I am now the proud owner of a complete edition of the Grove Press translation, together with a Psychopathia Sexualis, which also contains several amusing episodes. 🙂
Hogwash, he clearly reveled in his own shitpost for its own sake.
So what? Just because he got himself off putting together as much smut as possible doesn't change the fact that the value of the book lies therein that he collected and categorized all kinds of perversions fetishes and sexual mental illnesses. As a novel or pornography it's not that great.
No, the value of the book consists primarily in its possibility of being enjoyed for its own sake and unironically by sympathetic readers, and not at the "second-hand" level with which the sensitive and scholars would like to excuse themselves (while at the same time studying the thing-academics are a series of weirdos and perverts). There is a very great pleasure in the idea of putting on an extended depraved bipolysexual orgy and trading the various pieces around among your bros. To feel the hairs on the back of your neck stand up as you read the thing, self inserting.
In this case, Sade was not out to psychologize himself. He was out to amuse himself. He did so, and to our benefit.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Fair enough, the hairs on the back of my neck stood up when I read it the first time when I was twelve. But then you realize that the story itself is just not very good (and probably wouldn't have been in a finished form). And again, it doesn't matter what de Sade wanted to achieve, the result is that he gave others an idea of what perversions there are in this world. "Depraved bipolysexual orgy" is btw a cute desccription for torturing and fricking little children to death.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Jesus saw this too. Most people never heard of this. This is sad.
Apocryphal. The original was destroyed when the bastille was taken, we're supposed to believe a guard saved the manuscript, gave it to a wealthy french family who hid it for 150 years until a german israelite sexologist could publish it. It's absurd.
The story of the manuscript for the 120 days of sodom is this: >De Sade writes it while prisoner at the Bastille, starting on oct 22nd 1785 >supposedly he writes the whole thing (almost 500 pages) in just 20 days, no revisions, on a single roll of paper >De Sade is moved to a different prison, the manuscript stays hidden in his cell >The Bastille is taken and the manuscript is presumed destroyed for 150 years >In reality a guard (Arnoux de Saint Maximin), of which we know absolutely nothing, took it and gave it/sold it to the Marquis de Villeneuve-Trans >No record of the transaction or of the manuscript being in possession of the Villeneuves remains >The manuscript is sold to a german collector at the start of the 1900 >No record of the transaction exists >The collector is anonymous >From the collector the manuscript is transferred to Iwan Bloch, german dermatologist turned sexologist >No record of the transaction exists >Bloch publishes a german translation under a pseudonym >This translation is known to contain "thousands of errors" >After the death of Bloch a french writer, Maurice Heine, swoops in, buys the manuscript from the estate of Bloch >He uses money from an anonymous viscount >After years of work he publishes the "corrected" version of the manuscript which is what people read today >Gilbert Lely, biographer of De Sade, calls this version "the real original"
I think this story is bullshit. The real manuscript was destroyed during the pillaging of the Bastille.
What Iwan Bloch published was not written by De Sade but by Iwan Bloch himself, he had no manuscript to work from and this is why this version has thousands of "errors".
The story also says that the manuscript was kept hidden in De Sade's cell but its too big, the roll is huge and it could not be kept hidden.
Maurice Heine did not correct "errors" he rewrote large parts of the text to make it compatible with what De Sade would have written, he could do this because he was De Sade's biographer and had studied him for years. This is also when the "roll" manuscript was phabricated.
After this the roll spent years in private collections, where nobody could really examine it. It's only been in possession of France for 2 years, now that it can actually be examined and carbon dated I expect it will quickly be discovered to be a fake.
yes
What do people who read this look like?
i look like a twink and my benis is destroyed from the daily yanking
120 days of what?!
It's just an early attempt of putting together an encylcopedia of sexual perversions and should be read as one.
I am now the proud owner of a complete edition of the Grove Press translation, together with a Psychopathia Sexualis, which also contains several amusing episodes. 🙂
Hogwash, he clearly reveled in his own shitpost for its own sake.
So what? Just because he got himself off putting together as much smut as possible doesn't change the fact that the value of the book lies therein that he collected and categorized all kinds of perversions fetishes and sexual mental illnesses. As a novel or pornography it's not that great.
No, the value of the book consists primarily in its possibility of being enjoyed for its own sake and unironically by sympathetic readers, and not at the "second-hand" level with which the sensitive and scholars would like to excuse themselves (while at the same time studying the thing-academics are a series of weirdos and perverts). There is a very great pleasure in the idea of putting on an extended depraved bipolysexual orgy and trading the various pieces around among your bros. To feel the hairs on the back of your neck stand up as you read the thing, self inserting.
In this case, Sade was not out to psychologize himself. He was out to amuse himself. He did so, and to our benefit.
Fair enough, the hairs on the back of my neck stood up when I read it the first time when I was twelve. But then you realize that the story itself is just not very good (and probably wouldn't have been in a finished form). And again, it doesn't matter what de Sade wanted to achieve, the result is that he gave others an idea of what perversions there are in this world. "Depraved bipolysexual orgy" is btw a cute desccription for torturing and fricking little children to death.
Jesus saw this too. Most people never heard of this. This is sad.
you wanted atheism, you get atheism
Nah, it's what you get if you want catholicism
Apocryphal. The original was destroyed when the bastille was taken, we're supposed to believe a guard saved the manuscript, gave it to a wealthy french family who hid it for 150 years until a german israelite sexologist could publish it. It's absurd.
>german israelite sexologist
Why don't you just spell out what you want to say?
The story of the manuscript for the 120 days of sodom is this:
>De Sade writes it while prisoner at the Bastille, starting on oct 22nd 1785
>supposedly he writes the whole thing (almost 500 pages) in just 20 days, no revisions, on a single roll of paper
>De Sade is moved to a different prison, the manuscript stays hidden in his cell
>The Bastille is taken and the manuscript is presumed destroyed for 150 years
>In reality a guard (Arnoux de Saint Maximin), of which we know absolutely nothing, took it and gave it/sold it to the Marquis de Villeneuve-Trans
>No record of the transaction or of the manuscript being in possession of the Villeneuves remains
>The manuscript is sold to a german collector at the start of the 1900
>No record of the transaction exists
>The collector is anonymous
>From the collector the manuscript is transferred to Iwan Bloch, german dermatologist turned sexologist
>No record of the transaction exists
>Bloch publishes a german translation under a pseudonym
>This translation is known to contain "thousands of errors"
>After the death of Bloch a french writer, Maurice Heine, swoops in, buys the manuscript from the estate of Bloch
>He uses money from an anonymous viscount
>After years of work he publishes the "corrected" version of the manuscript which is what people read today
>Gilbert Lely, biographer of De Sade, calls this version "the real original"
I think this story is bullshit. The real manuscript was destroyed during the pillaging of the Bastille.
What Iwan Bloch published was not written by De Sade but by Iwan Bloch himself, he had no manuscript to work from and this is why this version has thousands of "errors".
The story also says that the manuscript was kept hidden in De Sade's cell but its too big, the roll is huge and it could not be kept hidden.
Maurice Heine did not correct "errors" he rewrote large parts of the text to make it compatible with what De Sade would have written, he could do this because he was De Sade's biographer and had studied him for years. This is also when the "roll" manuscript was phabricated.
After this the roll spent years in private collections, where nobody could really examine it. It's only been in possession of France for 2 years, now that it can actually be examined and carbon dated I expect it will quickly be discovered to be a fake.
Only god knows haha 🙂