/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18902883]

How did this make it into penguin classics? I barely made it past the intro, its completely vile, and the writing is garbage too.

[Anonymous No.18902940]

>>18902883
lmao it's hilarious you prude

[Anonymous No.18902973]

The original edgelord. It's literal drivel, Penguin Classics needs to be openly mocked for publishing this

[Anonymous No.18903010]

I sometimes mindless watch "booktube" videos and they have a very strange obsession with this man. Mostly girls for some reason. Its come up a lot

[Anonymous No.18903016]

>>18903010
>sasha grey wrote fanfic for it

[Anonymous No.18903031]

The English translations of de Sade is some of the most sterile and boring shit ever.

[Anonymous No.18903041]

>>18902883
Historical significance

[Anonymous No.18903059]

>>18902883
It's fun when you're drinking and taking turns reading passages with the boys

[Anonymous No.18903358]

>>18903031
>he does not appreciate the sublime talents of Wainhouse

[Anonymous No.18903434]

>>18902883
It's pretty bizarre that he gets the attention that he does, but at the same time, he's historically relevant because he called out France's perverse sexual repression a century before Freud showed up.

[Anonymous No.18903504]

>>18903434
he also mildly criticised French revolution and his views on the whole thing are quite interesting and uncommon if you compare him to other writers of that time

[Anonymous No.18903518]

>>18902973
Seriously.
>>18902883
>that cover
Fucking gross.

[Anonymous No.18903530]

>>18902973
>>18903518
Filtered

[Anonymous No.18903534]

>>18903518
it's Man Ray

[Anonymous No.18903594]

>>18903534
>oh don’t worry, it was done by a ~professional~ pervert
>>18903530
Like wheat from chaff faggot

[Anonymous No.18903698]

>>18903594
Let me guess, you also think Freud was advocating for sexual repression when he diagnosed people as having it?

[Anonymous No.18903711]

Don't start Sade by reading 120 Days of Sodom. Try Philosophy in the Boudoir.

[Anonymous No.18903718]

>>18903698
No, I think all of his work became compromised when he started pretending that people that reported childhood sexual abuse were lying about it to protect the perpetrators.

[Anonymous No.18903746]

>>18902883
I bought this during my edgy phase but now that I've decided to be Catholic I have to burn it. At least I never opened the book.

[Anonymous No.18903764]

>>18903718
>No, I think all of his work became compromised
Then you're naive.

[Anonymous No.18903827]

>>18903010
I was obsessed with De Sade for a few weeks after discovering him. I’ve no idea why.

[Anonymous No.18903842]

>>18903827

It's pretty interesting to learn that there was a ur-coomer.

[Anonymous No.18903888]

>>18902883
I masturbated once to a Marquis De Sade book, when I had to do an internship at a bookstore.

[Anonymous No.18903994]

Is there a compilation of his philosophical thought? Don't wanna read through all 120 to fish them out.

[Anonymous No.18904079]

>>18903994
Philosophy in the Boudoir is essentially a concise summary of his thinking.

[Anonymous No.18904104]

>>18903994
His philosophical thought was basically hedonism and egoism

[Anonymous No.18904893]

Because its a imporant peace of history? What excuse does this shit have in being classified as a "classic"?

[Anonymous No.18904960]

>>18904893
t. haven't read it

[Anonymous No.18904972]

>>18903518
The cover is the best part

[Anonymous No.18904975]

>>18904893
Top kek

[Anonymous No.18904977]

>>18904893
Should just be the lyrics from the Smtihs albums in book form, then it would be fine

[Anonymous No.18904994]

>>18903059
For laughing once ass of that is.

[Anonymous No.18905004]

>>18903711
That one is not better. I habe read both.

[Anonymous No.18905015]

>>18902883
It's quite the read yet I would௹t shake that cover about.

[Anonymous No.18905026]

>>18904893
it's a good laugh

[Anonymous No.18905032]

>>18902883

>not skipping ahead to Part 4 for the good shit

Escorted by Desgranges and Duclos, the Duc and Curval make a journey to the cellars with Augustine in the course of that night; her ass has been preserved in excellent condition, 'tis now lashed to tatters, then the two brothers alternately embugger her, but guard their seed, and then the Duc gives her fifty-eight wounds in the buttocks, pours boiling oil into each gash. He drives a hot iron into her cunt, another into her ass, and fucks her wounded charms, his prick sheathed in a sealskin condom which worsens the already lamentable state of her privities. That accomplished, the flesh is peeled away from the bones of her arms and legs, which bones are sawed in several different places, then her nerves are laid bare in four adjacent places, the nerve ends are tied to a short stick which, like a tourniquet, is twisted, thus drawing forth the aforesaid nerves, which are very delicate parts of the human anatomy and, which, when mistreated, cause the patient to suffer much. Augustine's agonies are unheard-of.

She is given some respite and allowed to recruit her strength, then Messieurs resume work, but this time, as the nerves are pulled into sight, they are scraped with the blade of a knife. The friends complete that operation and now move elsewhere; a hole is bored in her throat, her tongue is drawn back, down, and passed through it, 'tis a comical effect, they broil her remaining breast, then, clutching a scalpel, the Duc thrusts his hand into her cunt and cuts through the partition dividing the anus from the vagina; he throws aside the scalpel, reintroduces his hand, and rummaging about in her entrails, forces her to shit through her cunt, another amusing stunt; then, availing himself of the same entrance, he reaches up and tears open her stomach. Next, they concentrate upon her visage: cut away her ears, burn her nasal passages, blind her eyes with molten sealing wax, girdle her cranium, hang her by the hair, attach heavy stones to her feet, and allow her to drop: the top of the skull remains dangling.

She was still breathing when she fell, and the Duc encunted her in this sorry state; he discharged and came away only the more enraged. They split her belly, opened her, and applied fire to her entrails; scalpel in hand, the Président burrows in her chest and harasses her heart, puncturing it in several places. 'Twas only then her soul fled her body; at the age of fifteen years and eight months thus perished one of the most heavenly creatures ever formed by Nature's skillful hand. Etc. Her eulogy.

[Anonymous No.18905040]

>>18905032
This is what it looks like when you are reeeeaaaallly trying for the third nut.

[Anonymous No.18905053]

>>18904994
exactly

[Anonymous No.18905057]

>>18902883
>En art tout est admis, toutes les tendances étant également justifiables, le talent seul a de l’importance.

[Anonymous No.18905126]

>>18905032
Unironically, what was wrong with him?

[Anonymous No.18905149]

>>18905126
Habe you never written anything like that? I know I have.

[Anonymous No.18905155]

[Anonymous No.18905608]

>>18905032

Man, the movie version was really tame compared to this.

[Anonymous No.18905806]

>>18905032
unironically enjoyed this, but this may be because i took a liking to bataille, lyotard & klages lol

[Anonymous No.18905864]

>>18902883
>not the superior classic

[Anonymous No.18906822]

What you angloids don't understand is that de Sade was a great and profound philosopher of the human condition, who would mask and illustrate his work in hidden allegory. I will provide you with some examples, but will post this separately for the sake of the bump.

[Anonymous No.18906842]

>>18906822
Gimme elaboration

[Anonymous No.18906865]

>>18905608

The film is effectively an adaptation of the first part only, the only part that was completed. The last half-hour of so is a relatively weak take on the latter Murderous Passions, while the poop-eating in the middle basically corresponds to the Complex Passions. MANGIA! MANGIAAAA!

[Anonymous No.18906917]

>>18906822

I am this anon.

>>18905864

Let us first take the example of pic rel. In the book, we follow Justine, a maiden who has committed herself to a life of chastity and virtue, and has forsworn all pleasures of the flesh in favour of an existence in congruence to the traditional Christian ideals of womanhood. Throughout the course of the novel, she is continuously raped, exploited, assaulted, and made a whore of fortune. Meanwhile, her sister, Julie, leads a life of abject vice, and yet, comes out the winner of her story; she ends with wealth, land, and power.

Now, what is the point of this strange book? It can and must be understood in terms of proto-feminist critique, for lack of a better phrase. The point of the book is this; contrary to popular cultural belief, a woman can become the victim of rape and dishonour without dressing, or talking in a provocative manner, harbouring erotic intent or a long history of sexual promiscuity. She needn't wear makeup, be a tease, or anything else. Her destiny is ultimately and absolutely, be she a whore or a madonna, within the power of the men who surround her.

This concept is perhaps banal, but to the witch-burning, dowry-dealing audience of his time it was extremely novel and progressive. Indeed, even in our own times, as much as the knowledge of a woman's rape not being her own fault seems a self-evident truth, oft we find ourselves, in some way, insinuating blame on the victim. It is therefore helpful to have an illustration in the form of a novel such as this, to drive the point home.

Sorry for my bad English, but I hope this made sense. If you found it interesting, or if I can be bothered, perhaps I will talk about the philosophy of the 120 days and its connexion with the enlightenment etc.

[Anonymous No.18906924]

>>18905032
jesus christ

[Anonymous No.18907050]

>>18905032
how can somebody look at this and the french revolution and STILL not realise that napoleon was a gift sent down from the heavens to save that nightmarish place from being completely devoured by hell

he saved the future

[Anonymous No.18907055]

>>18904977
unironically
but i love it nonetheless

[Anonymous No.18907161]

>>18906917
really fucking good effort-post, anon

tell us more

[Anonymous No.18907599]

>>18907161

Give me a moment, brother.

[Anonymous No.18907617]

>>18905155
ollol

[Anonymous No.18907630]

>>18902883
Might as well ask how the movie got into the Criterion Collection

[Anonymous No.18907637]

>>18905608
but it had Nazis

[Anonymous No.18907654]

>>18905032
really...

[Anonymous No.18907682]

>>18907050
Don’t know what your saying. Sade didn’t like the French Revolution.

[Anonymous No.18907697]

>>18907161
>>18907599

P1

Thank you, brother. Since you enjoyed Justine, let us read the 120 Days together.

The key vice of the Anglo-Saxon world, as it respects literary criticism as of now, is the tendency to divorce a text from its context in space and time. We must, therefore, be careful to act with the opposite priority in mind, and consider the 120 Days of Sodom against the backdrop of the French Enlightenment, and particularly, as a response to, or, more precisely, a retaliation against Rousseau.

Particularly, de Sade is contesting with Rousseau's conception of the human, and of the human 'state of nature'. Rousseau operates within the framework of traditional Christianity (though he would never admit to this), which posits that the human being is, essentially and naturally good, and can only become bad through corrupting influence. Thus, in a state of nature, bereft of these corrupting influences, the human person will behave with an uncorrupted goodness and virtue.

This is nonsense for a multitude of reasons, not least the strides in archaeology which have been taken since the time of Rousseau. The contention which de Sade makes with it, however, is obviously not drawn from these sources. Instead, de Sade operates within the framework of Augustinian-Hobbesian conception of human nature. Augustine's view (which has come to be the mainline Catholic doctrine through his influence), was essentially that human nature is corrupt and evil by default (by virtue of original sin), and must be quelled and tamed through a constant enforcement of virtue by societal pressure and educational mechanisms. Hobbes (though he too would never admit to his Catholic influences) applies this theorem to the science of politics, famously insisting that in the absence of a strong, chauvinistic government which enforces the social mechanisms described heretofore, humanity would revert into primordial chaos, and life would be rendered, as he said "nasty, brutish, and short".

The genius of de Sade's take here in in his overt atheism. For him, man is an animal like any other, and vicious animal at that. The capacity for reason and sagacity do not guard him from his atavistic tendencies, but rather, allow him to devise cruelties and extremes which no brute beast could ever fathom. For de Sade, the existence of social mechanisms does indeed suppress the realisation of this bestial desire on the public stage, but, importantly, de Sade points out that if one is out of the reach and sight of the enforcers of said mechanisms, he is free to indulge his animal fancy.

[Anonymous No.18907717]

>>18903010
Yeah weird hahaha, I wonder why women would be interested in that kind of stuff, that seems really unhealthy

[Anonymous No.18907721]

>>18907682
yet he embodied it perfectly

[Anonymous No.18907729]

>>18907697

P2

Free to indulge his fancy, and in many instances, will indeed revert to his animal state.

Let us move on now. Why then the gratuity of the book, as seen in this passage?

>>18905032

Why not just explain these ideas by word or print, a I have done here? This too is a device, which allows de Sade to illustrate and substantiate his theories as to the innate cruelty and excess of the human animal. Through depiction and description, he proves the despicable excess of which man is capable. It matters not that these actions are performed only (ostensibly) by characters on the page, because the mere fact of de Sade's capability to even conceive of them serves as proof enough of the viciousness of which man is capable. It is like Schopenhauer said of Dante; "the man never went to Hell, so where then did he learn the tortures and horrors which populate the Inferno? It is simple. He observed reality. Of the world and of human nature." (I paraphrase here)

This conception of man as a counterbalance to that of Rousseau is fascinating for multiple philosophical implications. Besides its refutation of the key tenets of the enlightenment, it also seems to give premonitions against Marx, and anticipates, simultaneously, Nietzsche and Freud, in their conceptions and dissections of the human soul.

I hope that you have enjoyed, because it seems that I have writing for just one person. Again, I apologise for my poor English, if it has made what I am expressing here any more difficult to understand that it must needs be.

[Anonymous No.18907806]

>>18904893
it sells. Do you actually believe the west has any literary work, beside Don Quixote, that could be considered a classic?

[Anonymous No.18907821]

>>18907729

I haven't read your posts carefully but basically, we just have different priorities. You seem to be engaged in a serious explanation of the philosophical significance of Sade's writings, whereas I just enjoy re-posting the book's single edgiest passage on /lit/ a few times a year, just to see the reactions.

[Anonymous No.18907894]

>>18902883

[Anonymous No.18908199]

>>18907821

Perhaps. Nothing wrong with what you're doing really. It's good anyway, because it gives the Marquis some more of his very well-earned attention. Definitely one of my favourites, in the French language anyway.

[Anonymous No.18908271]

>>18906917
>Her destiny is ultimately and absolutely, be she a whore or a madonna, within the power of the men who surround her.
To some degree yes to some degree no. By being a promiscuous whore you are much more likely to find yourself in a nasty situation. Do exceptions exist? Sure. Doesn't disprove the rule.
>It is therefore helpful to have an illustration in the form of a novel such as this, to drive the point home.
Yeah let's discuss the horror of rape and man at his worst by writing smut about it.

T. Not an Anglo

[Anonymous No.18908285]

I've officially been on 4chan long enough to watch internet rightists go from the "shitting dick nipplies shock humor FYAD pedophile goreporn kill yourself" scene to the "OMG, I can't believe these disgusting displays of sexual behavior, this offends my subjective moral standards and must be censored!!!!!! Think of the poor children!!!!!!!" moralfagging scene. What happened to the right?

[Anonymous No.18908299]

>>18907697
>>18907729
I have to say, while I appreciated your posts and the context they provide for his writings, I don't find them his works any less detestable. Making the point that humans can be cruel and aren't innately innocent and pure is worthwhile (especially at the time), but the larger conclusions that he reaches about seeking pleasure even if others get hurt being justifiable is pretty damn close to what I'd define as being evil.

[Anonymous No.18908304]

Christcel filtered by the slightest implication that his cult is not as divine as he pretends

[Anonymous No.18908319]

>>18907729
Kant refutes just about everything you have said. You are reaching so hard to justify MdS when it's obvious he was just a pervert expressing himself in writing. Much like Jews in Hollywood. There's no philosophical lessons to be gleened from any of this.
>Man is capable of great evil therefore he is by nature evil
You, MdS, and Voltaire are all basically midwits who don't understand the core precepts of logic and fall into fallacy after fallacy. There's too many in your pedantic diatribe to even begin addressing them.

[Anonymous No.18908391]

>>18908271

I can understand what you're saying but find it impossible to agree that a person engaging in voluntary sexual acts somehow invites or deserves violence being visited upon them. I think that to depict the horror goes a long way to the ends of instilling aversion for it (this is the manner in which films about the holocaust, or slavery work, for instance)

>>18908299

This is a decent point. It gets to a point of being so visceral that it defies logical analysis. Nonetheless, that particular last point is not something which I myself tried to defend, and don't believe that it was so much de Sade's opinion as it was an opinion put into the mouth of one of his characters, for the sake exploring the animal evil inherent to mankind, and the manner in which the rational offices serve rather than assuage it.

>>18908319

What a cop out lmao. Wave your hand and namedrop Kant and then dismiss what's been written here, then prance around and declare victory with your usual teutonic lack of wit.

More to the point, I'm simply explaining the opinions of de Sade. I don't think that man is inherently evil, because there is very obviously no such thing as evil or immoral behaviour.

[Anonymous No.18908476]

>>18905032
what the fuck is this shit
this is truly vile.

[Anonymous No.18908484]

>>18908476

It's a fictional fucking story that never took place and therefore in that sense is more harmless than a gore video. Welcome to 4chan, enjoy your stay.

[Anonymous No.18908491]

>>18908391
>find it impossible to agree that a person engaging in voluntary sexual acts somehow invites or deserves violence being visited upon them
I never suggested that at all. Now you're strawmanning.
>there is very obviously no such thing as evil or immoral behaviour
Lol I'm not engaging seriously because it's late but you already know well that I'm right. If you don't you just haven't read Kant. Stay ignorant. Keep thinking MdS is a serious philosophical voice and throwing ad hominems and all other logical fallacies around. Being so openly pedantic doesn't help your argument.

[Anonymous No.18908499]

>>18908391
>there is very obviously no such thing as evil or immoral behaviour
So there's nothing wrong with raping Justine then.

[Anonymous No.18908503]

>>18905032

[Anonymous No.18908512]

>>18905032
now post something from Juliette

[Anonymous No.18908564]

>>18908499

In the absence of a final axiom upon which we might objectively base our moral systems, then the best that we can hope to achieve is a system of pragmatic values by which a society can be organised, in such a way that allows ends of functionality and happiness to be maximised. This is my opinion, coming from a standpoint of atheistic morality. I am not personally an atheist, but this would be the reality of an atheistic moral system.

>>18908491

>You already know well that I'm right!!!11!!!!1

About what, precisely? What I have engaged with here is just literary criticism. The ends are to help people understand and better appreciate a work of literature. You have entered an otherwise productive thread, and proceeded to thrash about (like a retard) accusing me of god knows what, and for what reason? That I understand a text which you clearly don't? You missed the point of the post (retarded), you perceived a moral debate where there was none (retarded), you've piled claim upon claim of victory and rectitude where there's none to be had (retarded), and you're sat here, proclaiming MY ignorance, whilst propping up your entire opposition to my ANALYSIS OF A BOOK by namedropping Kant. What bearing does Kant and his flaccid categorical imperative have on the discussion at hand, you complete midwit?

[Anonymous No.18908660]

>>18907729
>>18908391
You know what fuck it. Let's break down your pathetic apology for de Sade bit by bit since you're such a pedantic pseud and unfortunately people ITT seem to be buying your snake oil.
>This is nonsense for a multitude of reasons, not least the strides in archaeology which have been taken since the time of Rousseau.
Wow really BTFO Rousseau here.
>The genius of de Sade's take here in in his overt atheism. For him, man is an animal like any other, and vicious animal at that. The capacity for reason and sagacity do not guard him from his atavistic tendencies, but rather, allow him to devise cruelties and extremes which no brute beast could ever fathom.
So he's not like animal.
Also capacity for reason and "sagacity" aren't inherently tied up with guarding against atavistic tendencies. But they do often accomplish this as is seen in the opposite of the categorical imperative where you might not commit an atrocity because it would engender hardship upon you (i.e. killing your neighbor who has burly brothers or raping a woman with AIDS). This isn't to refute the categorical imperative. The opposite seems to the be rule for most human behavior as we frequently engage in acts of kindness and benevolence that don't have any quantitative benefit for us other than it feels good. But quantitatively you can also look at the fact that most humans don't rape and kill each other.
>if one is out of the reach and sight of the enforcers of said mechanisms, he is free to indulge his animal fancy
Yeah because there's so much archeological evidence of people committing heinous acts as a quotidian practice (don't even try to come in here with some anecdote about Carthaginians the exception doesn't prove the rule (AGAIN fuck why is this so hard for you to understand? Actually, I know why and if we're throwing generalizations about and employing the "undistributed middle term" then I could just as easily say that the French frequently discredit themselves by over indulgence in histrionics and sexual deviancy as emblematic of culture)). But there isn't.
>He observed reality. Of the world and of human nature."
A-FUCKING-GAIN: just because an isolate human does something does NOT make it human nature you absolute MONG.
>Besides its refutation of the key tenets of the enlightenment
Wew lad. Just becuase MdS badly 'refutes' Rousseau doesn't mean he has BTFO the key tenets of the enlightenment lol. Rousseau is basically a sideshow of the enlightenment anyway and you refuse to engage with the heavy weights such as Kant and Descartes and Leibniz who would also 1000% agree with me that what you are defending (and what I believe is a mis-characterization of MdS's intent) is basically dressed up smut with no more intellectual value than a fucking Big Mac.

[Anonymous No.18908679]

>>18904893
Idiot, Morrissey's autobio was on the level of Homer or Shakespeare

[Anonymous No.18908690]

>>18905032
Absolutely disgusting. Only a swift clean bullet to the back of the head cures a mind like that

[Anonymous No.18908694]

>>18907697
>>18907729
based af
glad to see someone who knows what they're talking about

unfortunately some undergrad is babbling

[Anonymous No.18908700]

>>18906917
Lol. This is your brain on contemporary academia.

[Anonymous No.18908725]

>>18908694
I'm grad actually and refute something I said or just continue like the French fag in throwing ad hominems and logical fallacies my way instead of engaging with my arguemnts.

[Anonymous No.18908738]

>>18908564
>What I have engaged with here is just literary criticism.
And in doing so you have thrown about a lot of extremely problematic assumptions that lesser minds here seem to have lapped up namely that human nature is akin to what MdS wrote about. You're a snake in the grass and I'm here to destroy you.

[Anonymous No.18908793]

>>18903504
It's funny, he actually survived the Terror and all the public executions because he was imprisoned so early

[Anonymous No.18908803]

>>18908660

P1

God save us all from your incoherent nonsense.

>Wow really BTFO Rousseau here.

Yes. The piles and piles of caved in skulls and arrow-pitted skeletons which survive from prehistoric times does, in fact, serve as direct evidence which disproves the thesis of a peaceful and non-violent state of nature. This serves to discredit, in turn, the conception of man as an inherently benevolent creature.

>So he's not like animal.

You have missed the point completely. I will spell it out more clearly. Man is animal, and is driven by the same essential drives as any animal, on a subconscious level. These are the desire to reproduce, the desire for status, and the desire to collect resources. The fact of his possessing rationality and foresight DOES allow him to avoid conflict and harm, as you've outlined. HOWEVER (and pay attention, because this is the entire point) those some faculties which set him apart from the other animals may also be perverted to the ends of engendering harm and conflict of a scale and kind infinitely greater than a lion, a snake, or a T-rex. Perversion of the human offices is the unique source of evil in mankind. This is not eve de Sade. It is as basic and fundamental Aristotle and Augustine, and provides the scaffolding of Dante, as well.

>don't even try to come in here with some anecdote about Carthaginians

What are you even trying to express here? The point to which you are responding scarcely requires justification. It is just a simple fact of life that in the absence of punishment or the potential for punishment, moral boundaries are thrown out the window. This might be as small scale as stealing a chocolate from a store with security cameras, or as large scale as resorting to cannibalism in the event of a mine collapsing with workers trapped inside. The fact that this point went over your head (or was even debatable to you for that matter) has betrayed the fact of your adolescence.

>just because an isolate human does something does NOT make it human nature you absolute MONG.

Yep. But that wasn't the point :^). The point is that any evil conceivable by the human mind is a product of human nature, by simple virtue of the fact of its being a product of the brain with which humanity is naturally endowed.

>Just becuase MdS badly 'refutes' Rousseau doesn't mean he has BTFO the key tenets of the enlightenment lol.

I thought at first that you were an angry German, but I can see now that you're a yankee in his late teens. I simplify the process for you. The state of nature and conception of man as inherently benevolent is refuted, and well-refuted, despite your unsubstantiated insistence to the contrary. If that is the case, then some of the most important ideals of the enlightenment (namely the obsolescence of hierarchy and governmental authority, and the implied right of every person to live in the absence of these, amongst other social constraints) is naturally corroded as well.

[Anonymous No.18908822]

>>18908803

P2

Thus from a refutation of the cornerstone of Rousseau's thinking, a critique of the ideals of the enlightenment more broadly issues forth. As to your bizarre vomiting of the names Kant, Descartes, and Leibniz, I haven't much to say. They have no obvious relevance to the literary discussion at hand, and for all your bombastic exasperation you've failed to suggest any for them.

>>18908738

>I'm here to destroy you.

I sincerely wish you good luck, because by the looks of things, you're in dire need of it. I am explaining the meaning of the works of de Sade to those who are interested. I can see that I've upset some Christian fanatics in the process, but I reserve the right to doubt that a little learning will be the cause of some mass-rape anytime soon.

>>18908694

thank you brother. I'm glad that my efforts haven't been to no end.

[Anonymous No.18908847]

>>18908738

Also, to follow up

>>18908803
>>18908822

I would add that it serves you little to lie about your level of education. Between your bombast, the black-and-white simplicity of your thought, your inability to name any logical fallacy besides ad hominem whilst simultaneously spewing them without provocation, you have outed yourself quite obviously as either a highschooler, or a teenager in his first year of university.

[Anonymous No.18908857]

>>18908822
> I can see that I've upset some Christian fanatics in the process, but I reserve the right to doubt that a little learning will be the cause of some mass-rape anytime soon.
Fallacies. Fallacies everywhere.

[Anonymous No.18908868]

>>18908803

Oops important mistake.

>This might be as small scale as stealing a chocolate from a store with security cameras

I meant a store WITH NO security cameras.

[Anonymous No.18908893]

>>18908857

Let's talk about fallacies :)

You implied that my teaching of the thoughts of a dead man (de Sade) somehow makes me a "dangerous" or "problematic" "snake in the grass" who needs to be "destroyed". So the implication of your statement is that if discussion of his ideas in a reasonable and thoughtful manner is normalised, then it would engender the practise of 'immoral' behaviours associated with his name and works.

When you get into your first year of university, you might learn about something called a 'slippery slope fallacy' :). And congratulations! Because what you've just done is textbook example of one! See! I am a good teacher!

[Anonymous No.18908944]

>>18908803
>inherently benevolent
people aren't good because they are generally kind, they are good because they can learn to be.

[Anonymous No.18908947]

>>18908944

That is what Augustine/Hobbes/de Sade contend.

[Anonymous No.18908948]

>>18908944
kind that is.
learn to be kind.

[Anonymous No.18908957]

>>18908947
I like Hobbes.

[Anonymous No.18909050]

>>18908957

Same dude

[Anonymous No.18909571]

>>18907721
the Revolution did not embody him enough, it failed him.

[Anonymous No.18909589]

>>18904893
>it's real
lmao im going to get this

[Anonymous No.18909591]

>>18908319
He doesn't know about Kant avec Sade...

[Anonymous No.18909651]

>>18908512
>Minski is my name; upon my father’s death I inherited his colossal riches and Nature had proportioned my physical faculties and my tastes to the favors wherewith fortune now gratified me. Sensing myself made for better things than to vegetate in the back country of an obscure province like this that was my birthplace, I traveled; the whole wide world seemed too narrow for my desires, they were limitless and the universe cramped them: born libertine and impious, debauched and perverse, bloodthirsty and ferocious, I visited a thousand far-flung lands to learn their vices, and no sooner adopted one than I refined it. ... I brought back penchants so dangerous that they condemned me to the stake in Spain, to be broken on the wheel in France, hanged in England, drawn and quartered in Italy; wealth is a guarantee against anything. I crossed over to Africa; there I became most fully aware that what you so foolishly call depravity is neither more nor less than the natural state of man and its particular details usually the result of the environment into which Nature has cast him. Those noble children of the sun laughed at me when I rebuked them for their barbarous treatment of women. ‘And what do you suppose a woman is,’ they would reply, ‘if not a domestic animal Nature gives us for the double purpose of satisfying our needs and our desires? What better claim to our consideration has she than the cattle and swine in our barnyards? The only difference we see here,’ those sensible people would tell me, ‘is that our livestock may merit some indulgence thanks to their mildness and docility, whereas women merit harshness only, in view of their congenital and everlasting dishonesty, mischievousness, treachery, and perfidy. We fuck them, don’t we? and is there anything better, indeed, is there anything else you can do with a woman you have fucked than use her as you do your ox or a mule, as a beast of burden, or kill her for food?’ In a word, it was there I observed man in his constitutionally vicious, instinctively cruel, and studiously ferocious form, and as such he pleased me, as such he seemed to me in closer harmony with Nature, and I preferred these characteristics to the simple crudeness of the American, to the knavery of the European, to the cynical depravation of the Oriental. Having killed men on the hunt with the first, having drunk wine and lain with the second, having done much fucking with the third, I ate human flesh with my brave African comrade; I have preserved a taste for it; all this wreckage you see around you are relics of the creatures I devour; I eat no other sort of meat; I trust you shall enjoy tonight’s feast, there will be a fifteen-year-old boy on the table. I fucked him yesterday, he should be delicious.

[Anonymous No.18909655]

>>18902883
I hate that fucking cover. it's the visual equivalent of explaining a joke after it didn't land.

[Anonymous No.18909659]

>>18909651
>I have two harems: the first contains two hundred girls from five to twenty years old; when by dint of lewd use they are sufficiently mortified, I eat them. Another tenscore women of from twenty to thirty are in the second; you’ll see how they are treated.
b-b-based??

[Anonymous No.18909675]

>>18905032
This is fucking disgusting. Catholics were right banning this shit.

[Anonymous No.18909950]

>all these anons ITT who don't understand de Sade

He wasn't a pornographer, people. He was a provocateur. There's a big difference between the two.

It's like that scene in the movie The Innocents, when the boy kisses the governess good night on the lips, and she is both shocked and sexually aroused by it. She looks at the boy lying in his bed smiling at her and she can't tell whether his eyes suggest innocence or sexual desire at her. He is, of course, a prepubescent boy, so the feelings are all in her head, and she is projecting them because of her own repression. That's the whole of de Sade in a nutshell.

His books are not meant to be enjoyed, but to show everyone that there are people who enjoy them. de Sade himself might have enjoyed himself while writing them, but he is keenly aware that he and everyone else enjoying them are sick. de Sade does not vouch for a world in which such activities are freely and openly committed without resistance. Rather, through displaying such activities in a fictional format, he accelerates the sickness in others so that others can either finally become aware of it in themselves and cure themselves of it, or so that others can arrive at their own destruction quicker, in both cases leading to less sickness in the world.

[Anonymous No.18909958]

>all these anons ITT who don't understand de Sade

He wasn't a pornographer, people. He was a provocateur. There's a big difference between the two.

It's like that scene in the movie The Innocents, when the boy kisses the governess good night on the lips, and she is both shocked and sexually aroused by it. She looks at the boy lying in his bed smiling at her and she can't tell whether his eyes suggest innocence or sexual desire at her. He is, of course, a prepubescent boy, so the feelings are all in her head, and she is projecting them because of her own repression. That's the whole of de Sade in a nutshell.

His books are not meant to be enjoyed, but to show everyone that there are people who enjoy them. de Sade himself might have enjoyed himself while writing them, but he is keenly aware that he and everyone else enjoying them are sick. de Sade does not vouch for a world in which such activities are freely and openly committed without resistance. Rather, through displaying such activities in a fictional format, he accelerates the sickness in others so that others can either finally become aware of it in themselves and cure themselves of it, or so that others can arrive at their own destruction quicker, in both cases leading to less sickness in the world.

[Anonymous No.18909998]

>>18904893
Some girls really are bigger than others

[Anonymous No.18910139]

I give the win to De Sade poster, for having more comprehensive writing, and no other reason. The elegance of argument is the only virtue of a debate where neither party can be persuaded.

[Anonymous No.18910179]

>>18905032
i find none of this disgusting lol

[Anonymous No.18910193]

>>18908738
the christcuck strikes and misses the point completely (as usual)

[Anonymous No.18911497]

>>18908319
I know you will not justify anything because you are just a namedropping retard, but how does Kant come any close to refuting human nature in natural state? Logic is only acquired when man is out of nature, the pre-culture man was literally an animal capable of doing anything to satiate his volitions. That you fail to see the basic of reduction of consciousness inherent to logical consciousness betrays your total lack of knowledge concerning it.

[Anonymous No.18911606]

>>18909651
I like how Minski's dick was so big it split girls in half.

[Anonymous No.18911976]

Anyone interested in the philosophy of de Sade should read Klossowski's essay "The Philosopher Villain". The most accurate and comprehensive critical work on de Sade that anyone's written imo. Really made me appreciate him more, especially the "boring" bits (which, according to Klossowski, are the most pornographic)

[Anonymous No.18911994]

>vile
Who invited Twitter here

[Anonymous No.18912010]

>>18909958
So, in truth, 4chan makes saints of men...bros....we're gmi

[Anonymous No.18912194]

>>18911976
Is “The Philosopher Villain” a chapter in his Sade my neighbour?

[Anonymous No.18912241]

>>18911976
I will check it out but I am deeply suspicious of any French thinking at this point. They all do this
>especially the "boring" bits (which, according to Klossowski, are the most pornographic)
>Ahh you see, it is actually at my most ____ that I am the least ____! For by confronting ____, are we not NOT confronting ____ at all?

Yeah yeah we fucking get it. Beneath every typically French utterance like this, if you just scratch the surface, you'll find that they're embarrassingly ignorant of the basic parameters of what they're writing about. They will make obvious, amateurish, sophomoric mistakes in one hand while also waxing maximum opaque with the other. I still value their thoughts most of the time and I am not joining the equally philistine (from the other direction) Anglo camp, but I have started to truly hate the French. They are primarily posing, secondarily doing philosophy. Sometimes good philosophy makes it through anyway, that's all.

[Anonymous No.18912502]

>>18912241
Generalizations are grounded on particulars. You should show us a particular case fitting into it.

[Anonymous No.18912580]

>>18902883
Filtered

[Anonymous No.18912672]

>>18910193
What was the point?

[Anonymous No.18912688]

>>18905032
No way she was still alive until the end there.

[Anonymous No.18912746]

>>18908893
>So the implication of your statement is that if discussion of his ideas in a reasonable and thoughtful manner
It wasn't reasonable though. You made a number of specious claims to the nature of human morality which under girded your argument that MdS is making a point other than producing smut for deranged minds to indulge in. At one point you even declared morality doesn't exist! You built a house on a bad foundation. Sorry I triggered you by pointing that out.

[Anonymous No.18912847]

>>18905032
brehs...

[Anonymous No.18912849]

>>18909958
So you're saying De Sade was a moral accelerationist?

[Anonymous No.18912857]

what word do they use for "shit" in it?
i read one that was like "he cut a nice turd" and it made me lol everytime

[Anonymous No.18912970]

>De Sade still making prudes seethe to this day
it's just fiction boys don't lose sleep over it
cheers x

[Anonymous No.18913087]

>>18912746

cute argument lmao how long did it take you to think of that one?

>Sorry I triggered

oh do be quiet. see:

>>18910139
>>18910193
>>18911497

No one is persuaded. What I've said made perfect sense and has no moral undertone within the proper context. Just accept that you lost rather than trying to claim the last laugh and be happy that you've learned something.

[Anonymous No.18913232]

>>18912194
Yes. Actually it was a new essay added to the second edition, but that's the only one translated into English anyway.

[Anonymous No.18913404]

>>18905864
ok

[Anonymous No.18913652]

>>18913087
Thanks for the seethe it made this thread memorable

[Anonymous No.18913820]

>>18902883
you're just a pussy

[Anonymous No.18913873]

>>18912849
Yes. De Sade was a brilliant satirist. His works exposed the widespread sexual repression in France, exposed the cause of that repression (Christianity), and exposed the weakness of the state to do anything about it. And the reason for that exposure, for satire in general, is psychiatric. It's either that, or recurring bloodbaths à la Révolution.

[Anonymous No.18914229]

>>18912241
I hear what you're saying, but in Klossowski's case his main argument is that de Sade is trying to reveal the "integral monstrosity" in Enlightenment thinking, i.e. that every recourse to the generality of language is founded upon an irrational "singularity", which is akin to the absence of thought. (This is already a very French Nietzschean sentiment, so if you're not interested in that kind of philosophy then this probably isn't for you.)

So according to Klossowski the whole point of the tediousness of de Sade's repetitive and stereotyped language is that it makes the mind drift off and fall into the very "void" that is prior to the generality of language, and it's in that sense that his writing is pornographic and "sensual" (as opposed to intellectual). When you're least aroused and least attentive to de Sade's language, you're the most susceptible to his technique, in other words.

[Anonymous No.18914256]

>>18913087
>cute argument lmao how long did it take you to think of that one?
So you don't have a response to my argument? Just another ad hominem.

[Anonymous No.18914368]

>>18906917
Nice take. Weird to think that such an enlightening moral could be reflected by the same author who wrote the passage I read above

[Anonymous No.18914380]

>>18914229
Can't we say Sade would express the true political epistemology: force, power, violence? This suits likewise the Nietzschean nobility (his anthropology in Genealogy of Morals for example, matching force with creation and the construction of society).
This expression reveals its reality in the Enlightenment era, in secularism, modernity. The moral ground is espitemologically null. The rational, scientific era being founded on regicide, deicide.

[Anonymous No.18914388]

>>18906917
terrible take

[Anonymous No.18914396]

>>18914368
It is weird because that (the take here >>18906917) has nothing to do with Sade's intentions.

[Anonymous No.18914420]

>>18905032
fellas i'm starting to understand the book burnings now

[Anonymous No.18914457]

>>18905032
oh

[Anonymous No.18914488]

>>18905032
based frog

[Anonymous No.18914547]

>>18914256
Just take the L dude
Guy is clearly very intelligent and has made his case way more eloquently and cogently than anyone else in this thread, you gotta learn when to just bow out.

[Anonymous No.18914641]

>>18914380
Yes totally, and to push it further I'd say de Sade (in this Nietzschean vein) is trying to show how thought / language is merely another expression of force, or a way for force, the highest passion, to express itself. By turning language into an act or activity, he reveals its monstrous nature. It's why he intentionally employs the syntax and language of Enlightenment thinkers for the description of monotonous sex acts: so he can transform them back into the passions from which they originate.

[Anonymous No.18914658]

>>18907697
>>18907729
nice, glad to see there are still some high-quality posts on /lit/

[Anonymous No.18914688]

>>18914396
>>18914388
>>18913652
>>18914256

fuck ur so pathetic. Get humiliated on an anonymous mongolian basket weaving forum then proceeding to sperg out, cuss the paint off the walls, and samefag your way to a pitiful attempt at a last laugh.

>u don't have a response to my argument!

what argument? these are just words. You emote where you should be rationalising, you accuse where you should be suggesting, you insist where you should consider and you seethe where you should admit defeat. stay mad

[Anonymous No.18914841]

>>18904893
Morrissey refused to let them publish it all unless it went straight to the classic series. chad move desu, it's amazing it actually worked

[Anonymous No.18915225]

>>18914688
Bingo. Kantcel is still probably checking this thread daily.

[Anonymous No.18915285]

>>18905032

[Anonymous No.18915324]

>>18902883
The only De Sade I enjoy is Sasha.

[Anonymous No.18915356]

>>18906917
is this just headcannon or did sade ever give any indication he isnt just writing torture porn for his fap sessions? I mean you can pull out meaning from his books but personally I think he wasnt that deep

[Anonymous No.18915611]

>>18905032
>cut away her ears, burn her nasal passages, blind her eyes with molten sealing wax, girdle her cranium, hang her by the hair, attach heavy stones to her feet, and allow her to drop: the top of the skull remains dangling.

[Anonymous No.18915634]

>>18906917
>a woman's rape not being her own fault
fuck off you silly cunt

[Anonymous No.18915649]

>>18915634
>the nerves are pulled into sight, they are scraped with the blade of a knife. The friends complete that operation and now move elsewhere; a hole is bored in her throat, her tongue is drawn back, down, and passed through it, 'tis a comical effect

[Anonymous No.18915781]

lmao everybody here acting disturbed at mds when there's way worse shit posted on this site daily

hownu.ru faggots lmao

[Anonymous No.18916282]

Or this

[Anonymous No.18916306]

>>18902883
120 days of sodom is far from his best work, he wrote it purely to keep himself occupied with no regards to its qualities. I guess it kind of became the most famous because of its gratuitousness

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fE2e4BSrFro

[Anonymous No.18916317]

>>18915781
MDS is more grotesque than body modification e-zine and ogrish videos. No cap.

[Anonymous No.18916480]

>>18916317
play lifeweb
it's more grotesque than anything mds wrote

[Anonymous No.18916541]

As a self-described sadist I think Sade did touch on something important but he’s vastly overestimating it.
I enjoy ryona and find it sexually arousing but I’m also an otherwise good and decent person that helps whenever I can.
Yes, people can be downright sadistic but he’s also ignoring the other side of human nature, which is altruistic and empathetic, and I’m willing to venture that the good outweighed the bad in most cases.

[Anonymous No.18916637]

As other anons have already said, Sade’s writings only make sense in the context of the Enlightenment.
Sade was writing about how decadent the aristocrats of the ancien regime we’re, he was well-positioned to do so on the subject because he wasn’t an aristocrat himself.
120 Days of Sodom is satire on the ruling class of 18th century France, it’s no coincidence that the libertines are a count (nobility), a minister (administration) and a bishop (the Church), all portrayed as exceedingly cruel monsters.
His writings are essentially a tacit endorsement of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, he too though they had to go.
This is why he remains so popular in his native France, which is extremely anti-Monarchist and pretty anti-clerical too.

[Anonymous No.18916645]

>>18908285
>What happened to the right?
Never had any principles to begin with

[Anonymous No.18916650]

>>18916637
>which is extremely anti-Monarchist and pretty anti-clerical too
No.

[Anonymous No.18916679]

>>18906917
You overthinking this.
Its porn. Written by some prevented aristocrat. He probably got off on it. For actually doing any of this stuff would get him executed. Even his orgy's landed him in prison. He was powerful but even he could not get away with anything close to this. >>18905032 Your trying to find meaning in the clouds. There is none.

[Anonymous No.18916681]

>>18907637
>but it had Nazis
Why?

[Anonymous No.18916698]

>>18916637
>because he wasn’t an aristocrat himself
Yea he was. He was pretty well off for a time as well.

[Anonymous No.18917907]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18917941]

>>18916681
idk

[Anonymous No.18917942]

>>18905032
so, it's basically guro hentai?

[Anonymous No.18919703]

bump

[Anonymous No.18919745]

>>18907729
>it seems that I have writing for just one person.
nono, continue if you have more.
Is this your own reading or is it inspired by SL?

[Anonymous No.18919781]

>>18906917
>>18907697
>>18907729
>>18911976
>>18914229
>>18914380
>>18914641
Quality posts