extreme, involving murder, sometime mass murder, violence, incest, torture, rape, mutilation.

I don't mean to sound like a scold . Probably I don't quite see what you're getting at. But what in the novels is simply NOT in the same ballpark as the minor infractions of 'real life' (insofar as he had a chance, in his few years of freedom!).

Best,

J.

 

[Pure]

Hi lara,

Merry Christmas!

I did re read parts of "At Home.." by Gray to see what the charges were: it appears they were poisoning, sodomy, and blashphemy/sacrilege. The poisoning appears to have been dropped since there was no 'poison' just 'spanish fly' and the women recovered. Possibly there was some charges relating to forcible confinement (holding a prostitute captive in a room for the night, sort of thing).

The book also tells a bit about the gossip and newspaper stories floating around-- like our tabloids-- making him out to be a monster and/or killer.

Best,
J.

PS It's unclear to me if there were any 'corruption of minors' type charges, since the times were a little different than now. Several of the 'women' in the orgies were teens. So by today's laws those would be crimes.

 

[RisiaSkye]

There are rather deep scholarly/philosophical studies like that by Henaff _Sade, the Invention of thee Libertine Body_;

Side note and name drop alert:
Marcel Henaff--the dude mentioned above--is really funny. When I was working on this project, he was my advisor, and he's kinda crazy, in the very classic absent-minded professor way, sans Jerry Lewis.

Wow, am I ever puffed up with self-importance right now.

Anyway, this came up on my screen in a drop by, and I wanted to say happy new year to Pure, and anyone else left whose verbiage I've enjoyed.

Be well,
RS

 

[Pure]

Happy New Year to you too, Risia,

and may your perverse passions flourish in the new year, and issue in some fine new stories and essays.!!



J.

 

[s'lara]

Hi Lara,

The plans sound good! I bought Gray at a local medium sized bookstore, and Le Brun over the net.

I admire your curiosity--as well as your perversion

As to your statements, I'm not sure I've been clear or gotten my point across:

i have to agree the times were different (Napoleonic Era/French revolution) during de Sade's life and what he did is not applicable or even on the same level with the sexual crimes committed by individuals in the 20th century. But my statements were not made in comparison to our sexual criminals of today, rather they were made in relation to how society viewed him in during that time. The blasphemous acts by themselves were enough to create the stigma. i also agree there was much grey area in the accusations made against him, however, the commitment to the asylums and the books he wrote only served to compound his then shady/questionable reputation. Is it right that he was comdemned for acting out his fantasies and putting pen to paper about them as well? Not at all. But that was the climate of his era and he paid for it, unjust or not.

I listed the acts of the Marquis. The only thing I left out was that sometimes several persons were involved. You will note that there were no murders or mutilations, not to say extreme torture or cannibalism. Even 'rape' is dubious, as far as a criminal charge, because of the 'consent' problem with prostitutes.

So, in comparison *with the sex criminals of his day* (and earlier), who certainly did such things, Sade is mild. And a good many 'noblemen' probably did the same assaults with prostitutes and defloration of serving maids.

Only the sacrilege angle puts things at all out of the norm for libertine noblemen, perhaps.

Your question "Is it right that he was comdemned for acting out his fantasies and putting pen to paper about them as well?"

is not quite well stated, or maybe I misread it. He 'acted out' only .01% of his fantasies, as stated above. What he put on paper, those fantasies, is *quite extreme, involving murder, sometime mass murder, violence, incest, torture, rape, mutilation.

I don't mean to sound like a scold . Probably I don't quite see what you're getting at. But what in the novels is simply NOT in the same ballpark as the minor infractions of 'real life' (insofar as he had a chance, in his few years of freedom!).

Best,

J.

Hi Pure,

my apologies ... i was lazy in responding.

Lets see:

lara said: i have to agree the times were different (Napoleonic Era/French revolution) during de Sade's life and what he did is not applicable or even on the same level with the sexual crimes committed by individuals in the 20th century.

Pure said:So, in comparison *with the sex criminals of his day* (and earlier), who certainly did such things, Sade is mild.

An agreement i believe.

As to the rest, we don't seem to disagree at all other than on the point of whether he garnered a stigma for his acts (the limited number) and his vivid books. i agree that his "perverted" acts were few in number, but i do believe his sexual acts involving sacrilege in combination with his books helped to create the stigma. As to my question, i was unclear about the distinction between his actual sexual events (the one's we know of) and the fantasies he wrote about in his books. What i should have said was- "Is it right that de Sade was comdemned for his sexual practices in life and for his fantasies which were the subject matter of his books?"

No big deal ... there are times when my thoughts put into text make less sense than they did in my head. See? The foregoing sentence makes no sense whatsoever.

On a side note, i am still awaiting my books. i am getting anxious for the read.

lara

 

[s'lara]

Hi lara,

Merry Christmas!

I did re read parts of "At Home.." by Gray to see what the charges were: it appears they were poisoning, sodomy, and blashphemy/sacrilege. The poisoning appears to have been dropped since there was no 'poison' just 'spanish fly' and the women recovered. Possibly there was some charges relating to forcible confinement (holding a prostitute captive in a room for the night, sort of thing).

The book also tells a bit about the gossip and newspaper stories floating around-- like our tabloids-- making him out to be a monster and/or killer.

Best,
J.

PS It's unclear to me if there were any 'corruption of minors' type charges, since the times were a little different than now. Several of the 'women' in the orgies were teens. So by today's laws those would be crimes.

Merry Christmas and Happy New to you Pure and all. Thanks for going back to check Pure ... i thought i'd read something about the blasphemous acts. As for the bad press and rumors, unfortunately, it is just those types of mediums that help to create a stigma. No he wasn't bluebeard, but it is an easy feat to become one through half circulated truths and gossip.

lara

 

[Pure]

Happy New Year, lara,

I didn't know if you were around, but good to see you back. It's odd, isn't it, that blasphemous sex is not represented at all in the bdsm forum. I guess everyone's blase'.

 

[Karen Kraft]

Okay, I confess: I'm an academic. I realize that this makes me, by definition (for many), duller than a box of Kleenex, so I try not to bring it into the light too often. However, I'm working on a paper on epistolary novels of the 18th century, and the construction of female sexuality in terms of violence within them. And, in the course of my research, I'm discovering a very interesting thing:

Sexual submission, Domination, and violence go way back in our westernized literature. I've read, far too many times, that de Sade and Masoch are basically held accountable for the expression of such tendencies, but I'm realizing more and more that it's a huge myth. Why do we call it Sadism? Well, because of de Sade, of course. Why do we call it Masochism? Well, because of Masoch, of course. Didn't they start it? As it turns out--NO, they didn't.

What, given the assumptions which infuse even the naming (S&M) of what we do, should we make of something like the following?:

"So tell me, my faint-hearted swain, do you really think that all those women you've had were raped? Nevertheless, however keen we are to give ourselves and however quickly we'd like it to happen, we still need some pretext. And can you tell me a more convenient one than seeming to submit to force? Let me be honest: for me one of the most gratifying things is a sharp, well-conducted assault in which everything takes place in the proper order but smartly, so that we're never placed in the tiresome and awkward predicament of having to overlook technical weaknesses which we ought really to have taken advantage of; which retains a semblance of violence even when we've given up the fight, and is skilful enough to satisfy our two favourite passions, a glorious resistance followed by a pleasurable defeat. I agree that such a gift, rarer than most people think, has always afforded me gratification, even when it hasn't made me lose my head, so that at times I've given in purely in recognition of a good performance. Rather like the tournaments of olden days when Beauty awarded the prize for skill and valour."
--letter 10, from the Marquise de Merteuil to the Viscomte de Valmont (emphasis mine); Les Liaisons Dangereuses by Choderlos de Laclos, 1781.

Bear in mind that de Laclos wrote this novel more than a decade before de Sade's most widely read and loudly scorned work, the BDSM epistolary (letters) novel Justine. Other, similarly themed, texts that I'm studying go back at least as far as the turn of the century--before de Sade was even born, in other words.

The Marquise de Merteuil is a figure that a BDSM crowd can readily recognize as a Domme. In the social context of the 18th century, the libertine woman was subject to public scorn at best, so she uses her masochistic tendencies to couch her sexual domination of men in a spider-web of pretended resistance, discouraging her conquests from outing her as a sexual adventurer. Yet, despite this facade, she controls her interactions with all, and ultimately is undone only by her weakness--and a kind of submission--for/to the equally Dom Viscomte de Valmont. Their sexual mastery of others is the fabric of the text, and their dalliances with others are largely readable as an extended power struggle with each other, a struggle to determine who will ultimate be Dom/me in their relationship.

In the end, the two Dominants are undone by falling too deeply in love with their submissives and out of love with each other--but they face different fates. Valmont, classified by the text as a roue (a french term for "rake" or "cad" which also translates as one broken on the wheel by torture), morally "redeems" himself by dying to defend the honor of the masochistic penitent he's made his submissive. Merteuil, on the other hand, is outed as a "fallen woman," loses her money, gets smallpox, becomes hideous, and is forced to flee the country. The broken Dom dies and is revered; the broken Domme is disgraced, disowned, and turned away but does not die. Curiouser and curiouser.

It's also interesting to note that de Laclos (the author) was a military strategist, died a full General, and faced massive public scorn for the text, but he never either denied his connection to it or expressed remorse at having done so. Further, because of the epistolary form, and a bizarre editor's note which attributed Laclos as the editor rather than author, it was read as a completely true story by his contemporaries.

This story continues to be immensely popular today--if you've seen Dangerous Liaisons, Valmont, Cruel Intentions or any number of other works based on it, you already know the story. It's part of our cultural fabric, as much today as ever.

Interesting, yes?
Or am I just doing way too much scholarly crap lately?

Oh, yes, RS. Whenever I go to the library, I always ask for the fuck books first. You would be surprised what a twinkle and sparkle I get when I do that.

Karen

 

[Peter2002]

A final thought, perhaps

This thread has been a great read. And almost everything I would add has already been been stated. Except...

As a couple of people have pointed out the Romans had their own tastes for kink as did the ancient Chinese.

I can't remember the sources for either of these examples, but I do remember reading years ago about the penchent some Roman women had for sticking pins in the breasts of slave girls (the pins were made of gold) as well as an account of the stimulating effect on both men and woman of a beautiful but hauty young nobel woman being caned (on the bare) at the order of the emperor in front of the entire court.

 

[evesdream]

puts the appropriate fee down for payment of the next mystery to be revealed.

And your excuse for discontinuing your substantive posts on this board as you did in this thread?

yes, this is like the end of season one million guest stars episode.

Pure: There are the various sacrileges of *our* times to consider. The news item about cannibalism that you posted is a lustrous one. I think there are quite a number of political sacrileges that come up here, almost casually, like erotic racism, and others. I guess you're right about the blasé when it comes to religion.

Interestingly other religions (judasim, islam.. buddhism) don't seem to have such a visible tradition of sexual sacrilege using iconography and symbolism, tho maybe that might be more apparent in the more repressive sects?

eta: Peter2002, it's a real shame that you can't remember the sources of those. Wouldn't it be something to find out how those "tastes" were received within their respective cultures.

 

[Peter2002]

Dear Evesdream,

If I remember correctly -- and perhaps I'm projecting -- the account of the Roman matrons sticking golden pins into the breasts of young slave girls was rather droll and matter of fact. More or less, "Why not?"

The account of the beautiful nobelwoman being caned was a bit more self-conscious and smutty.

Both are attitudes I could endorse.

 

[Peter2002]

Dear Evesdream,

If I remember correctly -- and perhaps I'm projecting -- the account of the Roman matrons sticking golden pins into the breasts of young slave girls was rather droll and matter of fact. More or less, "Why not?"

The account of the beautiful nobelwoman being caned was a bit more self-conscious and smutty.

Both are attitudes I could endorse.

 

[evesdream]

Re: Dear Evesdream,

If I remember correctly -- and perhaps I'm projecting -- the account of the Roman matrons sticking golden pins into the breasts of young slave girls was rather droll and matter of fact. More or less, "Why not?"

The account of the beautiful nobelwoman being caned was a bit more self-conscious and smutty.

Both are attitudes I could endorse.

Your descriptions sound very literary. Would I look under fiction, history, or legend?

 

[Netzach]

Well, most Roman writing ...from the conquest of Gaul by Caesar to the Georgics by Virgil....is all three.

 

[Pure]

_Aphrodite_, by P. Louys has some classical {Greek?} scenes of slaves' breast torture with pins, but it's a historical novel. Easily available.
I remember it was quite hot, at least to a young person in the 1960s.

 

[Peter2002]

Dear Evesdream, Netzach, and Pure

I'm rather sure that these examples were historical. Here's why:

As a seventeen-year-old school boy at a rather conservative school (six years of Latin and five of Greek), I remember reading in the last half of my last year something other than Horace. We got to pick. Whatever it was I chose to translate in those weeks caused me some problems, not that that was unusual. I do remember my Latin master (yes, that's what they were called) being more than mildly amused at my more than usually inept attempts to make sense of the gold pins in the young breasts. Breasts were an abstraction to me at this point in my life, let alone sticking gold pins in them. It wasn't Petronious and it wasn't the Greek "novelist" who preceded him. I'm drawing a blank on that. In any case, that's why I'm reasonably sure it was a "historical" source. I've never read Aphrodite by P. Louys, but I'm going to now.

As for the Chinese caning, I was then in my early twenties and had more than a clue to what was going on. I think the reference was in a footnote to a book I can't remember the title of. But I do remember, to borrow a phrase from Melville, the "shock of recognition" which caused my loins to stir.

Ah, who says one can't be high minded abut smut.

 

[Pure]

I did find this reference at many sites on the 'net, so the story is well known.

http://www.stanford.edu/~gfreidin/courses/147/zamiatin/underground.htm

Dostoevsky,

_Notes from the Underground (from Part I, chapter VII)_

//. . . In any case civilisation has made mankind if not more bloodthirsty, at least more vilely, more loathsomely bloodthirsty. In old days he saw justice in bloodshed and with his conscience at peace exterminated those he thought proper. Now we do think bloodshed abominable and yet we engage in this abomination, and with more energy than ever.Which is worse? Decide that for yourselves.

They say that Cleopatra (excuse an instance from Roman history) was fond of sticking gold pins into her slave-girls' breasts and derived gratification from their screams and writhings. You will say that that was in the comparatively barbarous times; that these are barbarous times too, because also, comparatively speaking, pins are stuck in even now; that though man has now learned to see more clearly than in barbarous ages, he is still far from having learnt to act as reason and science would dictate.//

I suspect the original is in Plutarch or Dio Cassius, since there is no surviving ancient bio of Cleopatra, just scattered stories in other's lives.

There is a review of Rice's book on Cleopatra and the standard sources used, at

http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ht/34.1/br_13.html