Take a photo of a barcode or cover
adventurous
dark
tense
medium-paced
Gruesome account of 120 days of sexual and violent perversions, performed at a fictional Swiss castle. This is a sickening read, but from an historical-psychological point of view not without interest. See the review in my general account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/6417231278.
“Now, dear reader, you must prepare your heart and your mind for the most impure story that has ever been written since the world existed, such a book being found neither among the ancients nor among the moderns.”
It sounds like a very cheap excuse (like reading Playboy for the interviews), but I read this primarily out of historical interest (and okay, maybe a little curiosity too). I'm just going to say it straight: this is gross, but really gross, extremely gross, in ways you can barely imagine. And it are not only the unimaginable sexual escapades that de Sade describes, but more the ever-increasing violence, and the sickening way in which other people (especially women and children) are degraded to mere objects.
To be honest: I mainly read the run-up to the book and most of the 'stories' of the first cycle (the first of 4), and even then, gradually I began to read diagonally, skipping the worst passages. I didn't have the stomach for it to begin with (some scenes really make you feel sick), and also, after a while the endless descriptions of the excesses really started to get boring. That also says something. Moreover, according to de Sade, that first cycle only contains a description of the “simple passions”. From the schematic overviews of the next three cycles (which he did not write out, thanks heaven), it can be concluded that after that first ‘simple’ cycle, it only goes crescendo into gruesome torture, up to and including the most beastly mutilations and even murder, all connected to sexual acts.
Curiously, all this is presented by de Sade as a kind of scientific experiment. The core of the story is that 4 friends (rich and powerful men) isolate themselves in a Swiss castle, together with about 30 victims, and for 4 months indulge themselves in an endless series of sexual and violent deeds, and while doing that, meticulously recording and sharing all their emotions and experiences. Notice that the focus always is on the own emotions and experiences of the 'masters', never on those of the victims. And regularly they debate on, for instance, what brings them the greatest pleasure (the act or the desire for it), and its moral implications (or rather, the lack thereof). At these moments, it's almost like you're reading a Platonic dialogue.
So, even amidst the disgusting excesses occasionally interesting things can be found, I mean on a philosophical level (imagine!). For instance, the 'masters' conclude that their happiness comes from the fact that others (their victims) cannot enjoy what they can, in other words: for them inequality and brutal domination are basic goods, provided by Nature. Or that good and evil are completely arbitrary, and that therefore everything is allowed. Not unexpected are the fierce attacks against the church and against religion in general: only Nature (with a capital) counts, because, by making possible the most terrible acts, nothing (and certainly not God) stands in the way of doing just that, and therefor every evil is justified. It is the libertine “natural philosophy” that de Sade keeps coming back to.
Now, one of the points I was curious about is to what extent de Sade can be seen as an exponent of the Enlightenment of the 18th century, a much debated and thorny issue. Okay, he was part of the nobility, and therefore thoroughly rooted in the ‘Ancien Regime’, but so were other Enlightenment philosophers. And agreed, his focus was certainly not on higher reason, but on the contrary on the dark side of the human species. But even then his approach exudes the rationalistic-mechanistic view that is so typical of the French 'philosophes' of that period. Only look at the thoroughness with which the four ‘masters’ perform their brutal deeds, in a premeditated order, how systematically they report on them and discuss them. So, in a way you can indeed say that de Sade - willingly or not - also exposes the dark side of Enlightened rationalism, eventually leading to the Holocaust (I'm not saying anything new, here).
Naturally you wonder: what was the personal motivation of de Sade to write all this, and especially why in that excessively explicit way? I know: libraries have already been written about it. And the variegated views on this range from “de Sade just had a sick mind”, or "he just wanted to shock, to get even with the hypocritical 'tidy' society that put him in jail for so many years", to “he wanted to provide a brilliant insight into the seething, stinking pit that hides inside each of us, but which we usually keep hidden”. I guess, all these views are valid. And so I definitely came to understand why the figure of de Sade, and his writings, continue to fascinate, even after more than 2 centuries. But if you want my (completely non-binding) advice: beware, if you want to read this, know what you're getting into.
Annex: I have now also read his [b:Justine ou Les Malheurs de la vertu|960525|Justine ou Les Malheurs de la vertu|Marquis de Sade|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1358797349l/960525._SY75_.jpg|13268607], and I must say that it is on a much higher literary level (ok, also this sounds very “I read Playboy for the interviews”-ish), it is a bit less explicit, and, actually contains a little less violence, although it remains very rude and particularly derogatory of the female species. But above all it contains many more well-developed passages that philosophize about the (im)moral aspects of libertine behavior, and in that sense it is much more interesting from an historical point of view.
It sounds like a very cheap excuse (like reading Playboy for the interviews), but I read this primarily out of historical interest (and okay, maybe a little curiosity too). I'm just going to say it straight: this is gross, but really gross, extremely gross, in ways you can barely imagine. And it are not only the unimaginable sexual escapades that de Sade describes, but more the ever-increasing violence, and the sickening way in which other people (especially women and children) are degraded to mere objects.
To be honest: I mainly read the run-up to the book and most of the 'stories' of the first cycle (the first of 4), and even then, gradually I began to read diagonally, skipping the worst passages. I didn't have the stomach for it to begin with (some scenes really make you feel sick), and also, after a while the endless descriptions of the excesses really started to get boring. That also says something. Moreover, according to de Sade, that first cycle only contains a description of the “simple passions”. From the schematic overviews of the next three cycles (which he did not write out, thanks heaven), it can be concluded that after that first ‘simple’ cycle, it only goes crescendo into gruesome torture, up to and including the most beastly mutilations and even murder, all connected to sexual acts.
Curiously, all this is presented by de Sade as a kind of scientific experiment. The core of the story is that 4 friends (rich and powerful men) isolate themselves in a Swiss castle, together with about 30 victims, and for 4 months indulge themselves in an endless series of sexual and violent deeds, and while doing that, meticulously recording and sharing all their emotions and experiences. Notice that the focus always is on the own emotions and experiences of the 'masters', never on those of the victims. And regularly they debate on, for instance, what brings them the greatest pleasure (the act or the desire for it), and its moral implications (or rather, the lack thereof). At these moments, it's almost like you're reading a Platonic dialogue.
So, even amidst the disgusting excesses occasionally interesting things can be found, I mean on a philosophical level (imagine!). For instance, the 'masters' conclude that their happiness comes from the fact that others (their victims) cannot enjoy what they can, in other words: for them inequality and brutal domination are basic goods, provided by Nature. Or that good and evil are completely arbitrary, and that therefore everything is allowed. Not unexpected are the fierce attacks against the church and against religion in general: only Nature (with a capital) counts, because, by making possible the most terrible acts, nothing (and certainly not God) stands in the way of doing just that, and therefor every evil is justified. It is the libertine “natural philosophy” that de Sade keeps coming back to.
Now, one of the points I was curious about is to what extent de Sade can be seen as an exponent of the Enlightenment of the 18th century, a much debated and thorny issue. Okay, he was part of the nobility, and therefore thoroughly rooted in the ‘Ancien Regime’, but so were other Enlightenment philosophers. And agreed, his focus was certainly not on higher reason, but on the contrary on the dark side of the human species. But even then his approach exudes the rationalistic-mechanistic view that is so typical of the French 'philosophes' of that period. Only look at the thoroughness with which the four ‘masters’ perform their brutal deeds, in a premeditated order, how systematically they report on them and discuss them. So, in a way you can indeed say that de Sade - willingly or not - also exposes the dark side of Enlightened rationalism, eventually leading to the Holocaust (I'm not saying anything new, here).
Naturally you wonder: what was the personal motivation of de Sade to write all this, and especially why in that excessively explicit way? I know: libraries have already been written about it. And the variegated views on this range from “de Sade just had a sick mind”, or "he just wanted to shock, to get even with the hypocritical 'tidy' society that put him in jail for so many years", to “he wanted to provide a brilliant insight into the seething, stinking pit that hides inside each of us, but which we usually keep hidden”. I guess, all these views are valid. And so I definitely came to understand why the figure of de Sade, and his writings, continue to fascinate, even after more than 2 centuries. But if you want my (completely non-binding) advice: beware, if you want to read this, know what you're getting into.
Annex: I have now also read his [b:Justine ou Les Malheurs de la vertu|960525|Justine ou Les Malheurs de la vertu|Marquis de Sade|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1358797349l/960525._SY75_.jpg|13268607], and I must say that it is on a much higher literary level (ok, also this sounds very “I read Playboy for the interviews”-ish), it is a bit less explicit, and, actually contains a little less violence, although it remains very rude and particularly derogatory of the female species. But above all it contains many more well-developed passages that philosophize about the (im)moral aspects of libertine behavior, and in that sense it is much more interesting from an historical point of view.
challenging
dark
medium-paced
I enjoyed the first part, not in sense of the story, but I liked the used language and stylistics, it was very readable. Second to fourth part were just notes, which made the read very boring and kind of annoying.
Already in first part you could have seen, that the stories are very similar, but in the next parts, because of only short descriptions the became even more obvious.
The third and fourth part were for me personally a bit too brutal, I don't enjoy described violence and I was really wonering, if there could really be people like that (hopefully not).
Already in first part you could have seen, that the stories are very similar, but in the next parts, because of only short descriptions the became even more obvious.
The third and fourth part were for me personally a bit too brutal, I don't enjoy described violence and I was really wonering, if there could really be people like that (hopefully not).
oh man…. so horrible to read but actually so fascinating. didn’t know the extent that i could feel disgusted until just now. but i actually think it’s very interesting how de sade’s philosophy slips into the book. really the libertines and the storytellers say some fascinating stuff. definitely a bit of psychological torture for the reader but makes me really appreciate the movie. so what happens to us if we have everything we can possibly want? do we turn to excess and debauchery and does it take excruciating pain and gruesomeness to stir senses that are dulled by excess? do we destroy beautiful things ? is this what money does when it flattens everything out into values?? awesome. 1 star because i might throw up. +.5 because i’ve got to see more of what was said between the atrocities. what came to light?
dark
slow-paced
challenging
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes