What do you think?
Rate this book
Justine ou Les Malheurs de la vertu
Rejetant la douce nature rousseauiste, Sade dévoile le mal qui est en nous et dans la vie.
La vertueuse Justine fait la confidence de ses malheurs et demeure jusque dans les plus scabreux détails l'incarnation de la vertu. Apologie du crime, de la liberté des corps comme des esprits, de la cruauté, « extrême sensibilité des organes connue seulement des êtres délicats », l'oeuvre du marquis de Sade étonne ou scandalise. « Elle paraît bien n'être, dit Klossowski, qu'un seul cri désespéré, lancé à l'image de la virginité inaccessible, cri enveloppé et comme enchâssé dans un cantique de blasphèmes. »
C'est aussi une oeuvre d'une poésie délirante et pleine d'humour noir.
La vertueuse Justine fait la confidence de ses malheurs et demeure jusque dans les plus scabreux détails l'incarnation de la vertu. Apologie du crime, de la liberté des corps comme des esprits, de la cruauté, « extrême sensibilité des organes connue seulement des êtres délicats », l'oeuvre du marquis de Sade étonne ou scandalise. « Elle paraît bien n'être, dit Klossowski, qu'un seul cri désespéré, lancé à l'image de la virginité inaccessible, cri enveloppé et comme enchâssé dans un cantique de blasphèmes. »
C'est aussi une oeuvre d'une poésie délirante et pleine d'humour noir.
378 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1787
About the author
Marquis de Sade
550 books2,061 followersA preoccupation with sexual violence characterizes novels, plays, and short stories that Donatien Alphonse François, comte de Sade but known as marquis de Sade, of France wrote. After this writer derives the word sadism, the deriving of sexual gratification from fantasies or acts that involve causing other persons to suffer physical or mental pain.
This aristocrat, revolutionary politician, and philosopher exhibited famous libertine lifestyle.
His works include dialogues and political tracts; in his lifetime, he published some works under his own name and denied authorship of apparently anonymous other works. His best erotic works combined philosophical discourse with pornography and depicted fantasies with an emphasis on criminality and blasphemy against the Catholic Church. Morality, religion or law restrained not his "extreme freedom." Various prisons and an insane asylum incarcerated the aristocrat for 32 years of his life: ten years in the Bastile, another year elsewhere in Paris, a month in Conciergerie, two years in a fortress, a year in Madelonnettes, three years in Bicêtre, a year in Sainte-Pélagie, and 13 years in the Charenton asylum. During the French revolution, people elected this criminal as delegate to the National Convention. He wrote many of his works in prison.
This aristocrat, revolutionary politician, and philosopher exhibited famous libertine lifestyle.
His works include dialogues and political tracts; in his lifetime, he published some works under his own name and denied authorship of apparently anonymous other works. His best erotic works combined philosophical discourse with pornography and depicted fantasies with an emphasis on criminality and blasphemy against the Catholic Church. Morality, religion or law restrained not his "extreme freedom." Various prisons and an insane asylum incarcerated the aristocrat for 32 years of his life: ten years in the Bastile, another year elsewhere in Paris, a month in Conciergerie, two years in a fortress, a year in Madelonnettes, three years in Bicêtre, a year in Sainte-Pélagie, and 13 years in the Charenton asylum. During the French revolution, people elected this criminal as delegate to the National Convention. He wrote many of his works in prison.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,367 reviews
September 13, 2014
This Justine she had like the all time worst luck, even worse than this girl Tiffany that I know who broke her leg on the first day of a three week ski holiday, it sounds so sad unless you know her in which case it practically proves there's a God right there. But anyway. I was reading this book at breakfast and that was a good laugh in itself cause people thought it must be a highly educational book because it was written before the Ark and I'm not saying they were wrong neither because some of it was very educational if you know whatb I mean but I got to one bit and I blurted cocopops all down my nose it was hilarious and so so gross. So you know, don't read Justine at breakfast. So this must be like French Psycho you know like American Psycho only its really old ass so it's French Old Ass Psycho lol. You know we have a lot of fast food shops in towns these days like KFC and those, well in the before the Ark France they must have had instead of fast french food a whole lot of whip shops ROTFLMWO (yeah roll on the floor laughing my whip off). It was just sick. So I guess we don't need books like this any more because we have modern videos like Tumbling Doll of Flesh or The Human centipede which rocks, you must see that, and also many computer games like Remains of the Bitches, and so you don't have to drag your eyes through all these words, it's the same.
Oh yeah I got to tell you one person who saw me reading this and I wont say who asked me why I was reading about the singer and I said who and they said Sade, you know, she's pretty famous. So I just said oh I'm a big fan, got all her stuff. Those are the kind of people I have to live with, just so you know. But yeah, Justine, man I was just howling. Stuff coming down my nose and everything.
Oh yeah I got to tell you one person who saw me reading this and I wont say who asked me why I was reading about the singer and I said who and they said Sade, you know, she's pretty famous. So I just said oh I'm a big fan, got all her stuff. Those are the kind of people I have to live with, just so you know. But yeah, Justine, man I was just howling. Stuff coming down my nose and everything.
June 6, 2021
Five stars, what!? But surely I hate violence in general, and sexualised violence in particular. Well, yes, I do, but this turned out to be way more interesting than I realised. I was revolted but I was completely engaged with it; I hated it, but I couldn't stop taking notes.
Previously, I had only read Sade in fragments, in the wrong contexts or with the wrong preconceptions. This time I came to him after a lot of reading in eighteenth-century thought and fiction, and he stood out completely differently, as a sort of monstrous, semi-parodic jester figure, making a serious and apocalyptic point with the blackest of black humour. It really overwhelmed me.
The thing is, on the face of it Justine is built like a typical sentimental novel of the time. A young girl is led astray, goes on a variety of rambling picaresque misadventures, and finally meets a long-lost relative in disguise who whisks her away from it all. Many of the beats in here are instantly familiar to anyone who's read Ann Radcliffe, Frances Burney, Smollett, Richardson, Fielding, or any of those writers. But while all of their books are driven by more or less implicit threats of sexual violence (often with sublimated incestuous themes), in Sade the subtext suddenly become thunderingly explicit and present. It's like the elided rape scene from Clarissa, forced centre-stage and reduplicated again and again and again (and without any trace of that book's comfortable sentimentality). It all feels like some nightmarish negative-image of the eighteenth-century novel.
However, there is more to it than just scenes of Justine being raped in increasingly elaborate ways, because these horrible set-pieces are intercut with long sections of philosophical dialogue. I know lots of people find these bits pretentious and/or boring, but I felt that Sade was going through just about every major concern of the time, on an almost point-by-point basis, and showing the reductio ad absurdum of contemporary preconceptions. This version of Justine came out in 1791, which was one of the most turbulent times in political and intellectual history. The Enlightenment had just blown up in Europe's face, in the form of the French Revolution. And the way Sade's novel is put together adds up to an argument that human sexuality is deeply political, and that the politics of the time was profoundly – well – sadistic.
The book's arguments are antifeminist, antitheist, antivirtuous and antisocial, but the basic point he makes is that these things are a natural extension of the civilisation he sees around him. Dans un siècle entièrement corrompu, Justine is told near the beginning, le plus sûr est de faire comme les autres, and that is how the action of the novel is presented: as a sort of fairground-mirror reflection of what everyone else is doing anyway. This is perhaps most explicit in his attitude towards women. Here, as so often, one is struck by Sade's disarming habit of simply saying out loud what other writers are accused of keeping hidden. Woman, according to one character in here, is
The lack of hypocrisy is a bit startling: it sounds like something that might be ascribed, by a modern critic, to the subconscious attitudes of a writer like John Updike or Kingsley Amis. But with Sade, it's never a matter of uncovering subconscious attitudes, but rather just writing his attitudes down when he tells you outright what they are. There is a sense, reading him, of having isolated a virus in its purest form. And yet this disagreeable litany of misogyny is, crucially, founded on a survey of societies around the world:
This actually sounds remarkably close to the sort of thing Mary Wollstonecraft was saying at the time. No, really! ‘If men be demi-gods,’ she writes in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (published the year after Justine) – ‘why let us serve them!’ If women are just subservient beasts, ‘it will be expedient to open a fresh trade with Russia for whips’. For her, these are flashes of bitter irony. With Sade, the irony is book-length, and the bitterness so dark that you choke on it.
The effect is parodic, whether or not you think he intended it that way. I think it's abundantly clear that he did, although that doesn't mean he didn't also share in these feelings to some extent: obviously, no one would lavish so much care on scenes of sexual torture and degradation unless they got some deep psychological satisfaction from them. But in real life his feelings were a little more nuanced: he hated women symbolically, in a sort of Camille Paglia sense, to the extent that they embodied the principle of weakness. Strong women – female writers and artists, for instance – he respected and admired, and he had many close female friends (to one of whom Justine is dedicated). His legal troubles came mainly from the persistence of his powerful mother-in-law, who loathed him; his actual crimes amounted to little more than some orgies and whipping. Many women he hired chose not to whip him, or to be whipped, or sodomised, and he respected those choices – indeed, turning from his fiction to his biography, one is taken aback at the amount of consent going around.
Not that I want to rehabilitate Sade, just that I want to see his attitudes in context. As far as libertinism went, he was, in terms of his real-life activities, not abnormal, and by some standards was even fairly mild. This was a time when Louis XV ran a ‘deer park’ of barely nubile girls, while the Prince de Conti amassed a collection of two thousand rings, each commemorating a woman ‘forced or bought’. What is unusual about Sade is that, in his writings, he extrapolated from such behaviour, and diagnosed things that other ‘libertines’ were not willing or able to acknowledge.
Indeed, one of the things Justine stresses is what we'd now call the cultural relativism of morality, which, the heroine is told, is a matter of ‘opinion and geography’ (and time, we might add). ‘Moral sensations are deceptive; there is no truth beyond physical sensations.’ Hence the importance in Sade of pain.
Again, one is struck by how he's said the quiet part out loud: in Sade's own description, the sadist is someone who inflicts pain on a woman because he is insecure about his ability to give her pleasure. It's a devastating insight, embedded within a scene of almost unreadable unpleasantness.
One of the many disorienting things about reading Sade is the way he suddenly makes other writers of the time seem completely inadequate, in certain specific ways. At several points in this book, Justine is given the chance to join her tormentors, to escape her torture by becoming part of their criminal gang, or at least by turning a blind eye to their activities. She always refuses, in terms that are very familiar from other novels, bursting out with exclamations like, ‘I would rather die a thousand deaths than [abandon my principles]!’ We are so used to seeing virtuous women rewarded for this behaviour in fiction, escaping from the most unlikely scenarios thanks to a just Providence, that there is a grim satisfaction here in seeing her instead punished for it. Because however extravagant the details, the underlying principles of Sade's narrative are often curiously modern – much more in accordance with how we now think consequences in fiction should be felt.
That all this is meant as a parody is surely cemented in the final pages, when, after waiting in vain throughout the novel for any sign of divine punishment, we finally see one appear. The clouds part and a thunderbolt bursts from the heavens, to strike down – Justine herself! The virtuous heroine is killed dead – along with the sentimental novel, and, we might almost say, the eighteenth century itself.
Previously, I had only read Sade in fragments, in the wrong contexts or with the wrong preconceptions. This time I came to him after a lot of reading in eighteenth-century thought and fiction, and he stood out completely differently, as a sort of monstrous, semi-parodic jester figure, making a serious and apocalyptic point with the blackest of black humour. It really overwhelmed me.
The thing is, on the face of it Justine is built like a typical sentimental novel of the time. A young girl is led astray, goes on a variety of rambling picaresque misadventures, and finally meets a long-lost relative in disguise who whisks her away from it all. Many of the beats in here are instantly familiar to anyone who's read Ann Radcliffe, Frances Burney, Smollett, Richardson, Fielding, or any of those writers. But while all of their books are driven by more or less implicit threats of sexual violence (often with sublimated incestuous themes), in Sade the subtext suddenly become thunderingly explicit and present. It's like the elided rape scene from Clarissa, forced centre-stage and reduplicated again and again and again (and without any trace of that book's comfortable sentimentality). It all feels like some nightmarish negative-image of the eighteenth-century novel.
However, there is more to it than just scenes of Justine being raped in increasingly elaborate ways, because these horrible set-pieces are intercut with long sections of philosophical dialogue. I know lots of people find these bits pretentious and/or boring, but I felt that Sade was going through just about every major concern of the time, on an almost point-by-point basis, and showing the reductio ad absurdum of contemporary preconceptions. This version of Justine came out in 1791, which was one of the most turbulent times in political and intellectual history. The Enlightenment had just blown up in Europe's face, in the form of the French Revolution. And the way Sade's novel is put together adds up to an argument that human sexuality is deeply political, and that the politics of the time was profoundly – well – sadistic.
The book's arguments are antifeminist, antitheist, antivirtuous and antisocial, but the basic point he makes is that these things are a natural extension of the civilisation he sees around him. Dans un siècle entièrement corrompu, Justine is told near the beginning, le plus sûr est de faire comme les autres, and that is how the action of the novel is presented: as a sort of fairground-mirror reflection of what everyone else is doing anyway. This is perhaps most explicit in his attitude towards women. Here, as so often, one is struck by Sade's disarming habit of simply saying out loud what other writers are accused of keeping hidden. Woman, according to one character in here, is
[u]ne créature chétive, toujours inférieure à l'homme, infiniment moins belle que lui, moins ingénieuse, moins sage, constituée d'une manière dégoûtante, entièrement opposée à ce qui peut plaire à l'homme, à ce qui doit le délecter…un être malsain les trois quarts de sa vie, hors d'état de satisfaire son époux tout le temps où la Nature le contraint à l'enfantement, d'une humeur aigre, acariâtre, impérieuse : tyran, si on lui laisse des droits, bas et rampant si on le captive ; mais toujours faux, toujours méchant, toujours dangereux […].
a weak creature, always inferior to man, infinitely less beautiful than he, less intelligent, less wise, with a disgusting constitution, entirely opposed to what man likes or takes delight in…a sickly being for three quarters of her life, unable to satisfy her husband whenever Nature constrains her to childbirth, possessed of a sour, shrewish, imperious temperament: a tyrant if she is given rights, mean and base when kept down; but always false, always vicious, always dangerous.
The lack of hypocrisy is a bit startling: it sounds like something that might be ascribed, by a modern critic, to the subconscious attitudes of a writer like John Updike or Kingsley Amis. But with Sade, it's never a matter of uncovering subconscious attitudes, but rather just writing his attitudes down when he tells you outright what they are. There is a sense, reading him, of having isolated a virus in its purest form. And yet this disagreeable litany of misogyny is, crucially, founded on a survey of societies around the world:
je le [ce sexe] vois opprimé partout, partout rigoureusement éloigné des affaires, partout méprisé, avili, enfermé ; les femmes, en un mot, partout traitées commes des bêtes dont on se sert à l'instant de besoin, et qu'on recèle aussitôt dans le bercail.
I see women everywhere oppressed, everywhere rigorously excluded from activity, everywhere despised, degraded and locked away: women, in a word, are everywhere treated like beasts, who are made use of when you need them and then sent straight back to their pen.
This actually sounds remarkably close to the sort of thing Mary Wollstonecraft was saying at the time. No, really! ‘If men be demi-gods,’ she writes in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (published the year after Justine) – ‘why let us serve them!’ If women are just subservient beasts, ‘it will be expedient to open a fresh trade with Russia for whips’. For her, these are flashes of bitter irony. With Sade, the irony is book-length, and the bitterness so dark that you choke on it.
The effect is parodic, whether or not you think he intended it that way. I think it's abundantly clear that he did, although that doesn't mean he didn't also share in these feelings to some extent: obviously, no one would lavish so much care on scenes of sexual torture and degradation unless they got some deep psychological satisfaction from them. But in real life his feelings were a little more nuanced: he hated women symbolically, in a sort of Camille Paglia sense, to the extent that they embodied the principle of weakness. Strong women – female writers and artists, for instance – he respected and admired, and he had many close female friends (to one of whom Justine is dedicated). His legal troubles came mainly from the persistence of his powerful mother-in-law, who loathed him; his actual crimes amounted to little more than some orgies and whipping. Many women he hired chose not to whip him, or to be whipped, or sodomised, and he respected those choices – indeed, turning from his fiction to his biography, one is taken aback at the amount of consent going around.
Not that I want to rehabilitate Sade, just that I want to see his attitudes in context. As far as libertinism went, he was, in terms of his real-life activities, not abnormal, and by some standards was even fairly mild. This was a time when Louis XV ran a ‘deer park’ of barely nubile girls, while the Prince de Conti amassed a collection of two thousand rings, each commemorating a woman ‘forced or bought’. What is unusual about Sade is that, in his writings, he extrapolated from such behaviour, and diagnosed things that other ‘libertines’ were not willing or able to acknowledge.
Indeed, one of the things Justine stresses is what we'd now call the cultural relativism of morality, which, the heroine is told, is a matter of ‘opinion and geography’ (and time, we might add). ‘Moral sensations are deceptive; there is no truth beyond physical sensations.’ Hence the importance in Sade of pain.
[I]l n'est aucune sorte de sensation qui soit plus vive que celle de la douleur ; ses impressions sont sûres, elles ne trompent point comme celles du plaisir perpétuellement jouées par les femmes ou presque jamais ressenties par elles ; que d'amour-propre ailleurs, que de jeunesse, de force, de santé ne faut-il pas pour être sûr de produire dans une femme cette douteuse et peu satisfaisante impression du plaisir. Celle de la douleur au contraire, n'exige pas la moindre chose : plus un homme a des défauts, plus il est vieux, moins il est aimable, mieux il réussira.
There is no keener sensation than that of pain: its impressions are certain, they do not deceive like those of the pleasure perpetually acted out by women and almost never felt by them. And how much self-esteem, youth, strength and vigour is required to produce in a woman that doubtful and hardly satisfying impression of pleasure. Whereas pain, by contrast, requires nothing: the more flaws a man has, the older and less likeable he is, the better he'll succeed.
Again, one is struck by how he's said the quiet part out loud: in Sade's own description, the sadist is someone who inflicts pain on a woman because he is insecure about his ability to give her pleasure. It's a devastating insight, embedded within a scene of almost unreadable unpleasantness.
One of the many disorienting things about reading Sade is the way he suddenly makes other writers of the time seem completely inadequate, in certain specific ways. At several points in this book, Justine is given the chance to join her tormentors, to escape her torture by becoming part of their criminal gang, or at least by turning a blind eye to their activities. She always refuses, in terms that are very familiar from other novels, bursting out with exclamations like, ‘I would rather die a thousand deaths than [abandon my principles]!’ We are so used to seeing virtuous women rewarded for this behaviour in fiction, escaping from the most unlikely scenarios thanks to a just Providence, that there is a grim satisfaction here in seeing her instead punished for it. Because however extravagant the details, the underlying principles of Sade's narrative are often curiously modern – much more in accordance with how we now think consequences in fiction should be felt.
That all this is meant as a parody is surely cemented in the final pages, when, after waiting in vain throughout the novel for any sign of divine punishment, we finally see one appear. The clouds part and a thunderbolt bursts from the heavens, to strike down – Justine herself! The virtuous heroine is killed dead – along with the sentimental novel, and, we might almost say, the eighteenth century itself.
November 27, 2007
Great book, but i really don't care for translations.
Let's see, something I took from this book:
Believe in God and a bunch of people are going to rape you, take advantage of you, tie you to a tree and let the dogs get you, while your sister becomes a whore and marries a rich guy and gets all the wonders in the world, while everyone who's fucked you over got rich and became successful.
But, hey, at least you go to heaven in the end...
Let's see, something I took from this book:
Believe in God and a bunch of people are going to rape you, take advantage of you, tie you to a tree and let the dogs get you, while your sister becomes a whore and marries a rich guy and gets all the wonders in the world, while everyone who's fucked you over got rich and became successful.
But, hey, at least you go to heaven in the end...
July 27, 2024
This book is appalling. One expects a novel written on the subject of libertinism. But, on the contrary, it is all the worse: it is only women sequestered, subjected, under duress and threats, to the worst perversities of men. One is far beyond one can imagine since imposed sex added to violence, blood, scatology, and death.
Those who admire Sade in the name of sexual liberation are all wrong: there is no liberation in Sade but only coercion. Only perverse, violent men with dangerous, selfish tendencies dress their evil and criminal actions with theories that are only sophisms.
Of course, this book is an exciting subject on the literary level. And the language of the eighteenth century is so beautiful! But what a painful moment to discover a book in which he is not a free and benevolent character!
Those who admire Sade in the name of sexual liberation are all wrong: there is no liberation in Sade but only coercion. Only perverse, violent men with dangerous, selfish tendencies dress their evil and criminal actions with theories that are only sophisms.
Of course, this book is an exciting subject on the literary level. And the language of the eighteenth century is so beautiful! But what a painful moment to discover a book in which he is not a free and benevolent character!
June 29, 2023
این کتابیه که موقع خوندنش به مقدار زیادی دستمال کاغذی احتیاج پیدا م��کنید.
🪳سکوت خدا یا چرا فضیلت احمقانه است؟
اگر رمان «ابله» از «داستایوسکی» رو خونده باشید، (پشنهاد ویژه م اینه بخونیدش) حتما یادتون میاد که توی یک صحنه در خانه روگوژین، تابلویی وجود داره که داستایوسکی از دهان «مشکین» درباره اش میگه «بعید است که این نقاشی را ببینید و ایمانتان را از دست ندهید». این تابلو، با عنوان ««جسد مسیح مرده در تابوت» ، اثر "هولباین" هستش که جزو رادیکال ترین نقاشی ها درباره مرگ مسیحه. چون این تابلو با عرض بسیار زیاد و طول خیلی کم، شبیه به تابوت واقعی، جسد مسیح رو بعد تصلیب نشون میده که هیچ شباهتی به تصور عامه مردم از مسیح زیبای چشم آبی و با چهره ملکوتی رضی الله عنهم و رضو عنه نداره. در تفسیر چهره عجیب مسیح توی این تابلو گفته شده: "زمانیکه مسیح به صلیب کشیده شد، از شدت درد فریاد زد: «خدای من.! چرا رهایم کردی». او تصور کرد که پدر آسمانیش او را ترک کرده است. دریافت تمام آنچه که موعظه کرده، دروغ باشد. در لحظههای پیش از مرگ، مسیح در تردید فرورفت. بدونشک، این سختترین لحظه عمرش بوده باشد. سکوت خدا!"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bod...
اینم لینک تابلو اگر دلتون خواست ببینید.
..............
خیلی از ما آدما هم این لحظه سکوت خدا رو تجربه کردیم.
وقتی اون مصیبت برای من اتفاق افتاد، بین گریه ها و جیغ ها و بدو بدو توی بیمارستان ها، به خدا التماس کردم که یبار هم که شده، فقط همین یبار، معجزه شو با خوب شدن مامانم نشونم بده و بعد من دیگه میشم بنده واقعی اون، همون بنده ای که همه جای کتابش توصیفش کرده، فقط بهم ثابت کنه وجود داره و منو میبینه و میشنوه. با وجود اینکه هیچوقت قبل از این اتفاق هم باهام حرف نزده بود و همیشه ازش شاکی بودم که چرا کاری برای من و بقیه بنده هاش نمیکنه ، اما این بار با تمام وجودم بهش باور داشتم و میخواستم دعاهامو بشنوه و جوابمو بده. اما نداد. و بعد من دیگه هیچی نداشتم. تنهایی مطلق رو درک کردم، خالی بودن، ناامیدی، و فهمید�� توی این دنیا فرقی نداره خوب باشی یا بد، مسیح باشی یا رویا، چون بعدش اتفاقاتی برات میوفته که ربطی به رفتار تو با دیگران و اعمالت نداره. هیچ پاداشی برای خوب بودنت وجود نداره، چون وقتی فکر میکنی الان دیگه خدا باید بخاطر اینهمه مدت خوب بودنت بهت پاداش بده و تو رو ببینه و نمیبینه، یعنی یا خدایی وجود نداره و یا این خدا دخالتی توی مسیر زندگی آدما نداره و منفعلانه فقط تماشاچی اضمحلال آفریدگانشه، حتی مخلص ترین و معتقدترین شون. در هر صورت فرقی هم نمیکنه و این آگاهی نتیجه اش ناامیدی محض و تنهایی بینهایت عمیق برای همه است.
........
🪳ارتباط ساد و مسیح چییت؟
توی کتاب «ژوستین» یا «مصائب فضیلت» هم «مارکی دوساد» این دیدگاه رو دستمایه خلق داستانی دهشتناک از سادیسم جنسی و مازوخیسم قرار داده. اگر کسی با خوندن این کتاب فکر کنه که فقط با یک داستان اروتیک با تصاویر گرافیکی از فحشا سر و کار داره و قراره پایه های ایمانش سست بشه یا تشویق به خودارضایی یا بی دی اس ام میکنه، سخت در اشتباهه. چون این کتاب علاوه بر همه اینها اساسا چکیده فلسفه ساد درباره مفهوم خیر و شر، آزاد اندیشی و نظریات جامعه شناسی اونه که از زبان شخصیت های منفور و فاسدش بیان شده.
در فلسفه ساد، خدا شر، و شرارت سرچشمه فعالیت انسانه، و درنتیجه بدبختی هایی که انسان های داستان هاش متحمل می شن از عدم شناخت این حقایق ناشی میشه. بنظر من کتاب «ژوستین» یک پارودی از فضیلت خواهی و شرافته، {هرچند که چندجایی از داستان تناقض هایی بین پیامی که میده با فلسفه اش دیده میشه که ظاهراً بخاطر فرار از سانسور کتابشه} و ساد با سرنوشت وحشتناک فلاکت باری که برای دخترک معصوم داستان رقم زده(علیرغم تقریبا قدیس بودنش) میخواد نشون بده توی زمانه ای که همه افراد فاسدن، فضیلت داشتن حماقته. ساد به سکوت خدا اعتقاد داره و توی این کتاب با زشت ترین و رکیک ترین ادبیات ممکن این اعتقاد رو نشون میده. (تشویق ایستاده حضار به افتخار مارکی دو ساد)
....
🪳چرا باید ساد بخوانیم یا نخوانیم؟
ساد و آثارش بیش از دو قرنه که تبدیل به دغدغه همیشگی و جهانی روشنفکران و متفکران شده. نویسنده جنجالی که آثارش خداشناسان رو خشمگین و روانپزشکان رو مجذوب خودش کرده (تا اونجا که اسم یکی از انحرافات جنسی رو از اسم اون اقتباس کردن) و حتی خیلی جاها که نمونه هایی از مبارزه طبقاتی رو با توصیفاتی از قربانی شدن مردم فرودست نشون میده دنیای سیاست رو هم غلغلک داده.
بسیاری از منتقدان و نویسندگان مارکی دوساد رو بعنوان «رماننویسی که خوانندگان رو بسیار برانگیخته بود» تحسین میکنن. چون ساد با قلم زهرآگین و صریحش تونست مفاهیمی چون سادیسم جنسی و پیامدهای اون، مازوخیسم، همچنان پارادوکسهای گیجکننده اخلاقی رو وارد ادبیات داستانی کنه و در طول زمان، خواندن آثارش این باور رو در مردم ایجاد کنه می تونن بدون احساس شرم و تا زمانی که هیچ اجباری اعمال نشه، آزادانه هر رفتار متناقض یا عجیبی که دوست دارن رو برای ارضای جنسی و موقعیت سکس انتخاب کنن انجام بدن.
....
ژوستین معروف ترین و پرفروش ترین کتاب ساد در جهان هستش که برای اون شهرت(خوب یا بد)، ۳۲ سال زندان و زندگی طولانی در تیمارستان رو به ارمغان آورد. این کتاب در ابتدا طی یک دوره دو هفته ای در سال ۱۷۸۷ به صورت داستان کوتاه نوشته شد، زمانی که نویسنده در باستیل زندانی بود. نسخه ای که من خوندم، دومین بازنویسی از همین کتاب ژوستین هستش که سال ۱۷۹۱ بعد از آزادی از زندان نوشته و تکمیل شده و ناقص تر نسخه هزار صفحه ای بعدیه. البته این کتاب یک دنباله هم داره بنام «فضایل رذیلت» که میخونم و نظرمو میگم.
خب صادقانه بگم این کتابی نیست که به کسی پیشنهادش کنم چون مطمعن نیستم برداشت طرف مقابل از همچین داستانی چیه، اما اگر کسی خواست داستانی از مارکی دو ساد بخونه، من این رو بیشتر از «۱۲۰ روز سدوم» پیشنهاد میکنم چون یجورایی این داستان مادر اون داستانه :)) یعنی اینو بخونید انگار سه بار اونو خوندید با بقیه داستان هاش.
.....
در پایان شاید این سوال پیش اومده باشه که چرا برخلاف همیشه کل داستان رو اسپویل نکردم اینجا؟ که خب چون خیلی دیگه طولانی میشد.
🪳سکوت خدا یا چرا فضیلت احمقانه است؟
اگر رمان «ابله» از «داستایوسکی» رو خونده باشید، (پشنهاد ویژه م اینه بخونیدش) حتما یادتون میاد که توی یک صحنه در خانه روگوژین، تابلویی وجود داره که داستایوسکی از دهان «مشکین» درباره اش میگه «بعید است که این نقاشی را ببینید و ایمانتان را از دست ندهید». این تابلو، با عنوان ««جسد مسیح مرده در تابوت» ، اثر "هولباین" هستش که جزو رادیکال ترین نقاشی ها درباره مرگ مسیحه. چون این تابلو با عرض بسیار زیاد و طول خیلی کم، شبیه به تابوت واقعی، جسد مسیح رو بعد تصلیب نشون میده که هیچ شباهتی به تصور عامه مردم از مسیح زیبای چشم آبی و با چهره ملکوتی رضی الله عنهم و رضو عنه نداره. در تفسیر چهره عجیب مسیح توی این تابلو گفته شده: "زمانیکه مسیح به صلیب کشیده شد، از شدت درد فریاد زد: «خدای من.! چرا رهایم کردی». او تصور کرد که پدر آسمانیش او را ترک کرده است. دریافت تمام آنچه که موعظه کرده، دروغ باشد. در لحظههای پیش از مرگ، مسیح در تردید فرورفت. بدونشک، این سختترین لحظه عمرش بوده باشد. سکوت خدا!"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bod...
اینم لینک تابلو اگر دلتون خواست ببینید.
..............
خیلی از ما آدما هم این لحظه سکوت خدا رو تجربه کردیم.
وقتی اون مصیبت برای من اتفاق افتاد، بین گریه ها و جیغ ها و بدو بدو توی بیمارستان ها، به خدا التماس کردم که یبار هم که شده، فقط همین یبار، معجزه شو با خوب شدن مامانم نشونم بده و بعد من دیگه میشم بنده واقعی اون، همون بنده ای که همه جای کتابش توصیفش کرده، فقط بهم ثابت کنه وجود داره و منو میبینه و میشنوه. با وجود اینکه هیچوقت قبل از این اتفاق هم باهام حرف نزده بود و همیشه ازش شاکی بودم که چرا کاری برای من و بقیه بنده هاش نمیکنه ، اما این بار با تمام وجودم بهش باور داشتم و میخواستم دعاهامو بشنوه و جوابمو بده. اما نداد. و بعد من دیگه هیچی نداشتم. تنهایی مطلق رو درک کردم، خالی بودن، ناامیدی، و فهمید�� توی این دنیا فرقی نداره خوب باشی یا بد، مسیح باشی یا رویا، چون بعدش اتفاقاتی برات میوفته که ربطی به رفتار تو با دیگران و اعمالت نداره. هیچ پاداشی برای خوب بودنت وجود نداره، چون وقتی فکر میکنی الان دیگه خدا باید بخاطر اینهمه مدت خوب بودنت بهت پاداش بده و تو رو ببینه و نمیبینه، یعنی یا خدایی وجود نداره و یا این خدا دخالتی توی مسیر زندگی آدما نداره و منفعلانه فقط تماشاچی اضمحلال آفریدگانشه، حتی مخلص ترین و معتقدترین شون. در هر صورت فرقی هم نمیکنه و این آگاهی نتیجه اش ناامیدی محض و تنهایی بینهایت عمیق برای همه است.
........
🪳ارتباط ساد و مسیح چییت؟
توی کتاب «ژوستین» یا «مصائب فضیلت» هم «مارکی دوساد» این دیدگاه رو دستمایه خلق داستانی دهشتناک از سادیسم جنسی و مازوخیسم قرار داده. اگر کسی با خوندن این کتاب فکر کنه که فقط با یک داستان اروتیک با تصاویر گرافیکی از فحشا سر و کار داره و قراره پایه های ایمانش سست بشه یا تشویق به خودارضایی یا بی دی اس ام میکنه، سخت در اشتباهه. چون این کتاب علاوه بر همه اینها اساسا چکیده فلسفه ساد درباره مفهوم خیر و شر، آزاد اندیشی و نظریات جامعه شناسی اونه که از زبان شخصیت های منفور و فاسدش بیان شده.
در فلسفه ساد، خدا شر، و شرارت سرچشمه فعالیت انسانه، و درنتیجه بدبختی هایی که انسان های داستان هاش متحمل می شن از عدم شناخت این حقایق ناشی میشه. بنظر من کتاب «ژوستین» یک پارودی از فضیلت خواهی و شرافته، {هرچند که چندجایی از داستان تناقض هایی بین پیامی که میده با فلسفه اش دیده میشه که ظاهراً بخاطر فرار از سانسور کتابشه} و ساد با سرنوشت وحشتناک فلاکت باری که برای دخترک معصوم داستان رقم زده(علیرغم تقریبا قدیس بودنش) میخواد نشون بده توی زمانه ای که همه افراد فاسدن، فضیلت داشتن حماقته. ساد به سکوت خدا اعتقاد داره و توی این کتاب با زشت ترین و رکیک ترین ادبیات ممکن این اعتقاد رو نشون میده. (تشویق ایستاده حضار به افتخار مارکی دو ساد)
....
🪳چرا باید ساد بخوانیم یا نخوانیم؟
ساد و آثارش بیش از دو قرنه که تبدیل به دغدغه همیشگی و جهانی روشنفکران و متفکران شده. نویسنده جنجالی که آثارش خداشناسان رو خشمگین و روانپزشکان رو مجذوب خودش کرده (تا اونجا که اسم یکی از انحرافات جنسی رو از اسم اون اقتباس کردن) و حتی خیلی جاها که نمونه هایی از مبارزه طبقاتی رو با توصیفاتی از قربانی شدن مردم فرودست نشون میده دنیای سیاست رو هم غلغلک داده.
بسیاری از منتقدان و نویسندگان مارکی دوساد رو بعنوان «رماننویسی که خوانندگان رو بسیار برانگیخته بود» تحسین میکنن. چون ساد با قلم زهرآگین و صریحش تونست مفاهیمی چون سادیسم جنسی و پیامدهای اون، مازوخیسم، همچنان پارادوکسهای گیجکننده اخلاقی رو وارد ادبیات داستانی کنه و در طول زمان، خواندن آثارش این باور رو در مردم ایجاد کنه می تونن بدون احساس شرم و تا زمانی که هیچ اجباری اعمال نشه، آزادانه هر رفتار متناقض یا عجیبی که دوست دارن رو برای ارضای جنسی و موقعیت سکس انتخاب کنن انجام بدن.
....
ژوستین معروف ترین و پرفروش ترین کتاب ساد در جهان هستش که برای اون شهرت(خوب یا بد)، ۳۲ سال زندان و زندگی طولانی در تیمارستان رو به ارمغان آورد. این کتاب در ابتدا طی یک دوره دو هفته ای در سال ۱۷۸۷ به صورت داستان کوتاه نوشته شد، زمانی که نویسنده در باستیل زندانی بود. نسخه ای که من خوندم، دومین بازنویسی از همین کتاب ژوستین هستش که سال ۱۷۹۱ بعد از آزادی از زندان نوشته و تکمیل شده و ناقص تر نسخه هزار صفحه ای بعدیه. البته این کتاب یک دنباله هم داره بنام «فضایل رذیلت» که میخونم و نظرمو میگم.
خب صادقانه بگم این کتابی نیست که به کسی پیشنهادش کنم چون مطمعن نیستم برداشت طرف مقابل از همچین داستانی چیه، اما اگر کسی خواست داستانی از مارکی دو ساد بخونه، من این رو بیشتر از «۱۲۰ روز سدوم» پیشنهاد میکنم چون یجورایی این داستان مادر اون داستانه :)) یعنی اینو بخونید انگار سه بار اونو خوندید با بقیه داستان هاش.
.....
در پایان شاید این سوال پیش اومده باشه که چرا برخلاف همیشه کل داستان رو اسپویل نکردم اینجا؟ که خب چون خیلی دیگه طولانی میشد.
December 17, 2015
*4,5 out of 10 spiky stars
I suspect that I expected to find something similar to smutty contemporary sado-masochistic literature, and was therefore quite pleasantly surprised stylistically speaking. Having watched documentaries about De Sade which depicted him as a dribbling sot in an institution for the insane, I had expected... well... something much less intelligent than this. De Sade is obviously no fool, and his arguments are intelligently put.
In this novel, De Sade still conforms to Victorian norms in the respect that even libertine, rebellious De Sade felt he had to wrap everything he said in euphemistic terms, in spite of the fact that the content of the novel and the gist of his rhetoric would indeed have been wildly shocking to most Victorian sensibilities.
Compared to certain contemporary literature, such as some of the works of authors like Palanuik, for example in his novel Snuff, also, various writings of J.G. Ballard, Samuel R. Delany's novel Hogg and others like the work of Brett Easton Ellis, Justine is not so very shocking in the contemporary landscape despite De Sade's reputation.
Of course, De Sade's later novels, especially The 120 Days of Sodom, truly do contain disgusting material, even by contemporary standards.
If one feels you really MUST read De Sade, I guess this is one of the most accessible ones, but, even though it is De Sade 'lite' it does nonetheless contain quite a bit of sadism, and poor little Justine does seem a bit of a sucker for punishment, the quintessential 'victim'.
Justine is the quintessential sad sac of the ages. De Sade paints her as a poor meek little thing who, according to him, deserves her end because of her continued piousness. His rhetoric is of course completely distorted, but one does get a sense that she (possibly unwittingly or subconsciously) invites victimhood. I hope people won't find it too cruel if I say that her end was actually quite a humorous piece of Deux Ex Machina. De Sade subverts a very common trope, by having a punishment that is usually visited upon sinners, strike down the innocent instead.
One often has to wonder why a lightning bolt never came down from heaven to strike the sinful Marquis himself down.
I liked that at least De Sade does not try to justify sadism as anything else than what it really is. He openly rebels against 'piety' with his proposed hedonistic rhetoric. The sadists and hedonists in the novel are what they are, fully and completely, and they don't make excuses for it, or pretend to 'love' their victims. They don't love their victims. They are most definitely not 'relationship' material, not poor misunderstood whelps who can be recycled if you just loved them enough. ...and perhaps this is precicely why de Sade is so reviled. He removes all the cobwebby romanticism, the smarmy treacle that these proclivities tend to be marinated in in popular fiction.
I don't agree with most of De Sade's philosophy, but from a literary stylistic point of view the book is probably a sight better than 50 Shades of Grey.
Proper review to follow when time permits.
I suspect that I expected to find something similar to smutty contemporary sado-masochistic literature, and was therefore quite pleasantly surprised stylistically speaking. Having watched documentaries about De Sade which depicted him as a dribbling sot in an institution for the insane, I had expected... well... something much less intelligent than this. De Sade is obviously no fool, and his arguments are intelligently put.
In this novel, De Sade still conforms to Victorian norms in the respect that even libertine, rebellious De Sade felt he had to wrap everything he said in euphemistic terms, in spite of the fact that the content of the novel and the gist of his rhetoric would indeed have been wildly shocking to most Victorian sensibilities.
Compared to certain contemporary literature, such as some of the works of authors like Palanuik, for example in his novel Snuff, also, various writings of J.G. Ballard, Samuel R. Delany's novel Hogg and others like the work of Brett Easton Ellis, Justine is not so very shocking in the contemporary landscape despite De Sade's reputation.
Of course, De Sade's later novels, especially The 120 Days of Sodom, truly do contain disgusting material, even by contemporary standards.
If one feels you really MUST read De Sade, I guess this is one of the most accessible ones, but, even though it is De Sade 'lite' it does nonetheless contain quite a bit of sadism, and poor little Justine does seem a bit of a sucker for punishment, the quintessential 'victim'.
Justine is the quintessential sad sac of the ages. De Sade paints her as a poor meek little thing who, according to him, deserves her end because of her continued piousness. His rhetoric is of course completely distorted, but one does get a sense that she (possibly unwittingly or subconsciously) invites victimhood. I hope people won't find it too cruel if I say that her end was actually quite a humorous piece of Deux Ex Machina. De Sade subverts a very common trope, by having a punishment that is usually visited upon sinners, strike down the innocent instead.
One often has to wonder why a lightning bolt never came down from heaven to strike the sinful Marquis himself down.
I liked that at least De Sade does not try to justify sadism as anything else than what it really is. He openly rebels against 'piety' with his proposed hedonistic rhetoric. The sadists and hedonists in the novel are what they are, fully and completely, and they don't make excuses for it, or pretend to 'love' their victims. They don't love their victims. They are most definitely not 'relationship' material, not poor misunderstood whelps who can be recycled if you just loved them enough. ...and perhaps this is precicely why de Sade is so reviled. He removes all the cobwebby romanticism, the smarmy treacle that these proclivities tend to be marinated in in popular fiction.
I don't agree with most of De Sade's philosophy, but from a literary stylistic point of view the book is probably a sight better than 50 Shades of Grey.
Proper review to follow when time permits.
September 19, 2007
When I was a grad student in Comparative Literature, all the "cool kids" read the Marquis de Sade. Just add philosophical musings to the sexcapades and basically you have porn for intellectuals!
February 18, 2021
Being briefly laid up I decided to read the work of this de Sade whose name is attached to -- a lot. Some, you know, okay things -- you know, fun things.
And more things in basements and bedrooms than I've ever dreamed of. That's because I don't have nightmares and if I did my mind doesn't contain the raw materials to dream of...This Stuff.
I got 120 Days and two pages in I returned it. Justine was said to be the tamest. Hmmm. It's relative, n'est-ce pas? Yet I finished it. Reader, I read him!
I don't at all judge you if you like or love his work. :shudder: I'm just not on the same page.
This extremely disturbing albeit frequently philosophical misery porn with heaping helpings of violence, torture and unrivaled perversion (not that I'm going to make a survey of it) -- I didn't realize. I was thinking small, along the lines of safe word, okay? obviously without the safe word.
Non non non! 🤮😱🤦♀️
And now I've traded my dignity to log some more pages on Goodreads. Idiot. 🤣🙄🤣🤮
And more things in basements and bedrooms than I've ever dreamed of. That's because I don't have nightmares and if I did my mind doesn't contain the raw materials to dream of...This Stuff.
I got 120 Days and two pages in I returned it. Justine was said to be the tamest. Hmmm. It's relative, n'est-ce pas? Yet I finished it. Reader, I read him!
I don't at all judge you if you like or love his work. :shudder: I'm just not on the same page.
This extremely disturbing albeit frequently philosophical misery porn with heaping helpings of violence, torture and unrivaled perversion (not that I'm going to make a survey of it) -- I didn't realize. I was thinking small, along the lines of safe word, okay? obviously without the safe word.
Non non non! 🤮😱🤦♀️
And now I've traded my dignity to log some more pages on Goodreads. Idiot. 🤣🙄🤣🤮
April 11, 2012
رواية (جوستين) للمركيز دو ساد أحد أكثر الروايات إنحرافًا ، مجونًا ، وشذوذًا. لذلك ظلت محرمة على العامة في فرنسا وإنجلترا والولايات المتحدة لمدة تزيد عن قرنٍ ونصف. كانت الحكومات الفرنسيّة المتعاقبة خلالها تصادر وتتلف كل ما تجده من نسخٍ شعبية كان يتداولها العامّة بشكلٍ سريّ
ولد المركيز ساد في القرن الثامن عشر ، وكان نموذجًا مصغرًا - أو ربما مضخمًا - لحياة المجو�� والتفسخ التي كان يعيشها أبناء الطبقة الأرستقراطيّة. مارس كل ما يخطر وما لا يخطر على بال بشر من طقوس جنسية منحرفة وشاذة دخل بسببها السجن والمصحة العقلية عدة مرات
كتب روايته (جوستين) وهو في السجن ، ووضع فيها عصارة أفكاره المنحرفة وخيالاته المريضة. ومع ذلك لم يرض ساد مطلقًا عن جوستين بصورتها الأولى. فأعاد بعد سنوات كتابتها وتوسّع فيها حتى صارت عملاً ضخمًا من أربعة مجلدات أسماه "جوستين الجديدة" لكنه لم يصدر سوى مرة واحدة فقط واختفت نسخه جميعها ، لتبقى النسخة الأولى التي يقارب عمرها الآن حوالي 220 سنة!
من الجدير بالذكر أن مصطلح السادية ينسب إلى الماركي�� دو ساد. وهو نوع من الإضطراب فى الممارسة الجنسية تغذيه خيالات جنسية شديدة أو رغبات جنسية أو سلوك جنسي يتضمن تعذيب أحد أطراف العلاقة الجنسية جديًا ونفسيًا.
جوستين قصة شقيقتين تنفصلان بعد موت والديهما. تختار إحداهما - وتدعى جولييت- الإنخراط في حياة الرذيلة والرفاهية ، بينما تسلك الأخرى -جوستين- طريق الفضيلة والعفة. وكل أحداث الرواية بعد ذلك بإمكاني أن أختصرها بعبارة واحدة: "كل شيءٌ سيء يمكن أن يحدث في هذا العالم ، يحدث لجوستين" حيث أنّها تتعرض طوال الرواية لضروب من الممارسات الجنسية الشريرة ، التعذيب الجنسي ، الإضطهاد\الإستغلال الجنسي ... إلخ وكل رغبات\شهوات ساد المريضة التي تمكن أو لم يتمكن من ممارستها في الواقع.
وكما بدأت الرواية بانفصال الشقيقتين ، تنتهي كذلك بانفصالهما بعد أن تلتقيان بالصدفة ، حيث تخترق صاعقة الشقيقة الصغرى جوستين وترديها قتيلة منهية بذلك حياةً مثقلة بالعذابات!
لو أتيحت لي إعادة تسمية الرواية فسأسميها "فلسفة الشر" أو "فلسفة الرذيلة"؛ فبعيدًا عن الثيمة المبتذلة (صراع الخير والشر) للرواية، وهي الثيمة التي كانت تلون معظم الأعمال الأدبية في القرن الثامن عشر، فإن للرواية بعدًا فلسفيًا عميقًا وغريبًا في آن
فـ"ساد" يبدو في الرواية كرسول للرذيلة ، يروج لها ، ويبررها في قالب فلسفي على لسان شخصيات الرواية. ربما لهذا السبب أصبحت الرواية مصدرًا سيكولوحيًا هامًا لكل من يريد أن يفهم تجليات الشر ودوافعه لدى المجرمين أو المنحرفين. شخصيًا لم أستمتع بأحداث الرواية (المقرفة في معظم الأحيان) بقدر استمتاعي بالنقاشات التي كانت تدور بين جوستين وجلاديها
ولد المركيز ساد في القرن الثامن عشر ، وكان نموذجًا مصغرًا - أو ربما مضخمًا - لحياة المجو�� والتفسخ التي كان يعيشها أبناء الطبقة الأرستقراطيّة. مارس كل ما يخطر وما لا يخطر على بال بشر من طقوس جنسية منحرفة وشاذة دخل بسببها السجن والمصحة العقلية عدة مرات
كتب روايته (جوستين) وهو في السجن ، ووضع فيها عصارة أفكاره المنحرفة وخيالاته المريضة. ومع ذلك لم يرض ساد مطلقًا عن جوستين بصورتها الأولى. فأعاد بعد سنوات كتابتها وتوسّع فيها حتى صارت عملاً ضخمًا من أربعة مجلدات أسماه "جوستين الجديدة" لكنه لم يصدر سوى مرة واحدة فقط واختفت نسخه جميعها ، لتبقى النسخة الأولى التي يقارب عمرها الآن حوالي 220 سنة!
من الجدير بالذكر أن مصطلح السادية ينسب إلى الماركي�� دو ساد. وهو نوع من الإضطراب فى الممارسة الجنسية تغذيه خيالات جنسية شديدة أو رغبات جنسية أو سلوك جنسي يتضمن تعذيب أحد أطراف العلاقة الجنسية جديًا ونفسيًا.
جوستين قصة شقيقتين تنفصلان بعد موت والديهما. تختار إحداهما - وتدعى جولييت- الإنخراط في حياة الرذيلة والرفاهية ، بينما تسلك الأخرى -جوستين- طريق الفضيلة والعفة. وكل أحداث الرواية بعد ذلك بإمكاني أن أختصرها بعبارة واحدة: "كل شيءٌ سيء يمكن أن يحدث في هذا العالم ، يحدث لجوستين" حيث أنّها تتعرض طوال الرواية لضروب من الممارسات الجنسية الشريرة ، التعذيب الجنسي ، الإضطهاد\الإستغلال الجنسي ... إلخ وكل رغبات\شهوات ساد المريضة التي تمكن أو لم يتمكن من ممارستها في الواقع.
وكما بدأت الرواية بانفصال الشقيقتين ، تنتهي كذلك بانفصالهما بعد أن تلتقيان بالصدفة ، حيث تخترق صاعقة الشقيقة الصغرى جوستين وترديها قتيلة منهية بذلك حياةً مثقلة بالعذابات!
لو أتيحت لي إعادة تسمية الرواية فسأسميها "فلسفة الشر" أو "فلسفة الرذيلة"؛ فبعيدًا عن الثيمة المبتذلة (صراع الخير والشر) للرواية، وهي الثيمة التي كانت تلون معظم الأعمال الأدبية في القرن الثامن عشر، فإن للرواية بعدًا فلسفيًا عميقًا وغريبًا في آن
فـ"ساد" يبدو في الرواية كرسول للرذيلة ، يروج لها ، ويبررها في قالب فلسفي على لسان شخصيات الرواية. ربما لهذا السبب أصبحت الرواية مصدرًا سيكولوحيًا هامًا لكل من يريد أن يفهم تجليات الشر ودوافعه لدى المجرمين أو المنحرفين. شخصيًا لم أستمتع بأحداث الرواية (المقرفة في معظم الأحيان) بقدر استمتاعي بالنقاشات التي كانت تدور بين جوستين وجلاديها
September 2, 2014
First impressions:
Marquis de Sade...you are one crazy m*****f*****.
So I had learned about Marquis de Sade, or at least first heard of him after watching the movie Quills and I immediately became really interested. Yes, his works are incredibly graphic and really go off the deep end, but he was added to my bucket list of authors I wanted to read just for the sake of reading.
After doing a little research I chose Justine, a classic, and one of his more famous stories to give a try at but it was a failure. I got either really bored or completely confused. It took me up until a couple of weeks ago to finally get his prose which is a bunch of active narration and then about 10 pages of speeches/sermons articulating his ideals. Ah ha! So away I went onto this journey, knowing that this was going to be one heck of a messed up story but curiosity is a powerful thing....
To start things off, before I really get into my opinion on Justine, a quick summary and yes this will contain spoilers, but I include them so everyone can understand where the heck I'm coming from here.
Okay! Now that we have gotten through all the nitty-and-gritty here is my opinion. What a load of garbage. Seriously why is this still in print anymore? Its like the Kardashians, famous for being famous and just as pathetic and sad. Basically the Marquis tried his hardest to not only gross out his audience but piss them off. The whole story's premise is basically that there cannot be good in the world without evil, therefore it is better to be evil to provide for the good.
Whatever. Did not like, really just finished the darn thing because I never really want to give up on a book. So many times Justine should have died but didn't and so many times she was just soo brainless. I mean if you keep getting kidnapped on your nightly walks, maybe...just maybe you SHOULDN'T take nightly walks!! Daytime girl. DAYTIME. Ugh. Waste of time but hey I crossed it off on my bucket list.
Don't really recommend for anyone unless you are just really curious what the heck it is after seeing the movie Quills. It's not often that I give such a bad review for a book because I try to look at both the pros and cons, but being a sh*tty story for the sake of being sh*tty story does not make it a good story. It makes it sh*tty. There I said it.
Boom! I'm out.
Marquis de Sade...you are one crazy m*****f*****.
So I had learned about Marquis de Sade, or at least first heard of him after watching the movie Quills and I immediately became really interested. Yes, his works are incredibly graphic and really go off the deep end, but he was added to my bucket list of authors I wanted to read just for the sake of reading.
After doing a little research I chose Justine, a classic, and one of his more famous stories to give a try at but it was a failure. I got either really bored or completely confused. It took me up until a couple of weeks ago to finally get his prose which is a bunch of active narration and then about 10 pages of speeches/sermons articulating his ideals. Ah ha! So away I went onto this journey, knowing that this was going to be one heck of a messed up story but curiosity is a powerful thing....
To start things off, before I really get into my opinion on Justine, a quick summary and yes this will contain spoilers, but I include them so everyone can understand where the heck I'm coming from here.
Okay! Now that we have gotten through all the nitty-and-gritty here is my opinion. What a load of garbage. Seriously why is this still in print anymore? Its like the Kardashians, famous for being famous and just as pathetic and sad. Basically the Marquis tried his hardest to not only gross out his audience but piss them off. The whole story's premise is basically that there cannot be good in the world without evil, therefore it is better to be evil to provide for the good.
Whatever. Did not like, really just finished the darn thing because I never really want to give up on a book. So many times Justine should have died but didn't and so many times she was just soo brainless. I mean if you keep getting kidnapped on your nightly walks, maybe...just maybe you SHOULDN'T take nightly walks!! Daytime girl. DAYTIME. Ugh. Waste of time but hey I crossed it off on my bucket list.
Don't really recommend for anyone unless you are just really curious what the heck it is after seeing the movie Quills. It's not often that I give such a bad review for a book because I try to look at both the pros and cons, but being a sh*tty story for the sake of being sh*tty story does not make it a good story. It makes it sh*tty. There I said it.
Boom! I'm out.
March 8, 2014
It is precisely the Misfortunes of Virtue which Sade illuminates in Justine. Virtue, personified in Justine, is perpetually confronted by misfortune, and subdued by an omnipresent force, which, as expected from the Marquis, drips animalistic eroticism. Justine is, inarguably, a novel on depravity, but beyond its blatant decadent literature, Justine is also to be seen and appreciated as a historical document -- a passionate chronicle and assessment of a culture not governed by law, but through the despotic monarchy of King Louis XVI. It is, essentially, a work of political philosophy and a critique of Revolutionary France.
Despite its ardent imagery the novel expands beyond the prurient joyride evident in its erotic style. That is to say, Justine is a candid rebuttal of Rousseau’s views of the noble savage and the social contract. The Marquis expounds man's unfettered indulgence as being fueled by momentary impulse and pleasure-- blind to consequence, or affliction to others. In the Sadean demimonde, characters (and people), were placed in either a position to impose their desires or as the objects upon which the desires of others were imposed upon -- occasionally a character enjoys the magnificence of the two. The Marquis’s savage is not noble in any perceivable sense, but rather merely a bundle of lustful appetites sulking underneath the patina of civilization, anticipating the occasion to be satiated.
Sade not only boldly decorated the macabre side of humanity, but he also glorified it and gave it a name—libertinism. He did so by drafting the most luxurious, nauseating, and magnetizing piece of writing since Ovid’s Erotic Poems. Justine is, arguably, the most extraordinary novel of the Marquis; the horrors narrated evoke a plethora of emotions in the reader—one minute inducing uninhibited sexual arousal, shortly after the arousal gives way to anguish, anguish to desperation, desperation into repudiation, until repudiation finally precipitates into cholera. It’s grotesque, inhumane, fascinating, and extraordinarily compelling.
Admittedly, I was simultaneously horrified and strangely captivated by Justine.
Despite its ardent imagery the novel expands beyond the prurient joyride evident in its erotic style. That is to say, Justine is a candid rebuttal of Rousseau’s views of the noble savage and the social contract. The Marquis expounds man's unfettered indulgence as being fueled by momentary impulse and pleasure-- blind to consequence, or affliction to others. In the Sadean demimonde, characters (and people), were placed in either a position to impose their desires or as the objects upon which the desires of others were imposed upon -- occasionally a character enjoys the magnificence of the two. The Marquis’s savage is not noble in any perceivable sense, but rather merely a bundle of lustful appetites sulking underneath the patina of civilization, anticipating the occasion to be satiated.
Sade not only boldly decorated the macabre side of humanity, but he also glorified it and gave it a name—libertinism. He did so by drafting the most luxurious, nauseating, and magnetizing piece of writing since Ovid’s Erotic Poems. Justine is, arguably, the most extraordinary novel of the Marquis; the horrors narrated evoke a plethora of emotions in the reader—one minute inducing uninhibited sexual arousal, shortly after the arousal gives way to anguish, anguish to desperation, desperation into repudiation, until repudiation finally precipitates into cholera. It’s grotesque, inhumane, fascinating, and extraordinarily compelling.
Admittedly, I was simultaneously horrified and strangely captivated by Justine.
Read
January 18, 2019هذا الرجل فاشل روائياً أيضاً لا أخلاقياً فقط !
ليست برواية ولا تستلزم التقييم .. مجموعة أوراق أفرغ فيها عصارة عقده النفسية ليس إلا .
ليست برواية ولا تستلزم التقييم .. مجموعة أوراق أفرغ فيها عصارة عقده النفسية ليس إلا .
March 2, 2015
Ante todo quiero aclarar que Justine no es una novela erótica y si alguien realmente se excita con las escenas de sexo explícitas del libro entonces tiene un nivel de perversión igual o peor que los personajes descriptos. Justine es un tratado filosófico sobre la virtud versus una sociedad corroída por los vicios, libertinajes y degeneraciones. También es un tratado filosófico sobre lo que realmente es lo bueno y lo malo, los valores que cada uno le atribuye a sus conductas. Por momentos es una apología del ateísmo y una cruda pero no por ello menos cierta crítica a la religión y sus instituciones hipócritas. La intención de Sade nunca fue tomar partido ni con los perversos ni con Justine, él solo se limitó a mostrar y que el lector fuera el último juez.
La sociedad francesa del siglo 18 no dista demasiado de lo que puede ser la sociedad de hoy en día. Básicamente el poder sigue siendo el mismo y sigue siendo ejercido de la misma manera. Los hombres hacen abuso de su autoridad, cargo y rol solo por ser hombres y tratan a las mujeres como objetos que solo sirven para satisfacer sus apetitos excesivos. Eso no es nada nuevo, siempre fue así y lo sigue siendo.
Quizás si Sade hubiese elegido el camino de escribir un libro netamente filosófico hubiese caído en el aburrimiento y es muy probable que sus ideas no hubiesen sido lo suficientemente claras. Pero a través de un relato de ficción, con un personaje que cuenta sus penas en primera persona, el lector se puede hacer una idea mucho más real de lo que se plantea.
La violencia tanto física, como sexual y emocional a la que es sometida Justine y otros tantos personajes a lo largo del relato, suele incomodar y por momentos asquear. Creo que era la idea y la intención de Sade cuando lo escribió. Lamentablemente la interpretación que se le dio a sus obras posteriormente fue equivocada, queriéndole endilgarles el tono erótico del cual carecen.
Mi primer acercamiento a Justine fue cuando tenía entre 18 y 20 años, llegué a la mitad y lo abandoné y recuerdo que era una lectura que me costaba mucho trabajo interpretarla, además que por momentos se me hacía dificil soportar lo que se describía con tanto detalle. Ahora con 38 años, esas cosas que antaño me generaban estupor, no me causaron ese efecto y pude ver más allá de lo pornográfico y entender la ideología que hay detrás.
No es una lectura fácil, ya sea por sensibilidades de ideas, creencias o morales. No es una lectura placentera porque por momentos tiene cierto nivel de densitud. Pero como enfoque filosófico y sociológico de una sociedad que se impulsa por sus vicios y premia a los criminales a través de la hipocrecía, es realmente fantástica.
La sociedad francesa del siglo 18 no dista demasiado de lo que puede ser la sociedad de hoy en día. Básicamente el poder sigue siendo el mismo y sigue siendo ejercido de la misma manera. Los hombres hacen abuso de su autoridad, cargo y rol solo por ser hombres y tratan a las mujeres como objetos que solo sirven para satisfacer sus apetitos excesivos. Eso no es nada nuevo, siempre fue así y lo sigue siendo.
Quizás si Sade hubiese elegido el camino de escribir un libro netamente filosófico hubiese caído en el aburrimiento y es muy probable que sus ideas no hubiesen sido lo suficientemente claras. Pero a través de un relato de ficción, con un personaje que cuenta sus penas en primera persona, el lector se puede hacer una idea mucho más real de lo que se plantea.
La violencia tanto física, como sexual y emocional a la que es sometida Justine y otros tantos personajes a lo largo del relato, suele incomodar y por momentos asquear. Creo que era la idea y la intención de Sade cuando lo escribió. Lamentablemente la interpretación que se le dio a sus obras posteriormente fue equivocada, queriéndole endilgarles el tono erótico del cual carecen.
Mi primer acercamiento a Justine fue cuando tenía entre 18 y 20 años, llegué a la mitad y lo abandoné y recuerdo que era una lectura que me costaba mucho trabajo interpretarla, además que por momentos se me hacía dificil soportar lo que se describía con tanto detalle. Ahora con 38 años, esas cosas que antaño me generaban estupor, no me causaron ese efecto y pude ver más allá de lo pornográfico y entender la ideología que hay detrás.
No es una lectura fácil, ya sea por sensibilidades de ideas, creencias o morales. No es una lectura placentera porque por momentos tiene cierto nivel de densitud. Pero como enfoque filosófico y sociológico de una sociedad que se impulsa por sus vicios y premia a los criminales a través de la hipocrecía, es realmente fantástica.
June 10, 2022
Με το Σαντ γίνεται το εξής : δεν είναι σίγουρο τι λειτουργεί ως πρόσχημα, η φιλοσοφία ή το ερωτικόν του κάθε βιβλίου του. Και βέβαια παντού υπάρχει μια ανερυθρίαστη κοινωνική κριτική και ένας σαρκασμός των μελόδραμάτικων καταστάσεων που ζουν ολες αυτες αί πτωχαι , πλην τιμιαις νεανίδες .
May 9, 2015
As Will Self puts it succinctly here, paraphrased: “I believe that humans are innately evil. It’s called egoism. When egoism hypertrophies, when it grows and grows like a cancer, then that person becomes a full-blown evil person.” Enter the uncompromising realm of the Marquis and the sequence of cartoon abuses heaped upon the virginal (anti?)heroine for over 250pp, translated (if Paul Bryant is to be believed), by the former (disgraced) songwriter of the Mamas and the Papas, who also wrote a monograph on the Marquis (note: this is a different John Phillips), and the ludicrous belief that humans should cultivate their innate evil and flout laws and conventions, because God does not love you, and the light at the end of the tunnel is the light of an oncoming train, and so on, yaketynoway. Phillips’s introduction for this book’s status as a blistering satire on the hypocrisy of institutions, and the absolute corruption of absolute power is a convincing one, and since the tortures mount in their ludicrousness, one can read this as a parodic period piece and save one’s blushes.
May 20, 2022
نمیدونم من چرا انتظار داشتم ژوستین از سدوم بهتر باشه؟ گول شهرتش رو نخورین!!! در حد همون سدوم داغونه!!
ژوستین یه کتاب مریضه! ولی نه یه کتاب مریض عادی بلکه یک کتاب مریض که به شدت درباره مسائل مریضش روده درازی میکنه!! جمعی از برترین خصال مورد علاقه من!!
آدم انتظار داره کتابی که معروفه به فلسفه آزادی خواهیش یکم کمتر پر از اهم... پورن... اهم... باشه؟ و جالبیش اینجاست که اون قسمت اروتیکش شدیداً چندش آور، زجرآور، طولانی، کثیف و غیر قابل ادامه دادنه!!
بحث های فلسفی کتاب هم تکراری و طولانیه. اوایل جالب و جذاب و جدیدن و آدم فکر میکنه واو!!! از این زاویه به قضایا نگاه نکرده بودمممممم!! اما خب پنجاه صفحه که میگذره دیگه از دست فلسفه بازی و نظرات بحث برانگیز (مودبانه گفتم!) شخصیت های کتاب، یکی تو سر خودت میزنی یکی تو سر کتاب!!
خلاصه بگم ژوستین مجموعهای از فانتزی های مارکی دو ساده که در پوشش بحث های فلسفی کادو پیچش کرده!!
و سوال اصلی اینه: چقدر باید ساد رو جدی گرفت؟ مسئله این است!!!
ژوستین یه کتاب مریضه! ولی نه یه کتاب مریض عادی بلکه یک کتاب مریض که به شدت درباره مسائل مریضش روده درازی میکنه!! جمعی از برترین خصال مورد علاقه من!!
آدم انتظار داره کتابی که معروفه به فلسفه آزادی خواهیش یکم کمتر پر از اهم... پورن... اهم... باشه؟ و جالبیش اینجاست که اون قسمت اروتیکش شدیداً چندش آور، زجرآور، طولانی، کثیف و غیر قابل ادامه دادنه!!
بحث های فلسفی کتاب هم تکراری و طولانیه. اوایل جالب و جذاب و جدیدن و آدم فکر میکنه واو!!! از این زاویه به قضایا نگاه نکرده بودمممممم!! اما خب پنجاه صفحه که میگذره دیگه از دست فلسفه بازی و نظرات بحث برانگیز (مودبانه گفتم!) شخصیت های کتاب، یکی تو سر خودت میزنی یکی تو سر کتاب!!
خلاصه بگم ژوستین مجموعهای از فانتزی های مارکی دو ساده که در پوشش بحث های فلسفی کادو پیچش کرده!!
و سوال اصلی اینه: چقدر باید ساد رو جدی گرفت؟ مسئله این است!!!
Read
May 16, 2024Reading De Sade is a deed of masochism in itself. A month ago I tried Les 120 journées de Sodome, and that was a real ordeal: the accumulation of gruesome scenes of sex and violence is unbearable. Moreover, the purely literary level of that unfinished work by the Marquis de Sade (1785) is clearly below par. That is somewhat different with this 'Justine', a novel that de Sade wrote and rewrote in various stages, spread between 1787 and 1797. It starts as a sentimental, moralistic story, about two sisters who grow up in a protected environment, but because of the dead of their parents end up on the street. The older sister, the cynical Juliette, manages to work her way up by using her feminine charms and committing numerous crimes. But the pious and virtuous Justine ends up really bad. In this novel she tells her story, following the conventions of the picaresque genre, in a succession of precarious situations in which she found herself.
If you have read the “120 days”, then this book initially seems to be not too bad: Justine uses strikingly veiled and disguised terms to describe what happens to her. But after the first third of the book, the events become increasingly perverse and sadistic. It is never as coarse and gross as in “120 days”, but you also have a strong stomach to read this book. Fortunately, the literary level and Justine's naive character somewhat make up for that. What also helps is that in this novel, much more than in “120 days”, the libertine protagonists 'philosophically' explain their perverse behavior with great rhetorical talent. These are sometimes passages of several pages that are beautifully developed in terms of literature.
The recurring mantra is the philosophy of nature that also recurs in de Sade's other works: in the state of nature it is everyone for himself; as with animals, only one's own pleasure counts; and nature takes no account of what is good or is bad. And above all: if we have a perverse taste, it is only because nature allows it: “If nature were offended by these tastes, she would not inspire them in us; it is impossible that we can receive from her a feeling designed to outrage her, and in this extreme certainty, we can give ourselves over to our passions of whatever kind, whatever violence they may be, well certain that all the inconveniences that their shock entails are only designs of nature of which we are the involuntary organs.» Clear, no?
Quite a bit has been written in the last half century about the misogynistic nature of de Sade's books. And indeed, the protagonists who indulge in the most unthinkable acts of violence and perversion are almost all men; and the victims are mainly women (and girls). That was certainly the case in “120 days”, and that is also the case in this Justine. In the 'philosophical' passages, the perpetrators regularly stress the absolute inferiority of the female species, to legitimize their evil deeds: “a puny creature, always inferior to man, infinitely less beautiful than him, less ingenious, less wise, made in a disgusting manner, entirely opposed to what can please man, to what should delight him.» So no discussion about the misogynistic character of de Sade's novels. Nevertheless, there is a very small nuance: in 'Justine', for example, older sister Juliette and the female leader of a gang of robbers show that they also like ‘the perverse stuff’, and in a single passage de Sade seems to hint that Justine herself very briefly began to see the attractive side of sadomasochistic play. Of course, this does not alter the fact that with de Sade this 'game' is always one-way, the total and arbitrary domination of one person by the other.
Reading 'Justine' was a slightly more pleasant experience than '120 days', although pleasant is certainly a misplaced word here. I think that by now I've seen enough of de Sade's world and I'm going to leave it at that. It's definitely not my world. But isn't that perhaps part of the reason why many readers venture into reading these kinds of things: to get to know other worlds, other lives, other views on life? Even though this is – in this case – a masochistic experience? And isn't such a confrontation with the repulsive always a bit of an enrichment? Or am I sweet-talking what cannot be sweet-talked? Mmm… De Sade certainly won't leave you unmoved.
If you have read the “120 days”, then this book initially seems to be not too bad: Justine uses strikingly veiled and disguised terms to describe what happens to her. But after the first third of the book, the events become increasingly perverse and sadistic. It is never as coarse and gross as in “120 days”, but you also have a strong stomach to read this book. Fortunately, the literary level and Justine's naive character somewhat make up for that. What also helps is that in this novel, much more than in “120 days”, the libertine protagonists 'philosophically' explain their perverse behavior with great rhetorical talent. These are sometimes passages of several pages that are beautifully developed in terms of literature.
The recurring mantra is the philosophy of nature that also recurs in de Sade's other works: in the state of nature it is everyone for himself; as with animals, only one's own pleasure counts; and nature takes no account of what is good or is bad. And above all: if we have a perverse taste, it is only because nature allows it: “If nature were offended by these tastes, she would not inspire them in us; it is impossible that we can receive from her a feeling designed to outrage her, and in this extreme certainty, we can give ourselves over to our passions of whatever kind, whatever violence they may be, well certain that all the inconveniences that their shock entails are only designs of nature of which we are the involuntary organs.» Clear, no?
Quite a bit has been written in the last half century about the misogynistic nature of de Sade's books. And indeed, the protagonists who indulge in the most unthinkable acts of violence and perversion are almost all men; and the victims are mainly women (and girls). That was certainly the case in “120 days”, and that is also the case in this Justine. In the 'philosophical' passages, the perpetrators regularly stress the absolute inferiority of the female species, to legitimize their evil deeds: “a puny creature, always inferior to man, infinitely less beautiful than him, less ingenious, less wise, made in a disgusting manner, entirely opposed to what can please man, to what should delight him.» So no discussion about the misogynistic character of de Sade's novels. Nevertheless, there is a very small nuance: in 'Justine', for example, older sister Juliette and the female leader of a gang of robbers show that they also like ‘the perverse stuff’, and in a single passage de Sade seems to hint that Justine herself very briefly began to see the attractive side of sadomasochistic play. Of course, this does not alter the fact that with de Sade this 'game' is always one-way, the total and arbitrary domination of one person by the other.
Reading 'Justine' was a slightly more pleasant experience than '120 days', although pleasant is certainly a misplaced word here. I think that by now I've seen enough of de Sade's world and I'm going to leave it at that. It's definitely not my world. But isn't that perhaps part of the reason why many readers venture into reading these kinds of things: to get to know other worlds, other lives, other views on life? Even though this is – in this case – a masochistic experience? And isn't such a confrontation with the repulsive always a bit of an enrichment? Or am I sweet-talking what cannot be sweet-talked? Mmm… De Sade certainly won't leave you unmoved.
September 27, 2020
Popsugar Challenge 2020 - A book featuring one of the seven deadly sins
Oh Justine! Up until i read this I would have said Tess of the D'Urberville's was the unluckiest woman in classic literature but I take it all back. JUSTINE!!!
I have a fascination with Marquis De Sade, one of the first documented Libertines and one of the earliest writers of BDSM and same sex relations. 17th century French literature is extraordinary.
Triggers warnings all over this, this is not a typical classic novel where disturbing scenes are alluded too, this contains on the page graphic gang bangs and rape. Modern day dark genre fiction pales beside De Sade which should not be a surprise since the word sadism was derived from his name.
For those interested in trying this out the first volume is on Spotify narrated by Susan Penhaligon which just her voice alone is extremely enjoyable.
Justine I shall see you again, this is one book I would reread.
Oh Justine! Up until i read this I would have said Tess of the D'Urberville's was the unluckiest woman in classic literature but I take it all back. JUSTINE!!!
I have a fascination with Marquis De Sade, one of the first documented Libertines and one of the earliest writers of BDSM and same sex relations. 17th century French literature is extraordinary.
Triggers warnings all over this, this is not a typical classic novel where disturbing scenes are alluded too, this contains on the page graphic gang bangs and rape. Modern day dark genre fiction pales beside De Sade which should not be a surprise since the word sadism was derived from his name.
For those interested in trying this out the first volume is on Spotify narrated by Susan Penhaligon which just her voice alone is extremely enjoyable.
Justine I shall see you again, this is one book I would reread.
May 17, 2012
de Sade's unfortunate reputation goes before him. Certainly none of his books are ones that you'd recommend to a maiden aunt. Part of their reputation is well earned.
However, it is, I think, a pity to dismiss him simply as a pornographer. His books are an unusual read, but are stimulating. His fierce anti-clericism is refreshing, if, as with most of what he says, rather on the extreme level.
What I find most informative, though, are his discussions of morality, ethics and government. de Sade was quite an enlightened proto-anarchist and, surprisingly, was, in many ways Epicurean. It is unfortunate that his fascinating political and social observations are mixed up with the salacious stuff, so it's difficult, for many people, to come to grips with them.
If you're not squeamish, or easily offended, and are interested in a remarkable man, with an unusual perspective, I think de Sade is well worth reading!
However, it is, I think, a pity to dismiss him simply as a pornographer. His books are an unusual read, but are stimulating. His fierce anti-clericism is refreshing, if, as with most of what he says, rather on the extreme level.
What I find most informative, though, are his discussions of morality, ethics and government. de Sade was quite an enlightened proto-anarchist and, surprisingly, was, in many ways Epicurean. It is unfortunate that his fascinating political and social observations are mixed up with the salacious stuff, so it's difficult, for many people, to come to grips with them.
If you're not squeamish, or easily offended, and are interested in a remarkable man, with an unusual perspective, I think de Sade is well worth reading!
July 13, 2020
المفروض ان عم ماركيز دي ساد اللي كاتب الرواية ده هو أصل كلمة سادية وطبعا المقدمة كان فيها معلومات عن جزء من حياته السودا وفضايحه المهببة، ده السادية كلمة قليلة علي اللي جابوه
والرواية طبعا بينت ده جدا لأنها بتحكي ببساطة عن جوستين عندها 16 سنة عيلتها افتقرت وابوها وامها ماتوا
اختها قالتلها فكك من الفضيلة والاحترام انا هعك وافك علي نفسي عشان الفلوس
وجوستين حلفت مية يمين ابدا انا هفضل عفيفة وعذراء لحد النهاية
وطبعا مكملتش التلات اللي بعديه كانت مصر القديمة كلها عملت معاها الفاحشة
الرواية عايزة تقول ان الفضيلة ده ملهاش لازمة وان الشر ده شئ طبيعي وموجود ومش شرط يبقي غلط لانه بيفرق من كل شخص
يعني الحمل مضايق ان الذئب بياكله لكن الذئب بيقول جعان وده الطبيعة يبقي مش غلطان
وان الغلط كمان في مكان ممكن يكون صح في أماكن تانية ف بلاش كلام عن الفضيلة والرب
جوستين اللي كانت بتدعي ربنا وعايزة الفضيلة قابلت اوسخ اصناف ناس في الدنيا وحصل فيها كل حاجة سودا ممكن حد يتخيلها يعني اللي اتبقي منها ميعملش ملاية
الكل اغتصبها وده كان كل نص ساعة واتجلدت واتحرقت وخلوها تنزف وشنق بالحبل كل يوم واستعبدوها شغل.. فاضل كانت تاخد طلقة في حلق بوءها
وبعدين كل اللي قابلها زبالة ابن كلب مقابلتش حتي محاسب يعاملها عدل يومين
ده حتي جاب في الرواية أن جوستين اللي بتعمل معاه خير وتنقذه حتي من الموت بيبهدل ابوها
اللي هو الفضيلة او الخير الي بتعمله ده ملوش لازمة مع الاشكال ده او في الدنيا كلها لان مفيش اي خير في انسان وان اللي بيغلط ده بيكون في احسن حال والحياة فل معاه
وتحس ان الكاتب اساسا نفسه يعمل كل ده ويبقي مكان الشخصيات ده... اللي هو اناااااام معاكم
وده طبعا ��ن المقدمة عرفنا انه عمله واتمسك كذا مرة ملفوف بملاية وهربان عشان ميتسجنش من اللي عمله واتسجن كذا مرة
رواية سيئة ومحادثة فلسفية عن الفضيلة زي الزفت
والرواية طبعا بينت ده جدا لأنها بتحكي ببساطة عن جوستين عندها 16 سنة عيلتها افتقرت وابوها وامها ماتوا
اختها قالتلها فكك من الفضيلة والاحترام انا هعك وافك علي نفسي عشان الفلوس
وجوستين حلفت مية يمين ابدا انا هفضل عفيفة وعذراء لحد النهاية
وطبعا مكملتش التلات اللي بعديه كانت مصر القديمة كلها عملت معاها الفاحشة
الرواية عايزة تقول ان الفضيلة ده ملهاش لازمة وان الشر ده شئ طبيعي وموجود ومش شرط يبقي غلط لانه بيفرق من كل شخص
يعني الحمل مضايق ان الذئب بياكله لكن الذئب بيقول جعان وده الطبيعة يبقي مش غلطان
وان الغلط كمان في مكان ممكن يكون صح في أماكن تانية ف بلاش كلام عن الفضيلة والرب
جوستين اللي كانت بتدعي ربنا وعايزة الفضيلة قابلت اوسخ اصناف ناس في الدنيا وحصل فيها كل حاجة سودا ممكن حد يتخيلها يعني اللي اتبقي منها ميعملش ملاية
الكل اغتصبها وده كان كل نص ساعة واتجلدت واتحرقت وخلوها تنزف وشنق بالحبل كل يوم واستعبدوها شغل.. فاضل كانت تاخد طلقة في حلق بوءها
وبعدين كل اللي قابلها زبالة ابن كلب مقابلتش حتي محاسب يعاملها عدل يومين
ده حتي جاب في الرواية أن جوستين اللي بتعمل معاه خير وتنقذه حتي من الموت بيبهدل ابوها
اللي هو الفضيلة او الخير الي بتعمله ده ملوش لازمة مع الاشكال ده او في الدنيا كلها لان مفيش اي خير في انسان وان اللي بيغلط ده بيكون في احسن حال والحياة فل معاه
وتحس ان الكاتب اساسا نفسه يعمل كل ده ويبقي مكان الشخصيات ده... اللي هو اناااااام معاكم
وده طبعا ��ن المقدمة عرفنا انه عمله واتمسك كذا مرة ملفوف بملاية وهربان عشان ميتسجنش من اللي عمله واتسجن كذا مرة
رواية سيئة ومحادثة فلسفية عن الفضيلة زي الزفت
June 2, 2012
جوستين
قررت أن أنفض عن هذه الرواية غبارها، بعدما قرأت رواية (خمسون ظلاً من الرمادي)، والتي كان أحد أبطالها سادياً، أو كما عبرت عنه الكاتبة مسيطراً، فلذا أردت أن اقرأ لدي ساد نفسه، كنوع من الفضول غير المحمود.
والآن وبعد الفراغ من هذه الرواية يمكنني أن أقول أنها بدت كلعبة فيديو، حيث أخذ المؤلف فتاة صغيرة، وجعلها تمر بمراحل مختلفة من الممارسات السادية، بحيث تظن وأنت تقرأ الكتاب، أن هذه الفتاة إما عاثرة الحظ بشكل لا يصدق، أو أن الريف الفرنسي كان يعج بالساديين في وقت الكاتب.
ولكننا نفهم شغف الكتابة عن الأشياء التي تثيرنا، والمؤلف كان سادياً، بل اشتقت التسمية من اسمه، والتاريخ كما نعرف مليء بهؤلاء، لم يكن دي ساد أولهم ولن يكون آخرهم، ولكنه ربما أول من حاول فلسفة ما يفعله، فلذا جعل فتاته الصغيرة (جوستين)، فتاة طاهرة، متعلقة بالفضيلة، ترفض هذه الممارسات تماماً، وجعلها تبتلى مرة تلو المرة، بساديين مخادعين، لا يكتفون باستغلالها، وتعذيبها، وإنما يملكون الرغبة والوقت لتبرير أفعالهم لها، بأحاديث مطولة عن غياب الخير والشر، ومن وراء ذلك غياب الإله الذي له وحده حق الحكم على صواب الأشياء وخطئها، ولكن جوستين لا تلين، ولا تستسلم، ولا تختفي من صدرها شعلة الدين والفضيلة، رغم كل ما مرت به من أحداث مجنونة، وأماكن مرعبة، يصفها المؤلف بشكل رهيب، وفي النهاية نجد أن أختها التي قررت سلوك الرذيلة من البداية، عاشت حياة هانئة، يحاول فيها أغنى رجال فرنسا الوصول إليها ونيل رضاها، وتزداد السخرية عندما تضرب صاعقة جوستين فتقتلها، وهي نهاية هزلية، فالصاعقة التي يمكننا اعتبارها رمز للعقوبة الإلهية، لم تقع على أي من هؤلاء الساديين، لم تقع على جولييت، وإنما وقعت على الكائن الوحيد المنكوب في الرواية، إنها نهاية عبثية، تقول لنا أن فضيلة جوستين كانت بلاهة، تستحق عليها صاعقة سماوية.
قررت أن أنفض عن هذه الرواية غبارها، بعدما قرأت رواية (خمسون ظلاً من الرمادي)، والتي كان أحد أبطالها سادياً، أو كما عبرت عنه الكاتبة مسيطراً، فلذا أردت أن اقرأ لدي ساد نفسه، كنوع من الفضول غير المحمود.
والآن وبعد الفراغ من هذه الرواية يمكنني أن أقول أنها بدت كلعبة فيديو، حيث أخذ المؤلف فتاة صغيرة، وجعلها تمر بمراحل مختلفة من الممارسات السادية، بحيث تظن وأنت تقرأ الكتاب، أن هذه الفتاة إما عاثرة الحظ بشكل لا يصدق، أو أن الريف الفرنسي كان يعج بالساديين في وقت الكاتب.
ولكننا نفهم شغف الكتابة عن الأشياء التي تثيرنا، والمؤلف كان سادياً، بل اشتقت التسمية من اسمه، والتاريخ كما نعرف مليء بهؤلاء، لم يكن دي ساد أولهم ولن يكون آخرهم، ولكنه ربما أول من حاول فلسفة ما يفعله، فلذا جعل فتاته الصغيرة (جوستين)، فتاة طاهرة، متعلقة بالفضيلة، ترفض هذه الممارسات تماماً، وجعلها تبتلى مرة تلو المرة، بساديين مخادعين، لا يكتفون باستغلالها، وتعذيبها، وإنما يملكون الرغبة والوقت لتبرير أفعالهم لها، بأحاديث مطولة عن غياب الخير والشر، ومن وراء ذلك غياب الإله الذي له وحده حق الحكم على صواب الأشياء وخطئها، ولكن جوستين لا تلين، ولا تستسلم، ولا تختفي من صدرها شعلة الدين والفضيلة، رغم كل ما مرت به من أحداث مجنونة، وأماكن مرعبة، يصفها المؤلف بشكل رهيب، وفي النهاية نجد أن أختها التي قررت سلوك الرذيلة من البداية، عاشت حياة هانئة، يحاول فيها أغنى رجال فرنسا الوصول إليها ونيل رضاها، وتزداد السخرية عندما تضرب صاعقة جوستين فتقتلها، وهي نهاية هزلية، فالصاعقة التي يمكننا اعتبارها رمز للعقوبة الإلهية، لم تقع على أي من هؤلاء الساديين، لم تقع على جولييت، وإنما وقعت على الكائن الوحيد المنكوب في الرواية، إنها نهاية عبثية، تقول لنا أن فضيلة جوستين كانت بلاهة، تستحق عليها صاعقة سماوية.
October 22, 2017
Πήρε κάπου το μάτι μου μια εξαιρετικά θετική κριτική για ένα άλλο βιβλίο του ντε Σαντ προσφατα και επέστρεψα στην δική μου κριτική για τη Ζυστίν. Παρατήρησα ότι της έχω βάλει μόνο τρία αστεράκια και προσπάθησα να θυμηθώ γιατί.
Θυμάμαι πολύ χαρακτηριστικά να αναφωνω σε πολλά σημεία του βιβλίου "ω, κοίτα τι είπε ο άνθρωπος πριν από τόσα χρόνια!" με θαυμασμό. Πολλές ωραίες ιδέες για την δικαιοσύνη και την αρετή, για το δίκαιο του δυνατού (περίπου όπως το παρουσίασε ο Θρασύμαχος στην Πολιτεία του Πλάτωνα) και τη σημασία του να είσαι ο ισχυρός που θέτει τους κανόνες. Επίσης πολύ γλαφυρή γραφή και τολμηρή γλώσσα για την εποχή και φυσικά πολύ μα πολύ βίαιο σεξ. Όλο το βιβλίο στην ουσία είναι μια παρατεταμένη σκηνή βιασμού όπου αλλάζει το περιβάλλον και το πρόσωπο του ή των βιαστή/βιαστών. Και στο ενδιάμεσο η Ζυστίν να προσπαθεί να πείσει για την αρετή της παρθενίας της, την οποία βέβαια έχει χάσει προ πολλού και να λαμβάνει ένα πολύ ενδιαφέρον κήρυγμα για το πόσο ανάξια λόγου είναι μια τέτοια αρετή και πόσο ανούσια και μάταια είναι η προσπάθεια αναζήτησης και διατήρησής της.
Αλλά. Δεν εκστασιάστηκα. Καταλαβαίνω γιατί σοκάρει (ακόμα και σήμερα είναι αρκετά σοκαριστικό), καταλαβαίνω γιατί προκαλεί και ερεθίζει το πνεύμα με τις φιλοσοφικές του προεκτάσεις, αλλά. Από τα μισά και κάτω καταρχάς επαναλαμβάνεται σε πολύ μεγάλο βαθμό. Είναι σαν να είχε απλώς ο ντε Σαντ μερικές ιδέες ακόμα για το πώς να κάνει τη Ζυστίν να ��ποφέρει αλλά του είχε τελειώσει η φιλοσοφία. Έτσι, μας έμειναν μόνο οι βιασμοί και τα βασανιστήρια. Έπειτα, αν και στην εποχή του ήταν πολύ προχωρημένο, σήμερα δεν είμαι σίγουρη ότι έχει να πει πολλά περισσότερα πέρα από αυτό: ότι στην εποχή του ήταν πολύ προχωρημένο. Όχι ότι δεν είναι σημαντικό κι αυτό βέβαια, αλλά... Αλλά.
Νομίζω ότι για αυτό του είχα βάλει τρία αστέρια. Κάποια στιγμή θα ήθελα να πιάσω τη φιλοσοφία στο μπουντουάρ και ξέρω ότι ποτέ δεν πρόκειται να διαβάσω το 120 μέρες στα Σόδομα.
Θυμάμαι πολύ χαρακτηριστικά να αναφωνω σε πολλά σημεία του βιβλίου "ω, κοίτα τι είπε ο άνθρωπος πριν από τόσα χρόνια!" με θαυμασμό. Πολλές ωραίες ιδέες για την δικαιοσύνη και την αρετή, για το δίκαιο του δυνατού (περίπου όπως το παρουσίασε ο Θρασύμαχος στην Πολιτεία του Πλάτωνα) και τη σημασία του να είσαι ο ισχυρός που θέτει τους κανόνες. Επίσης πολύ γλαφυρή γραφή και τολμηρή γλώσσα για την εποχή και φυσικά πολύ μα πολύ βίαιο σεξ. Όλο το βιβλίο στην ουσία είναι μια παρατεταμένη σκηνή βιασμού όπου αλλάζει το περιβάλλον και το πρόσωπο του ή των βιαστή/βιαστών. Και στο ενδιάμεσο η Ζυστίν να προσπαθεί να πείσει για την αρετή της παρθενίας της, την οποία βέβαια έχει χάσει προ πολλού και να λαμβάνει ένα πολύ ενδιαφέρον κήρυγμα για το πόσο ανάξια λόγου είναι μια τέτοια αρετή και πόσο ανούσια και μάταια είναι η προσπάθεια αναζήτησης και διατήρησής της.
Αλλά. Δεν εκστασιάστηκα. Καταλαβαίνω γιατί σοκάρει (ακόμα και σήμερα είναι αρκετά σοκαριστικό), καταλαβαίνω γιατί προκαλεί και ερεθίζει το πνεύμα με τις φιλοσοφικές του προεκτάσεις, αλλά. Από τα μισά και κάτω καταρχάς επαναλαμβάνεται σε πολύ μεγάλο βαθμό. Είναι σαν να είχε απλώς ο ντε Σαντ μερικές ιδέες ακόμα για το πώς να κάνει τη Ζυστίν να ��ποφέρει αλλά του είχε τελειώσει η φιλοσοφία. Έτσι, μας έμειναν μόνο οι βιασμοί και τα βασανιστήρια. Έπειτα, αν και στην εποχή του ήταν πολύ προχωρημένο, σήμερα δεν είμαι σίγουρη ότι έχει να πει πολλά περισσότερα πέρα από αυτό: ότι στην εποχή του ήταν πολύ προχωρημένο. Όχι ότι δεν είναι σημαντικό κι αυτό βέβαια, αλλά... Αλλά.
Νομίζω ότι για αυτό του είχα βάλει τρία αστέρια. Κάποια στιγμή θα ήθελα να πιάσω τη φιλοσοφία στο μπουντουάρ και ξέρω ότι ποτέ δεν πρόκειται να διαβάσω το 120 μέρες στα Σόδομα.
December 1, 2017
de Sade'ın Sodom ve Franval 'dan sonra okuduğum 3. kitabıydı. Ne Sodom kadar "sapkın" ne de Franval kadar felsefi anlamda basitti. İçerdiği konu itibariyle "aykırı" edebiyat olarak sınıflandırılsa da alt metinlerdeki felsefi değerlendirmeler kesinlikle kitabı başka bir boyuta taşıyor.
Alt başlığında da belirtildiği gibi Erdemin Felaketleri, neden erdemli olmamalıyız, haz duymanın vazgeçilmezliği, haz uğruna yapılan kötüleklerin mübah olduğu, bekaret / namus olgusunun ilkelliği, dinin ve tanrı fikrinin geçerliliği, varoluş sorunsalında insanın bencilliği, cinayetin ve öldürmenin kökeninde farksızlığı, kan bağının anlamsızlığı, değişmez ahlakın varolup olmadığı gibi daha bir çok konu irdeleniyor ve çoğu yerde bir şekilde ikna oluyorsunuz.
Yazıldığı dönemi gözönünde bulundurursak oldukça cesur ve aykırı diyebiliriz.
Justine'in anlattıklarından sonra, erdemsizliği tercih eden ablası Juliette'nin anlatacaklarını oldukça merak ediyorum.
Alt başlığında da belirtildiği gibi Erdemin Felaketleri, neden erdemli olmamalıyız, haz duymanın vazgeçilmezliği, haz uğruna yapılan kötüleklerin mübah olduğu, bekaret / namus olgusunun ilkelliği, dinin ve tanrı fikrinin geçerliliği, varoluş sorunsalında insanın bencilliği, cinayetin ve öldürmenin kökeninde farksızlığı, kan bağının anlamsızlığı, değişmez ahlakın varolup olmadığı gibi daha bir çok konu irdeleniyor ve çoğu yerde bir şekilde ikna oluyorsunuz.
Yazıldığı dönemi gözönünde bulundurursak oldukça cesur ve aykırı diyebiliriz.
Justine'in anlattıklarından sonra, erdemsizliği tercih eden ablası Juliette'nin anlatacaklarını oldukça merak ediyorum.
May 29, 2020
Look at that I actually finished it. Say what you want about Sade but he definitely has a sense of humour like she gets struck by lightening in the end is that not the funniest thing. Sade is all about testing boundaries and limits and then going far far beyond them, in a physical, emotional, political and philosophical sense. The acts of libertinism serve as example of the philosophical arguments Justine has time and time again with her captors. Sade doesn’t fear saying things explicitly (lol) that others won’t, pointing out how corrupted and exploitable the system is through the ways it should save Justine but really only delivered her into the hands of more abusers. This book is for sure not for everyone, but I do genuinely think he’s one of the most fascinating people of the 18th c to read... y’know, if you have the stomach for it.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 27, 2024
البته این امتیاز رو به ترجمه فرانسوی دادم.
و البته آنکه از حیث ادبی امتیاز در هر صورت پایین خواهد بود برای من.
پروبلماتیک ساده اخلاق است و این اثر هم از این حیث دوچندان مهم است.
و البته آنکه از حیث ادبی امتیاز در هر صورت پایین خواهد بود برای من.
پروبلماتیک ساده اخلاق است و این اثر هم از این حیث دوچندان مهم است.
June 17, 2013
Saying that this is my kind of porn comes across very, very badly. So before i say that (or write it) i just want to make it absolutely clear that i enjoyed the intellectual side of it, not the raping side. So, without further ado, this is my kind of porn!Hence the 5 stars.
I'd also like to formally invite the Marquis over to my place for dinner this Saturday, because as we all know he and Elvis are having the time of their (still very ongoing) lives somewhere on a secluded island, Richard Branson style. And please bring a pen, certain parts of my anatomy need signing.(Seriously, i'm a massive fan).
Now, what to say about the book itsself?
It's damn good and you all should read it. Not quite as good as "Philosophy in the Bedroom," but great fun to read. I honestly can't believe the sheer comical value of this book! Justine gets raped so often, one becomes completely bored of it and starts to wonder how much more it'll take for the dumb, litte blonde to realise that religion isn't helping her?
It sounds bad, but please read it and all of Sade's other books before you hate on the man. I mean, how evil can a guy that liked children's party games really be?
I'd also like to formally invite the Marquis over to my place for dinner this Saturday, because as we all know he and Elvis are having the time of their (still very ongoing) lives somewhere on a secluded island, Richard Branson style. And please bring a pen, certain parts of my anatomy need signing.(Seriously, i'm a massive fan).
Now, what to say about the book itsself?
It's damn good and you all should read it. Not quite as good as "Philosophy in the Bedroom," but great fun to read. I honestly can't believe the sheer comical value of this book! Justine gets raped so often, one becomes completely bored of it and starts to wonder how much more it'll take for the dumb, litte blonde to realise that religion isn't helping her?
It sounds bad, but please read it and all of Sade's other books before you hate on the man. I mean, how evil can a guy that liked children's party games really be?
August 9, 2023
Il n’y a pas de justice pour Justine.
Δεν είχα διαβάσει ποτέ ντε Σαντ, δεν εξεπλάγην ωστόσο καθόλου εφόσον είχα ακουστά περί τίνος πρόκειται ούτε και σοκαρίστηκα τόσο από τις σαδομαζοχιστικές σκηνές και τις εκτενείς περιγραφές οργίων και σεξουαλικών βασανισμών που υπέστη η Ζυστίν, κατά κόσμον Τερέζα. Προφανώς και η ουσία του βιβλίου δε βρίσκεται σε αυτά –ωστόσο ο μαρκήσιος το παρατράβηξε με τις επαναλήψεις των ακραίων σωματικών δεινών της ενάρετης κορασίδας.
Πέραν του ότι πρόκειται για ένα ρόλερ κόστερ της Ζυστίν από τον έναν επιβήτορα στον άλλον και σε ομάδες αυτών, το βιβλίο έχει πολλή φιλοσοφία από πίσω, όπως ότι στη γη συνυπάρχει το καλό και το κακό (έλα, δεν το πιστεύω) και πως κατά κάποιο τρόπο δεν υπάρχουν ενιαίες ηθικές αρχές που διέπουν όλους τους λαούς. Η Ζυστίν διαφυλάσσοντας την αρετή της στην ψυχή –διότι το σώμα της εκμαυλίστηκε με τους χειρότερους δυνατούς τρόπους– βρέθηκε βορά όλων των κακοτυχιών και έγινε στόχος υπέρτατων σωματικών βασανιστηρίων. Πολλοί προσπάθησαν να τη διαφθείρουν, όπως γίνεται και σήμερα στους ενάρετους αυτού του κόσμου: πόσο συχνά η αδικία πέφτει τσεκουράτη επάνω σε αγνούς και αθώους, επάνω σε αυτούς που πορεύονται με τον σταυρό στο χέρι, χωρίς ποτέ αυτοί να βρίσκουν το δίκιο τους (καταδικαστικές αποφάσεις που μετά αναιρούνται και βιαστές ξαναβγαίνουν στην πιάτσα είναι ένα μόνο παράδειγμα των αδικιών που συμβαίνουν παντού και πάντα).
Ο ντε Σαντ θέτει το θέμα της σχετικότητας της αρετής. Όπως επίσης και της ανθρώπινης φύσης την ευθυγραμμίζει με την ίδια τη φύση: ο κάθε άνθρωπος έχει διαφορετικές εργοστασιακές ρυθμίσεις. Άλλος είναι εκ φύσεως ενάρετος, άλλος εκ φύσεως ρέπει προς τη διαστροφή και την καταστροφικότητα. Δεν πρέπει επ’ ουδενί να παρεμποδίζεται αυτή η φυσ��κή τάξη των πραγμάτων, σύμφωνα με τους διαφθορείς της Ζυστίν. Όπως η φύση που δεν έδωσε ποτέ δεκάρα για την ηθική και ενεργεί αυθορμήτως, έτσι και ο άνθρωπος θα πρέπει να πράττει ανάλογα με την αυτοδιάθεσή του, ακόμα κι αν αυτή είναι βλαπτική ή τοξική για τους υπόλοιπους. Έτσι λειτουργούν τα πράγματα, έτσι κινούνται τα γρανάζια του κόσμου. Ξεδιπλώνεται στις σελίδες μπόλικος μισογυνισμός που μας δίνει την απολύτως ακριβή εικόνα παρελθόντων αιώνων: η γυναίκα ήταν μόνο σκεύος ηδονής, ένα χυσοδοχείο (χατζηστεφανικός όρος που συγκράτησα από παλιά) για το δυνατό, υπερέχον φύλο και τίποτε άλλο. Οι τύψεις είναι επίσης «χίμαιρες», ένα άχρηστο κατασκεύασμα που δεν εξυπηρετεί πουθενά και κανέναν, «[…] δεν είναι η επιβεβαίωση ενός εγκλήματος, είναι απλώς το σημάδι μιας ψυχής που υποτάσσεται εύκολα.»
«Σε μια φαύλη κοινωνία, η αρετή δε χρησιμεύει σε τίποτε. Δεν πρέπει να την υιοθετεί κανείς, διότι θα του είναι άχρηστη. Δεν έχω, λοιπόν, άδικο όταν υποστηρίζω πως η αναγκαιότητά της εξαρτάται από τα πιστεύω του καθενός και από τις περιστάσεις. Η αρετή δεν είναι αδιαμφισβήτητη αξία, αλλά ένας τρόπος συμπεριφοράς που ποικίλλει ανάλογα με το κλίμα και συνεπώς, δεν εμπεριέχει τίποτε αληθινό. Αυτό αρκεί για να μας κάνει να δούμε πόσο ασήμαντη είναι. Το αληθινά καλό είναι το σταθερό. Ό,τι αλλάζει διαρκώς δεν θα μπορούσε να έχει τον χαρακτήρα του καλού. Γι’ αυτό, άλλωστε, έχουμε θέσει το αμετάβλητο στον πυρήνα της τελειότητας του Αιωνίου. Η αρετή όμως στερείται εντελώς αυτού του χαρακτηριστικού. Πουθενά στον κόσμο δε θα βρεις δύο έθνη που να εκφράζουν την αρετή με τον ίδιο τρόπο. Δεν υπάρχει, λοιπόν, τίποτε αληθινό στην αρετή, τίποτε εσωτερικά καλό, και δεν αξίζει καθόλου να λατρεύεται. Θα πρέπει να τη χρησιμοποιούμε ως υποστήριγμα, να υιοθετούμε πολιτικά την αρετή της χώρας όπου ζούμε, ώστε όσοι την ασκούν επειδή το θέλουν ή επειδή οφείλουν, να την τιμούν λόγω της κατάστασης να μας αφήσουν σε ησυχία.»
Έχοντας πρόσφατα διαβάσει το «Ένας, κανένας και εκατό χιλιάδες» του Πιραντέλλο, μου άρεσε που βρήκα συσχετισμούς με το αγαπημένο αυτό βιβλίο. Ο Μαρκήσιος είπε πράγματα before it was cool, και προφανώς και άλλοι πριν από αυτόν. Αυτή η νοητική συνάντηση ήταν για μένα και το απολαυστικότερο κομμάτι του βιβλίου.
«Το πιο γελοίο πράγμα στον κόσμο, αγαπητή μου Τερέζα, είναι αναμφίβολα να θες να συζητάς για τα γούστα του ανθρώπου που, να τα αντικρούεις, να τα μέμφεσαι ή να τα τιμωρείς αν δεν είναι σύμφωνα με τους νόμους της χώρας όπου κατοικείς ή με τις κοινωνικές συμβάσεις. Ε, μα! Οι άνθρωποι δεν λένε να καταλάβουν ότι δεν υπάρχει γούστο, όσο αλλόκοτο, όσο εγκληματικό κι αν υποθέσουμε ότι είναι, που να μην εξαρτάται από την οργάνωση που μας έχει δώσει η φύση! Και με βάση αυτό, σε ρωτώ: με ποιο δικαίωμα ένας άνθρωπος θα τολμήσει να αξιώσει από κάποιον άλλον είτε να αναμορφώσει τα γούστα του είτε να τα συμμορφώσει προς την κοινωνική του τάξη; Με ποιο δικαίωμα, μάλιστα, οι νόμοι, που είναι φτιαγμένοι για την ευτυχία του ανθρώπου και μόνο, τολμούν να λυμαίνονται αυτή την ευτυχία που οι νόμοι οφείλουν να του διασφαλίζουν; Και να ήθελε κάποιος να αλλάξει τα γούστα του, μπορεί; Είναι στο χέρι μας να ξαναφτιάξουμε τον εαυτό μας; Μπορούμε να γίνουμε άλλοι από αυτό που είμαστε; Θα απαιτούσατε κάτι τέτοιο από έναν εκ γενετής ανάπηρο; Πόσο διαφέρει αυτή η μη συμμόρφωση των γούστων μας σε ηθικό επίπεδο από την ατέλεια ενός αναπήρου σε σωματικό επίπεδο;»
Δε θέλω να ξέρω πώς θα μπορούσε να το αναλύσει αυτό το εδάφιο ένας ψυχαναλυτής σήμερα! Le grand bordel, ουουουου 666 antichrist!
Όμως το καλό, απαντά με τον ίδιο τρόπο στον διαφθορέα του:
«[…] Παραδέχεστε ότι στη φύση υπάρχει ένα συνολικό άθροισμα καλού και κακού και ότι, κατά συνέπεια, χρειάζεται ένας ορισμένος αριθμός κάποιων που πράττουν το καλό και ένας ορισμένος αριθμός κάποιων άλλων που ενδίδουν στο κακό. Η δική μου θέση λοιπόν [η αρετή] είναι κάτι που προκύπτει φυσικά. Πώς απαιτείτε από μένα να παρεκκλίνω από τους κανόνες που η φύση έχει προδιαγράψει για την περίπτωσή μου;»
Στο τέλος, θα νικήσουν οι «καλοί» και θα ζήσουν αυτοί καλά κι εμείς καλύτερα. Μπορεί όμως να θεωρηθεί επιτυχία της αρετής ένα τέλος καλό του οποίου έχει προηγηθεί μια τεράστια θυσία; Αυτό θα το απαντήσει ο καθένας στον εαυτό του, ελέγχοντας την ελαστικότητα των αρχών και των αξιών του.
Δεν είχα διαβάσει ποτέ ντε Σαντ, δεν εξεπλάγην ωστόσο καθόλου εφόσον είχα ακουστά περί τίνος πρόκειται ούτε και σοκαρίστηκα τόσο από τις σαδομαζοχιστικές σκηνές και τις εκτενείς περιγραφές οργίων και σεξουαλικών βασανισμών που υπέστη η Ζυστίν, κατά κόσμον Τερέζα. Προφανώς και η ουσία του βιβλίου δε βρίσκεται σε αυτά –ωστόσο ο μαρκήσιος το παρατράβηξε με τις επαναλήψεις των ακραίων σωματικών δεινών της ενάρετης κορασίδας.
Πέραν του ότι πρόκειται για ένα ρόλερ κόστερ της Ζυστίν από τον έναν επιβήτορα στον άλλον και σε ομάδες αυτών, το βιβλίο έχει πολλή φιλοσοφία από πίσω, όπως ότι στη γη συνυπάρχει το καλό και το κακό (έλα, δεν το πιστεύω) και πως κατά κάποιο τρόπο δεν υπάρχουν ενιαίες ηθικές αρχές που διέπουν όλους τους λαούς. Η Ζυστίν διαφυλάσσοντας την αρετή της στην ψυχή –διότι το σώμα της εκμαυλίστηκε με τους χειρότερους δυνατούς τρόπους– βρέθηκε βορά όλων των κακοτυχιών και έγινε στόχος υπέρτατων σωματικών βασανιστηρίων. Πολλοί προσπάθησαν να τη διαφθείρουν, όπως γίνεται και σήμερα στους ενάρετους αυτού του κόσμου: πόσο συχνά η αδικία πέφτει τσεκουράτη επάνω σε αγνούς και αθώους, επάνω σε αυτούς που πορεύονται με τον σταυρό στο χέρι, χωρίς ποτέ αυτοί να βρίσκουν το δίκιο τους (καταδικαστικές αποφάσεις που μετά αναιρούνται και βιαστές ξαναβγαίνουν στην πιάτσα είναι ένα μόνο παράδειγμα των αδικιών που συμβαίνουν παντού και πάντα).
Ο ντε Σαντ θέτει το θέμα της σχετικότητας της αρετής. Όπως επίσης και της ανθρώπινης φύσης την ευθυγραμμίζει με την ίδια τη φύση: ο κάθε άνθρωπος έχει διαφορετικές εργοστασιακές ρυθμίσεις. Άλλος είναι εκ φύσεως ενάρετος, άλλος εκ φύσεως ρέπει προς τη διαστροφή και την καταστροφικότητα. Δεν πρέπει επ’ ουδενί να παρεμποδίζεται αυτή η φυσ��κή τάξη των πραγμάτων, σύμφωνα με τους διαφθορείς της Ζυστίν. Όπως η φύση που δεν έδωσε ποτέ δεκάρα για την ηθική και ενεργεί αυθορμήτως, έτσι και ο άνθρωπος θα πρέπει να πράττει ανάλογα με την αυτοδιάθεσή του, ακόμα κι αν αυτή είναι βλαπτική ή τοξική για τους υπόλοιπους. Έτσι λειτουργούν τα πράγματα, έτσι κινούνται τα γρανάζια του κόσμου. Ξεδιπλώνεται στις σελίδες μπόλικος μισογυνισμός που μας δίνει την απολύτως ακριβή εικόνα παρελθόντων αιώνων: η γυναίκα ήταν μόνο σκεύος ηδονής, ένα χυσοδοχείο (χατζηστεφανικός όρος που συγκράτησα από παλιά) για το δυνατό, υπερέχον φύλο και τίποτε άλλο. Οι τύψεις είναι επίσης «χίμαιρες», ένα άχρηστο κατασκεύασμα που δεν εξυπηρετεί πουθενά και κανέναν, «[…] δεν είναι η επιβεβαίωση ενός εγκλήματος, είναι απλώς το σημάδι μιας ψυχής που υποτάσσεται εύκολα.»
«Σε μια φαύλη κοινωνία, η αρετή δε χρησιμεύει σε τίποτε. Δεν πρέπει να την υιοθετεί κανείς, διότι θα του είναι άχρηστη. Δεν έχω, λοιπόν, άδικο όταν υποστηρίζω πως η αναγκαιότητά της εξαρτάται από τα πιστεύω του καθενός και από τις περιστάσεις. Η αρετή δεν είναι αδιαμφισβήτητη αξία, αλλά ένας τρόπος συμπεριφοράς που ποικίλλει ανάλογα με το κλίμα και συνεπώς, δεν εμπεριέχει τίποτε αληθινό. Αυτό αρκεί για να μας κάνει να δούμε πόσο ασήμαντη είναι. Το αληθινά καλό είναι το σταθερό. Ό,τι αλλάζει διαρκώς δεν θα μπορούσε να έχει τον χαρακτήρα του καλού. Γι’ αυτό, άλλωστε, έχουμε θέσει το αμετάβλητο στον πυρήνα της τελειότητας του Αιωνίου. Η αρετή όμως στερείται εντελώς αυτού του χαρακτηριστικού. Πουθενά στον κόσμο δε θα βρεις δύο έθνη που να εκφράζουν την αρετή με τον ίδιο τρόπο. Δεν υπάρχει, λοιπόν, τίποτε αληθινό στην αρετή, τίποτε εσωτερικά καλό, και δεν αξίζει καθόλου να λατρεύεται. Θα πρέπει να τη χρησιμοποιούμε ως υποστήριγμα, να υιοθετούμε πολιτικά την αρετή της χώρας όπου ζούμε, ώστε όσοι την ασκούν επειδή το θέλουν ή επειδή οφείλουν, να την τιμούν λόγω της κατάστασης να μας αφήσουν σε ησυχία.»
Έχοντας πρόσφατα διαβάσει το «Ένας, κανένας και εκατό χιλιάδες» του Πιραντέλλο, μου άρεσε που βρήκα συσχετισμούς με το αγαπημένο αυτό βιβλίο. Ο Μαρκήσιος είπε πράγματα before it was cool, και προφανώς και άλλοι πριν από αυτόν. Αυτή η νοητική συνάντηση ήταν για μένα και το απολαυστικότερο κομμάτι του βιβλίου.
«Το πιο γελοίο πράγμα στον κόσμο, αγαπητή μου Τερέζα, είναι αναμφίβολα να θες να συζητάς για τα γούστα του ανθρώπου που, να τα αντικρούεις, να τα μέμφεσαι ή να τα τιμωρείς αν δεν είναι σύμφωνα με τους νόμους της χώρας όπου κατοικείς ή με τις κοινωνικές συμβάσεις. Ε, μα! Οι άνθρωποι δεν λένε να καταλάβουν ότι δεν υπάρχει γούστο, όσο αλλόκοτο, όσο εγκληματικό κι αν υποθέσουμε ότι είναι, που να μην εξαρτάται από την οργάνωση που μας έχει δώσει η φύση! Και με βάση αυτό, σε ρωτώ: με ποιο δικαίωμα ένας άνθρωπος θα τολμήσει να αξιώσει από κάποιον άλλον είτε να αναμορφώσει τα γούστα του είτε να τα συμμορφώσει προς την κοινωνική του τάξη; Με ποιο δικαίωμα, μάλιστα, οι νόμοι, που είναι φτιαγμένοι για την ευτυχία του ανθρώπου και μόνο, τολμούν να λυμαίνονται αυτή την ευτυχία που οι νόμοι οφείλουν να του διασφαλίζουν; Και να ήθελε κάποιος να αλλάξει τα γούστα του, μπορεί; Είναι στο χέρι μας να ξαναφτιάξουμε τον εαυτό μας; Μπορούμε να γίνουμε άλλοι από αυτό που είμαστε; Θα απαιτούσατε κάτι τέτοιο από έναν εκ γενετής ανάπηρο; Πόσο διαφέρει αυτή η μη συμμόρφωση των γούστων μας σε ηθικό επίπεδο από την ατέλεια ενός αναπήρου σε σωματικό επίπεδο;»
Δε θέλω να ξέρω πώς θα μπορούσε να το αναλύσει αυτό το εδάφιο ένας ψυχαναλυτής σήμερα! Le grand bordel, ουουουου 666 antichrist!
Όμως το καλό, απαντά με τον ίδιο τρόπο στον διαφθορέα του:
«[…] Παραδέχεστε ότι στη φύση υπάρχει ένα συνολικό άθροισμα καλού και κακού και ότι, κατά συνέπεια, χρειάζεται ένας ορισμένος αριθμός κάποιων που πράττουν το καλό και ένας ορισμένος αριθμός κάποιων άλλων που ενδίδουν στο κακό. Η δική μου θέση λοιπόν [η αρετή] είναι κάτι που προκύπτει φυσικά. Πώς απαιτείτε από μένα να παρεκκλίνω από τους κανόνες που η φύση έχει προδιαγράψει για την περίπτωσή μου;»
Στο τέλος, θα νικήσουν οι «καλοί» και θα ζήσουν αυτοί καλά κι εμείς καλύτερα. Μπορεί όμως να θεωρηθεί επιτυχία της αρετής ένα τέλος καλό του οποίου έχει προηγηθεί μια τεράστια θυσία; Αυτό θα το απαντήσει ο καθένας στον εαυτό του, ελέγχοντας την ελαστικότητα των αρχών και των αξιών του.
May 10, 2015
I'm not sure what I was expecting from this book. Knowing de Sade's reputation I assumed Justine would be controversial and an interesting insight to the late 18th century life. Yes, I can see how and why it was controversial and yes, it was a sort of an insight to a late 18th century deviant's mind, but interesting? Not so much.
I think I expected more substance and depth to the story from Justine as a reading experience. It took me months to read it, mostly because I couldn't understand any of the characters, I strongly disagreed with many of the "philosophy" rants in the book and I suppose I was already too jaded for the shock value to have any effect. I do see why de Sade was and has become such a debated author and philosopher, but I doubt he'd get a following if he lived and wrote in today's world. You have to switch your brain a couple hundred years back before you can really see a point to this book.
Justine is basically about good and evil, virtue and sin, good guys vs. bad guys. It's all very well, but it gets tiring after a while. The same scene gets repeated so many times that the reader (me at least) gets frustrated with all that obviousness. The heroine (possibly the dumbest chick ever to appear in a book) gets assaulted, imprisoned, raped and abused so many times and in so many ways that in the end you just don't care anymore. Justine is de Sade's personification of the perfect believer - she's virtuous and blindly faithful to her God, naive and easily manipulated, always willing to help others and never learning from her mistakes or past experiences.
The so-called bad guys, on the other hand, are twisted and sadistic atheists, to them it's all about having their own pleasure with any means necessary and not giving a crap about anything or anyone else.
And therein lies my biggest problem with the book. It seems that in de Sade's mind atheism is not so much about denying the possibility of God, but hating him. The abusers do monologues that last for pages, advising Justine to practically stomp on God and embrace the hedonistic lifestyle they all seem to be rooting for. She's like a creep magnet, finding every perv in France! Anyhow, I'm not impressed by the way de Sade insinuates that if you're not a virtuous believer, you have no morale. I think he failed to see the concepts of religion and morale in a bigger context and made a few rash conclusions based on his own experience.
All in all, I think Justine was pretty much a collection of de Sade's own fantasies disguised with a few bits of philosophical debate.
I think I expected more substance and depth to the story from Justine as a reading experience. It took me months to read it, mostly because I couldn't understand any of the characters, I strongly disagreed with many of the "philosophy" rants in the book and I suppose I was already too jaded for the shock value to have any effect. I do see why de Sade was and has become such a debated author and philosopher, but I doubt he'd get a following if he lived and wrote in today's world. You have to switch your brain a couple hundred years back before you can really see a point to this book.
Justine is basically about good and evil, virtue and sin, good guys vs. bad guys. It's all very well, but it gets tiring after a while. The same scene gets repeated so many times that the reader (me at least) gets frustrated with all that obviousness. The heroine (possibly the dumbest chick ever to appear in a book) gets assaulted, imprisoned, raped and abused so many times and in so many ways that in the end you just don't care anymore. Justine is de Sade's personification of the perfect believer - she's virtuous and blindly faithful to her God, naive and easily manipulated, always willing to help others and never learning from her mistakes or past experiences.
The so-called bad guys, on the other hand, are twisted and sadistic atheists, to them it's all about having their own pleasure with any means necessary and not giving a crap about anything or anyone else.
And therein lies my biggest problem with the book. It seems that in de Sade's mind atheism is not so much about denying the possibility of God, but hating him. The abusers do monologues that last for pages, advising Justine to practically stomp on God and embrace the hedonistic lifestyle they all seem to be rooting for. She's like a creep magnet, finding every perv in France! Anyhow, I'm not impressed by the way de Sade insinuates that if you're not a virtuous believer, you have no morale. I think he failed to see the concepts of religion and morale in a bigger context and made a few rash conclusions based on his own experience.
All in all, I think Justine was pretty much a collection of de Sade's own fantasies disguised with a few bits of philosophical debate.
December 23, 2020
*تحديث بعد موقف حصل من يومين، تغيرت رؤيتي لهذه الرواية، وأقول فعلًا يا صديقي الكونت المجنون الحكيم ،الفضيلة ليس لها مكان في هذا العالم👌🏻
لذلك أرفع تقيمي لهذه الرواية لأربع نجوم، للفكرة العظيمة والقراءة العميقة للمجتمع👏🏻👏🏻
23.12.2020
هذا الرجل مجنون🤦🏻♀️🔪
لا عجب أن السادية اشتقت من اسمه.
نجمتان لجرأته على الكتابة، في هكذا مواضيع في القرن الثامن عشر!!!
أما الرواية فلا حبكة ولا إسلوب ولا هم يحزنون.
لذلك أرفع تقيمي لهذه الرواية لأربع نجوم، للفكرة العظيمة والقراءة العميقة للمجتمع👏🏻👏🏻
23.12.2020
هذا الرجل مجنون🤦🏻♀️🔪
لا عجب أن السادية اشتقت من اسمه.
نجمتان لجرأته على الكتابة، في هكذا مواضيع في القرن الثامن عشر!!!
أما الرواية فلا حبكة ولا إسلوب ولا هم يحزنون.
August 1, 2016
منذ فترة كنت أقرأ كتاب لكولن ويلسون يُدعى "التاريخ الإجرامي للجنس البشري"، (لم أنهيه بعد) تحدث فيه عن إحدى أعتى المجرمين الذين عرفهم التاريخ، وكان من بين ما ذكره عنه أنه تأثر بشكل كبير بالماركيز دوساد وروايته "جوستين"
تسائلت وقتها هل من الممكن أن تؤثر رواية في شخص ما لدرجة أن يتحول لمجرم؟!
ولم أكن أعرف من هو الماركيز دوساد، فلم يصادفني شيئًا عنه من قبل
وبدأت رحلة الفضول، او بمعنى أصح بعد قراءة هذه الرواية اسميها لعنة الفضول ..!!
حصلت على نسخة ورقية بالصدفة، فتذكرت ماقاله كولن ويلسون عنها، فقرأت ماكُتب على ظهر الغلاف
«هذه واحدة من اكبر الروايات الممنوعة على مدار الأزمنة. يُعتبر مؤلفها، المركيز دو ساد، من أكثر الكتّاب الملعونين في التاريخ، حيث يوسم بأنه منحرف، إباحيّ، منتهك للفضلية، ومجنون»
لم ينته الفضول فأكملت، ولكنني تخطيت المقدمة لأقرأها بعد قراءة الرواية كما تعودت في الفترات الأخيرة لأتجنب ما يفعله المترجمين من تدمير للعمل في مقدمته، وربما لو قرأت وقتها المقدمة أولًا لما تجرأت على أن أكملها
المركيز دوساد الشخصية الأكثر إنحرافًا، فسمي المرض النفسي بإسمه "الس��دية"
كتب دساد روايته جوستين وهو وفي السجن، فقد سجن أكثر من مرة بسبب انحراف سلوكه
فجاءت هذه الرواية الغريبة لتجسد كل إنحرافاته
الرواية عن أختين مات عنهم والدهم، فاختارت كل منهم طريقها بعد ان وجدوا صعوبة في الحياة
فالأولى اختارت طريق الرذيلة واعتبرته الوسيلة الوحيدة لتستطيع ان تعيش ولم ياتي ذكرها في الأحداث بعد افتراقها عن اختها إلا في النهايات
فالقصة كلها مع جوستين التي اختارت طريق الفضيلة
فتبدأ االاحداث معها فتقع في كل ما قد تتخيله او لا تتخيله من شخصيات سيئة، سادية
لا ادري لماذا عرضها لكل هذا ؟
فكما قلنا اولًا بما انه حاول ان يفرغ كل طاقته الإنحرافية في السجن في هذه الرواية
ومن جهة اخرى اختيار جوستين للفضيلة، هل أراد ان يوصل رسالة مفادها بأن الفضيلة لا تنفع وهذا جراء اختيارها؟ وربما تلك النهاية الهزلية بموتها بصاعقة تؤكد هذا الخيار
ام اراد ان يقول ان طريق الفضيلة ليس سهلًا، وهذا ما كتبه في التعليق الغريب المتواجد في اخر صفحة من الرواية والذي جاء فيه ان يحاول ان يقنع القارئ ان السعادة في حضن الفضيلة، ولكن الأحداث لم تظهر هذا الأمر نهائيًا
تظهر الرواية ان دوساد على قدر من الثقافة ايضًا فنجده يذكر امثلة مختلفة من التاريخ، ويذكر وأد البنات في قريش قديمًا
كما له فلسفة غريبة ويدافع عنها عن طريق شخصياته السادية، وعلى الرغم من اشمئزازي من الاحداث والتفاصيل، إلا أن الحوارات كانت قوية جدًا بين جوستين وبين تلك الشخصيات التي قابلتها في رحلتها المؤلمة
دوساد كتب رواية ادبية نعم ولكنها تخطت حدود الجنون ..
10 / 12 / 2015
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,367 reviews