Help, scholars, Biblical and others, the erudite--reference?

[rgraham666]

Why? And I will argue on this.

Because women are by their very nature soft and weak. Or just by their natures, better than men. Such acts would be beneath them.

(Pauses to roll on the floor, laughing)

Better.

Stereotypes are wonderful. Saves a person a lot of time to do things other than think.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pure
'
Most interesting is that many feminists and also male critics swore that the book could not have been written by a woman (because of her (O's) abuse and debasements).

Why? And I will argue on this.

I would too. There are some people, both men and women, who get off on abuse and debasement, such as golden or brown ahowers, being vomited on and the like.

 

[Pure]

hi charley

the hypothesis that "O" couldn't have been written by a woman never attracted me. rather i accepted the argument of others that lots of the 'feminine' details suggested a female author.

that said, i don't see much 'true sadism' written by women, EXCEPT, as the case with Aury, to 'sell' to men. even then Aury gave a particular 'love' twist to the masochism (clearly O feels loved by Rene, the person who initially gets her into the rigors of this 'club.')

ya know, you might read the book, then you could make lots more arguments!

 

[neonlyte]

the hypothesis that "O" couldn't have been written by a woman never attracted me. rather i accepted the argument of others that lots of the 'feminine' details suggested a female author.

that said, i don't see much 'true sadism' written by women, EXCEPT, as the case with Aury, to 'sell' to men. even then Aury gave a particular 'love' twist to the masochism (clearly O feels loved by Rene, the person who initially gets her into the rigors of this 'club.')

ya know, you might read the book, then you could make lots more arguments!

Long time since I read the book, been interesting look up the references. As I understand it, she didn't write the book with the intention of it being published. It was written to maintain her lover's interest in her, he was sixties at the time. He was the person who took it to a publisher and the publisher immediately recognised the writing as Aury's, despite the pseudonym. The secret of the author was kept to a handful of people, one imagines in part to protect her literary reputation in France though there are hints that she wished to protect her immediate family from any backlash.

I'm curious as to why she choose a woman's name as her pseudonym, it was the 1950's, 'women' didn't write that type of erotica. It is unclear whether Aury herself insisted on 'Pauline Reage' or whether the publisher decided a 'woman writer' would be more marketable.

What comes across strongly from reading the background is the relationship between Aury and her lover Paulhan. After the initial surge of writing (the first part from which Pure's original query arises) Paulhan encourages her to turn the work into a novel and in some way the writing took on the struggle of the woman in the novel, forcing herself beyond limits toward a goal. For writing never intended to be published, its effect on most who have read it is extraordinary.

 

[Antfarmer77]

Plausible reference? Interesting thread BTW...thanks
Ezekiel 23:16-18 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain



16And as soon as she saw them with her eyes, she doted upon them, and sent messengers unto them into Chaldea.

17And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoredom, and she was polluted with them, and her mind was alienated from them.

18So she discovered her whoredoms, and discovered her nakedness: then my mind was alienated from her, like as my mind was alienated from her sister.

 

[Pure]

ant-- note to neon

interesting reference, antfarmer! thanks!

another ref i toyed with is Romans 9:22, referring to vessels of wrath (who will be destroyed, IOW), and earlier in the ch. these are referred to as 'children of the flesh.'
---

as ogg says, women as 'sinks' 'pits' etc is an old idea--essentially equating them with whores. likewise, there is a common picture of prostitutes as a kind of 'sewer system.' st. thomas aquinas, i believe said that prostitutes have a 'good' function the 'sewer' of society, i.e the channels for its nasty impulses and excretions.

humans (esp. men!) are such moralistic bastards! somebody's got to be dirt.



==
neon, thanks for posting the info. the reason i put "sell" in quotes, regarding Aury, is that, as you say, it was to please (figuratively, 'sell') to her lover. hence arguably she was writing the sort of sadistic things that please most of us guys. further, it's said that Paulham proposed that no woman could write like de Sade. so, we might speculate that she was looking for a Sade-like content and feel.

in simple terms, we know that women writers can make things appear however they want, just as Suze Randall can do porn shots that appeal to millions of guys.

by the way, i'd say her writing is better than Sade who wasn't really a very good novelist, except for ideas and images. i'm an amateur in French, but i don't think his style--i.e., mastery of novelistic prose-- is anything exceptional. its coldness, perhaps is its most apparent quality or virtue.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

neon, thanks for posting the info. the reason i put "sell" in quotes, regarding Aury, is that, as you say, it was to please (figuratively, 'sell') to her lover. hence arguably she was writing the sort of sadistic things that please most of us guys.

don't you guys get it? pleasing you pleases us... Aury's writing FOR her man mirrors O's serving FOR her lover(s)... it's getting in the giving. Subs find pleasure in the service... but the master has to be worth serving. That's another theme altogether...

Pure, still curious what you're up to?

 

[neonlyte]

don't you guys get it? pleasing you pleases us... Aury's writing FOR her man mirrors O's serving FOR her lover(s)... it's getting in the giving. Subs find pleasure in the service... but the master has to be worth serving. That's another theme altogether...

Pure, still curious what you're up to?

Yes

But... Aury's lover immediately before Paulhan was Edith Thomas, both women describe the relationship as 'intense', I remain unclear as to why it stopped. I wonder if she regarded a lesbian relationship as more publically shocking than writing 'O'.

What is clear is the extent to which she feared losing Paulhan to a younger woman, (he was married with a succession of mistresses), I curious as to whether that fear pushed the writing, a kind of written promise. I'll have to read the book again, I don't recall the alternative endings or the two distinct beginnings, i suspect my teenage mind was busy on what lay between.

ETA: I hope Pure is working up a 'symbolism' thread for SDC

 

[Pure]

hi selena,

i didn't have a big plan, but i found my copy of "O" with various notes, and got to thinking.

it is intriguing to me that "O" is very much in the Sade tradition, unlike most porn, ESP. "bdsm" porn.

neon, i don't have an idea for a discussion, but i'm open: there is much religious symbolism in "O" and of course, by negation, in Sade. howcum no one writes about a cock driving a holy wafer into a butt anymore?

 

[Selena_Kitt]

howcum no one writes about a cock driving a holy wafer into a butt anymore?

there is much religious symbolism because many of those involved in BDSM are seeking a connection to the divine...

 

[Pure]

here's the french

elle se sentait à la lettre le réceptacle d'impureté, l'égout dont parle l'Ecriture.

damn but erotica sounds better in French. anyway, the word 'l'egout' is usually translated as 'sewer.' i'm not sure if that aids in the scripture search. any talk of 'sewers'?