|
| 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. |