Read The Marquis de Sade: An Essay by Simone de Beauvoir by Simone de Beauvoir Marquis de Sade Annette Michelson Cemal Süreya Paul Dinnage Online


"Must we burn Sade?": a translation of "Faut-il bruler Sade?" originally published in 'Les Temps Moderne', December 1951 and January 1952, translated from the French by Annette Michelson.Also includes selections from de Sade's writings chosen (and translated from the French) by Paul Dinnage....

Title : The Marquis de Sade: An Essay by Simone de Beauvoir
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9780450010507
Format Type : Hardcover
Number of Pages : 199 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

The Marquis de Sade: An Essay by Simone de Beauvoir Reviews

  • Agir(آگِر)
    2019-02-13 05:13

    ساد ما را مجبور می کند تا مسئله اساسی عصر خویش را به طور کامل و به شکل های مختلف بازبینی کنیم: رابطه‌ی واقعی بین انسان و انسانسیمون دوبوآر

  • Ian
    2019-02-09 09:03

    de Beauvoir’s Bookended Life Concerns1927:"The theme is almost always this opposition of self and other that I felt upon starting to live. Now has come the time to make a synthesis of it.”Simone de Beauvoir, philosophy student, Sorbonne, July 10, 19271979:Jessica Benjamin: "So when you wrote in 'L'lnvitée' that...what really upsets [Françoise] about Xavière is that she has to confront in her another consciousness, [is that] not an idea that particularly came (from) Sartre? Simone de Beauvoir: It was I who thought about that! It was absolutely not Sartre! Jessica Benjamin: But that is an idea which it seems to me appears later in his work. Simone de Beauvoir: Oh! Maybe! (Laughter) In any case, this problem . . .of the other’s consciousness, it was my problem."Simone de Beauvoir, interview with Jessica Benjamin and Margaret SimonsInterrogatoriesThe interrogatory title of this essay implies a number of other questions, not all of which are expressly answered.Who is the "we" that might do the burning? The State, society (i.e., the collective of both men and women), women (as a subset of society) or feminists (as a subset of women)?(view spoiler)[Some other questions:What might be burnt? Sade personally? Or his works? (Well, of course, he’s already dead, but there must have been a time when the question was raised during his lifetime.) Shouldn’t we separate Sade from his works, and judge them separately?On what basis "must" we act? Is it a legal, social or ethical compulsion?On what basis do we "judge" Sade or his works? What is his alleged crime? Or is it not a crime?What is the nature of the burning? Is it in effect punishment, a death penalty, mere censorship, or the destruction or termination of a culture or heritage? (hide spoiler)]One thing this essay is not, at least in my opinion, is a gender-based analysis or condemnation of Sade. It is very much a philosophical and moral analysis of his works, which only in one or two instances comments on the relationship between the two sexes as such.Overall, Beauvoir was more concerned with establishing the philosophical and moral seriousness of Sade’s works.Pierre Klossowski - "Roberte agressée par les esprits qu'elle a censures"An Hegelian Purple Patch"Must We Burn Sade" was published in an amazing eight year purple patch for Beauvoir.She started writing "The Second Sex" in 1946 and published it in 1949. While writing "The Second Sex", she re-read Hegel’s "The Phenomenology of Spirit" (having first been exposed to Hegel in 1926 and having first read the book in its entirety in 1940). She finished the novel "The Mandarins" in 1954. In between, she worked on this essay on her trip to the United States in 1951 (during which she stayed with Nelson Algren whom she had met on the 1947 trip that was documented in her book, "America Day by Day‎"). She published the essay in two parts in "Les Temps Modernes" in December, 1951 and January, 1952. It was published in book form in 1953. I mention Hegel by way of anticipating the extent to which Beauvoir’s most famous book and this essay were influenced by her reading of "The Phenomenology of Spirit".Reasonable AberrationsAt the time of this essay, as well as now, public opinion of Sade swings between the satanic and the divine. Some associate him with cruelty. Others hail him as a prophetic genius who heralded "Nietzsche, Stirner, Freud, and surrealism."The scandal about his writing and ideas is understandable. The praise is a reaction. But Beauvoir equally regards the cult that deified and hailed Sade as a “divine Marquis” as a betrayal and disservice to the man and his achievements. For her, he was "neither villain nor idol, but a man and a writer [who] has come back at last to earth, among us."Public opinion is primarily divided along moral lines. How do we feel about the conduct which he indulged in or wrote about?However, Beauvoir feels that his merit sits somewhere between these two extremes:"His chief interest for us lies not in his aberrations, but in the manner in which he assumed responsibility for them. He made of his sexuality an ethic; he expressed this ethic in works of literature. It is by this deliberate act that Sade attains a real originality."Just as Hegel built an elaborate system to explain his worldview, so did Sade. In a way, his private system was a personal moral framework designed to replace that imposed by the State or society:"The fact is that it is neither as author nor as sexual pervert that Sade compels our attention: it is by virtue of the relationship which he created between these two aspects of himself. Sade's aberrations begin to acquire value when, instead of enduring them as his fixed nature, he elaborates an immense system in order to justify them."A Repertory of Sexual PossibilitiesSade is associated with cruelty, but beyond that, little is understood about what he or his characters did that qualifies for this description.In reality, his "aberrations" consisted mainly of whipping (and being whipped) and sodomy (and being sodomised), sometimes at the same time. The debauchees were usually paid prostitutes who consented to whatever was expected of them. When Sade asked the Marseilles prostitute, Rose Keller, to consent to being "known from behind" by his valet, Latour (while Sade watched), she declined. Instead, Sade fondled and whipped her with a cat−o'−nine−tails, while he himself was buggered by Latour. For this and similar acts, he spent a total of 27 years in prison, during most of which he converted his experiences and the products of his imagination into literature.Regardless of our own moral judgment of these activities, Beauvoir didn’t see fit to analyse Sade solely or even primarily in terms of gender issues.In other words, there is a sense of neutrality about what he or we get up to in the boudoir or the brothel or between the sheets:"On the verge of his adult life he made the brutal discovery that there was no conciliation possible between his social existence and his private pleasures."It’s almost enough for Beavoir to justify Sade’s greatness as a writer, philosopher and moralist that:"Sade established systematically, according to the prescriptions of a kind of synthetic art, a repertory of man's sexual possibilities."Courtesy: ScreetownGhost, deviantArt Affairs of StateSade believed that the State should remain out of private and moral affairs:"It is not the opinions or vices of private individuals that are harmful to the state, but rather the behavior of public figures."Beauvoir extrapolated:"The real plagues [on the State and society] are established injustice, official abuses, and constitutional crimes; and these are the inevitable accompaniments of abstract laws which try to impose themselves uniformly upon a plurality of radically separate objects. "A just economic order would render codes and courts useless, for crime is born of need and illegality and would vanish with the elimination of these grounds. The ideal regime, for Sade, was a kind of reasonable anarchy: "‘The reign of law is inferior to that of anarchy. The greatest proof of what I advance is to be found in the fact that all governments are obliged to plunge into anarchy when they wish to remake their constitutions. In order to abrogate its old laws, a government is obliged to establish a revolutionary regime in which there are no laws. New laws are ultimately born of this regime, but this second state is nevertheless less pure than the first, since it is derived from it.’"TransgressionFor all of his opposition to the legislation of morality, Sade still derived greater pleasure from his activities, precisely because they were both legally and morally transgressive:"Crime is the soul of lust. What would pleasure be if it were not accompanied by crime? It is not the object of debauchery that excites us, but rather the idea of evil."In the pleasure of torturing and mocking such a woman, there is the kind of pleasure which comes from sacrilege or the profanation of the objects offered us for worship.’"Conversely, virtue in its own right had no appeal for Sade. It was a form of empty subjection to the State or society:"Happiness lies only in that which excites and the only thing that excites is crime…"Virtue can procure only an imaginary happiness; ‘true felicity lies only in the senses, and virtue gratifies none of them.’"EroticismSade’s private pleasures clearly went beyond the boundaries of both marriage and social norms at the time (even if many others indulged in them):"There was only one place where he could assert himself as such, and that was not the bed in which he was received only too submissively by a prudish wife, but in the brothel where he bought the right to unleash his fantasies."His fantasies were primarily sexual:"Sexual pleasure is, I agree, a passion to which all others are subordinate but in which they all unite."Ultimately, Sade’s existence becomes subordinate to eroticism:"He subordinated his existence to his eroticism because eroticism appeared to him to be the only possible fulfillment of his existence… Sade made of his eroticism the meaning and expression of his whole existence."The Sex Life of the ImaginationIronically, Sade’s appetite for eroticism was satiated more by literature than by the sexual act itself:"If he devoted himself to it with such energy, shamelessness, and persistence, he did so because he attached greater importance to the stories he wove around the act of pleasure than to the contingent happenings; he chose the imaginary."Real life is almost secondary to literature and the life of the imagination:"I have imagined everything conceivable in this sort of thing, but I have certainly not done, and certainly never will, all that I've imagined."Beauvoir adds:"…there is only one way of finding satisfaction in the phantoms created by debauchery, and that is to accede to their very unreality. In choosing eroticism, Sade chose the make-believe. "It was only in the imaginary that Sade could live with any certitude and without risk of disappointment. He repeated the idea throughout his work. "’The pleasure of the senses is always regulated in accordance with the imagination.’ "’Man can aspire to felicity only by serving all the whims of his imagination.’ "It was by means of his imagination that he escaped from space, time, prison, the police, the void of absence, opaque presences, the conflicts of existence, death, life, and all contradictions. It was not murder that fulfilled Sade's erotic nature; it was literature…that erotic universe of which, out of sensuality, boredom, defiance, and resentment, he had constructed the only world which counted for him."Again, she highlights the link with crime and vice:"No one has emphasized with more vigor the link between the imagination and what we call vice; and he gives us, from time to time, insights of surprising depth into the relation of sexuality to existence."The Illusion of Sovereign PowerStill, sex has overtones of other drives. Beauvoir explains Sade in terms of a thirst for "the illusion of power" (not for power as such, but the illusion):"’What does one want when one is engaged in the sexual act? That everything about you give you its utter attention, think only of you, care only for you . . . every man wants to be a tyrant when he fornicates.’ "The intoxication of tyranny leads directly to cruelty, for the libertine, in hurting the object that serves him, “tastes all the pleasures which a vigorous individual feels in making full use of his strength; he dominates, he is a tyrant."The Enchanted DomainIn his capacity as author, Sade remains sovereign in the world of his literature and his imagination (to which list, we could potentially add philosophy):"…he is free to make things happen in this forbidden domain."Beauvoir sees analogies with the world of Gothic fiction:"Caves, underground passageways, mysterious castles, all the props of the Gothic novel take on a particular meaning in his work. "They symbolize the isolation of the image. Perception echoes data's totality and, consequently, the obstacles which the data contain. The image is perfectly submissive and pliant. We find in it only what we put into it. "The image is the enchanted domain from which no power whatever can expel the solitary despot."Master and SlaveIt’s in this context that Beauvoir analyses both Sade the person and author and his work in terms of the concepts outlined by Hegel in "The Phenomenology of Spirit".Beauvoir had a lifelong interest in the relationship between the consciousness of the Self and the consciousness of the Other. She embraced Hegel’s analysis whole-heartedly when she became aware of it.It features heavily in the Introduction to "The Second Sex". But it is even more integral to this essay.The problem is that the erotic or violent conduct which we now call Sadism involves cruelty, hurt and pain inflicted by the Self against an Other. Sade refers often to "the pleasure to be derived from making people suffer."Whether or not it is consensual, Beauvoir explains it in terms of the Self.Only if it resulted in death or murder would it constitute a real "life and death struggle" as described by Hegel.However, it is more obvious that the relationship between Self and Other is analogous to Hegel’s Master/Slave relationship.According to my reading, this relationship occurs within each person’s consciousness. However, I suspect that in both "The Second Sex" and this essay, Beauvoir transfers the concept to the sensual world.In the sensual world of "The Second Sex", the Master is invariably the male and the Slave is the female. The dilemma for women is how to go beyond the Master/Slave relationship with men and enjoy mutual recognition.It doesn’t seem to be important to Beauvoir in this essay that Sade is a male and his activities are described from his point of view.What seems to be important is that the male (Sade) is trapped, his development is arrested at the Master/Slave level, and hasn’t progressed or sublated to the stage of mutual recognition.Sade remains a master, a despot, a tyrant.Sade’s ApartnessBeauvoir believes that the sex act can be and result in mutuality, reciprocity and recognition.However, these consequences are missing in Sade.Sade asks, "What able−bodied man . . . does not wish . . . to bedevil his ecstasy?"Sade remains trapped in a world in which: "the sexual act creates the illusion of sovereign pleasure..."Pleasure requires neither exchange, giving, reciprocity, nor gratuitous generosity. Its tyranny is that of avarice, which chooses to destroy what it cannot assimilate."Beauvoir speculates that:"... all his sadism strove to compensate for the absence of one necessary element which he lacked. The state of emotional intoxication allows one to grasp existence in one's self and in the other, as both subjectivity and passivity. The two partners merge in this ambiguous unity; each one is freed of his own presence and achieves immediate communication with the other." She sees in Sade "a combination of passionate sexual appetites with a basic emotional 'apartness' which seems to me to be the key to his eroticism."Sade is never able to overcome the apartness or separation of the Self and the Other. He is never able to experience mutuality, reciprocity or recognition. He even went as far as to say: "…any enjoyment is weakened when shared...“One must do violence to the object of one's desire; when it surrenders, the pleasure is greater."Isolation without AbandonmentIt’s almost as if Beauvoir is suggesting that Sade has never experienced love:"…he shrinks from the kind of equality which is created by mutual pleasure…"From adolescence to prison, Sade had certainly known the insistent, if not obsessive, pangs of desire. There is, on the other hand, an experience which he seems never to have known: that of emotional intoxication. Never in his stories does sensual pleasure appear as self-forgetfulness, swooning, or abandon."Sade is always self-conscious, cold, cerebral. He is afraid that if he drops his guard "freedom and consciousness would be lost in the rapture of the flesh." Instead, he sits back, disengages and watches himself as a spectacle. Notwithstanding the presence of the debauchee, the debaucher remains effectively solitary. Sade builds this worldview into a philosophy:"Man is isolated in the world...All creatures are born isolated and have no need of one another."In effect, Sade's philosophy is founded on a denial of the need for recognition.From Other to FraternityJust as Sade does not value the mutual recognition of Self and Other, he sees no need for fraternity:"Now I beg of you to tell me whether I must love a human being simply because he exists or resembles me and whether for these reasons alone I must suddenly prefer him to myself?"…My neighbor is nothing to me; there is not the slightest relationship between him and myself."Beauvoir regards Sade's world as an "ethical darkness." She doesn’t look to him for revelations or easy answers. There are none.However, Beauvoir values Sade, because he forces us to ask the right questions, even if they disturb us:"If ever we hope to transcend the separateness of individuals, we may do so only on condition that we be aware of its existence [the ethical darkness]. Otherwise, promises of happiness and justice conceal the worst dangers. "Sade drained to the dregs the moment of selfishness, injustice, and misery, and he insisted upon its truth. "The supreme value of his testimony is the fact that it disturbs us. It forces us to re-examine thoroughly the basic problem which haunts our age in different forms: the true relation between man and man."Or to put it in more gender-neutral Hegelian terms, the true relation between Self and Other.SOUNDTRACK:Wilco - "Impossible Germany" (Live)"Nothing more important Than to knowSomeone's listening;Now I know You'll be listening."["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>

  • peiman-mir5 rezakhani
    2019-02-17 04:06

    ‎دوستانِ گرانقدر، در موردِ این کتاب نمیدانم چی بگویم؟! و چه بنویسم!... میدانم که در پایان بعد از خواندنِ این کتاب، حالتِ سردرگمی به شما دست خواهد داد‎ابتدا درودِ فراوان بر دوستِ خردگرایِ من «امین قضایی» که همچون همیشه ترجمه هایش همچون شخصیتش، خوب است و درست‎لازم به توضیح است که بگویم: فهمِ جملات و مفاهیمِ کتاب کمی پیچیده است، پَس تصور نکنید ایراد از ترجمۀ جنابِ قضایی بوده است، چراکه وی عادت به توضیحات در موردِ واژگان و روان نمودنِ ترجمه ندارد، و با پیش فرضِ اینکه خواننده از اکثرِ واژگانِ به کار برده شده آگاهی و شناختِ قبلی دارد، کتاب را ترجمه میکند‎دوستانِ عزیزم، این کتابِ 66 صفحه ای، از آن دسته از کتبی است که با یک بار خواندن، فهمِ آن دشوار است... به هر حال سخن از «ساد» در میان است... واقعاً نگاهش به روابطِ جنسی بسیار عجیب بوده است، آنقدر عجیب که واژۀ «سادیسم» از او و رفتارش پدیدار شده است‎اولین فکری که از ذهنِ من خطور کرد این بود که، می توانم «ساد» را درک کنم؟! نه... همدردی با «ساد» در حکمِ خیانت به اوست!... «ساد» خودپسندی را بر دوستی برتر میداند، اما این مانع از واقعیت بخشیدن به دوستی نمیشود‎شهوترانیِ جمعی و سکسِ گروهی ارتباطی اصیل میانِ هرزه هایِ «ساد» ایجاد میکند،... من جسمِ خود را در جسمِ دیگری تجربه میکنم، پس همواره من برایِ من وجود دارد، واقعیتِ تکان دهندۀ همزیستی، ما را از اندیشیدن رها میکند‎دوستانِ عزیزم، «اروتیسیسم» برایِ «ساد» بهترین و تنهاترین راهِ ارتباط است و به بیانِ دیگر، گویا گاییدنِ یک انسان بهتر از درک کردنِ اوست‎ولی اشتباه برداشت نکنید، اعمالِ «ساد» هیچ شباهتی به «پورنوگرافی» ندارد، دوستانِ خوبم، میشود اینگونه رَوایش کرد که «ساد» به واسطۀ «اروتیسیسم»، نه تنها به طور جسمانی دخول را انجام میدهد، بلکه احساس میکند که از نظرِ روحی هم این دخول صورت گرفته است، بین «اروتیسیسم» و «پورنوگرافی» تفاوت بسیار است‎خواندنِ این کتاب و قضاوت در موردِ «ساد» دقیقاً همان چیزیست که نویسندۀ این کتاب «سیمون دوبوآر»، شما را با ذکاوتِ بسیار بالا مجبور به آن میکند،... من شخصاً نمیتوانم به راهِ حل هایِ ارائه شده توسطِ «ساد» رضایت دهم، شما را نمیدانم‎عزیزانم «ساد» در سال 1795 نوشته بود: لذتِ جنسی به نظرِ من هوسی است که تمامیِ دیگر هوس ها، مطیع آن هستند، و تنها در این هوس، همۀ هوس ها یکی میشوند‎در نهایت باید بگویم، «ساد» در تنهاییِ سلولِ زندانش در تاریکی اخلاقی زیست، تا ما را مجبور به اندیشیدن در موردِ رابطۀ انسان با انسان کرده باشد***************************‎امیدوارم این توضیحات، کافی و مفید بوده باشه‎<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>

  • Irandokht
    2019-01-24 09:54

    خیلی سخت بود خوندنش و حتی درکشم سخت بود

  • Yasemin Şahin
    2019-02-12 05:19

    Marquis de Sade'ı bir feminist gözüyle irdelemesini beklerken onun cinsel ahlaka öfkesini yazdıklarıyla vermesine değinilerde bulunmuş ve onu olumlamıştır. Cinsel tabular ve olmazsa olmaz ahlak bekçiliğinin kuyusunu kazan ve insanın en derinden sakladığı kendi sırlarını bile günyüzü eden Marquis de Sade (bence) anlaşılmadı ve uzunca da anlaşılmayacak.

  • Foad Ansari
    2019-01-23 09:50

    خیلی سخت و پیچیده توضیح داده بود و در مقابل نقد آلبر کامو در مورد ساد این کتاب هیچی نبود

  • Guus van der Peet
    2019-01-27 12:09

    Sometimes the legacy of a writer can be more interesting than the writer himself. Donatien Alphonse François, le Marquis de Sade, has not gone into history as an especially gifted author. Most people will remember him as the ‘inventor’ of sadism, as the ultimate libertine. During his lifetime, of which he spent 27 years in various prisons and asylums, he wrote countless novels, short stories and plays.; most of them consisting of long, detailed descriptions of murder, rape, torture, blasphemy and coprophilia, with the occasional quasi-philosophic conversation. They aren’t necessarily great, or even good literature, but they do, in my opinion at least, give an fascinating insight in the mind of an psychotic man and a very specific 18th century subculture. His works were, not entirely without reason, banned is most countries. Although they still circulated in small groups (see Luis Buñuel’s 1930 film L’age d’or), they seemed to have been forgotten. This changed during the middle of the 20th century. Society became more open and some countries decided to life their bans. It led to two reactions. On the one hand there were those who argued that the books should immediately be banned again. On the other hand there were those who defended De Sade, those who admired his unique view on society. One of the defenders was the French philosopher Simone de Beauvoir. In her essay Faut-il brûler Sade she asks if the Marquis still has any relevance in our modern society. The answer, she quickly reveals, is yes. She immediately admits that he didn’t have much literary talent. His philosophy however, could still be very useful. She sees him as the ultimate fighter for freedom. His look on the human condition and the relationship between the individual and the state could still be very relevant in today’s society. She tries to explain De Sade’s works within this interpretation. At times it feels a bit far-fetched. Her explanations of De Sade’s thoughts not always substantiated and she tends to make quite a lot of assumptions without any real evidence. His open atheism, homosexuality and stance against capital punishment were indeed extremely progressive for 18th century standards. Painting him as a philosophical hero may go too far. It’s more likely that he just tried to provoke as many people as possible with his writings. He may certainly have had philosophical ideas, but De Beauvoir’s interpretation is too improbable. If you want a realistic, conventional biography of De Sade and his works, this essay will not be very interesting. There are simply too many assumptions for a serious psychological profile. It does however, give a unique view of this man; one that may not be entirely realistic, but is nevertheless an intriguing one.

  • Gulsah
    2019-02-14 12:00

    Daha önce hiç Sade kitabı okumadığımı fark ettim. Ve bu kitap belki de o yüzden ağır ilerledi bende. Onun dışında içinde ki kişisel ve genel bilgiler iyiydi. Başlangıç oldu bana.

  • Maryam
    2019-02-10 09:10

    اه، کشتارگران، زندانبان ها و ابلهان همه‌ی رژیم ها و حکومت ها، چه وقت خواهد رسید که علم آموزش دادن انسان را به علمِ کشتن و زندان انداختن او ترجیح دهید؟

  • Cemre
    2019-02-09 11:54

    Marquis de Sade'ın hayatına ve felsefesine Simone de Beauvoir tarafından güzel bir bakış olmuş. Bu kitapla hem Sade'ın hayatına dair önemli birkaç şeyi öğrenmek mümkün oluyor hem de Sade'ın felsefesini Beauvoir'ya göre genel olarak kavrama imkânı elde ediyorsunuz.. Bundan önce yine Sade'a dair Pierre Klossowski'nin Komşum Sade kitabını okumuştum. Her ne kadar Sade'ı Yakmalı Mı'ya göre daha derin bir araştırma ve inceleme söz konusu olsa da Sade'ı Yakmalı Mı daha yalın ve temel bir anlatıma sahip. Bu kitapta da yer yer Klossowski'nin görüşlerine yer verilmiş ve zaman zaman Beauvoir'ca eleştirilmiş. Eğer bu Marquis de Sade kimdir, genel olarak felsefesi nedir öğrenmek istiyorsanız hem Sade'ı Yakmalı Mı'yı hem de Komşum Sade'ı tavsiye ederim; ancak Komşum Sade dediğim gibi Sade'ı Yakmalı Mı'ya göre daha ağır, o nedenle ilk olarak bu kitaptan başlamak faydalı olabilir.

  • Y. Durand (Renn)
    2019-02-12 06:12

    Bastante interesante.Simone de Beauvoir nos trata de explicar como El Marques de Sade pensaba, nos ayuda a interpretar todo lo que dice en sus libros. Lo leí ya que estoy interesada en leer Las 120 Jornadas de Sodoma pero antes quería entender un poco al Marques de Sade.

  • Ben Lovegrove
    2019-02-20 03:53

    Simone de Beauvoir attempts to explain de Sade's thinking. There are some perceptive comments by her and interesting biographical details from what we know of his life. It probably helps to read most of his novels before reading this otherwise it can seem complicated and does contain plot spoilers.

  • Cristina
    2019-02-08 10:16

    El marqués de Sade era un dogmático, amargado y pesado. El ensayo de Beauvoir vale la pena.

  • Mahsa Etemadzadeh
    2019-02-06 10:14

    ترجمه ي كتاب خيلي بد بود. كتاب به وضوح ويرايش نشده بود. نمي دونم چقدر مي شه از كتابي كه مجاني تو اينترنت منتشر مي شه توقع داشت، اما به هر حال ترجمه ي بد باعث شد خوندنش برام اصلا لذت بخش نباشه. كتاب مقدمه درستي نداشت و براي من كه صرفا به خاطر اسم سيمون دوبوآر كنجكاو خوندن بودم، تا مقدار قابل توجهي از كتاب، فكر مي كردم دارم رمان مي خونم. چون تو اينترنت هم نتونسته بودم اين كتابو تو ليستاي كاراي دوبوار پيدا كنم.به هرحال اگه به فلسفه يا روانشناسي جنسي علاقه دارين توصيه مي كنم اين كتابو به فرانسوي يا انگليسي بخونين!

  • Omololu Adeniran
    2019-02-12 07:19

    Whatever you've heard about the Marquis de Sade (Sadism, sadist and other derivations come from him), he was infinitely worse. He wrote explicitly to shock and to corrupt; a man so depraved that he was tossed in the Bastille for 11 years, and then an asylum. What Simone de Beauvoir has done in this magnificent essay is to carry out a judicious and thorough inquest, free of morality and cant, to the very soul of the Marquis: Why he was so antagonistic towards religion, why he held that the highest pinnacle of human achievement was the libertine's, and if (or why) he really carried out the gore and decadence of his writings in his actual life.I found this essay in a collection of Sade's writings “The 120 Days of Sodom and Other Writings”, It is lengthy (about 100 pages), but well worth the effort because it is rigorously argued and situates Sade in his proper historical – if not literary – context."He made of his sexuality an ethic; he expressed this ethic in works of literature. The reason for his tastes is obscure, but we can understand how he erected these tastes into principles, and why he carried them to the point of fanaticism.”Of the many insights de Beauvoir offers in this essay, she argues –convincingly– that de Sade did not carry out all his perversions in his work in his real life (though he did dither dangerously close). “I have imagined everything conceivable in this sort of thing,” he writes, “but I have certainly not done, and certainly never will, all that I have imagined.” We know, for example, that he was arrested for his excesses in a brothel (he was married), and that these excesses reached such a disquieting character that the inspector of Police, "Inspector Marais warned the procuresses to stop giving their girls to the Marquis.” We know that another incident shows him "beating his victim with a cat-o’-nine-tails and a knotted cord and, probably, slashing her with a knife and pouring wax on the wounds." We also know, and Sade openly acknowledged, his coprophilia. Everything so far indicates a personality well beyond the Freudian pale."Evil is unspectacular and always human, shares our bed and eats at our table.” - W.H AudenIt might interest a certain mind to know that in December 1793, the author of '120 days of Sodom' in his role as Grand Juror, was imprisoned by the Revolutionary government during the terror, for charges of 'moderatism'. The foulest libertine the world has ever known was a...moderate? He had a conscience, and committed the unpardonable act of tempering justice with mercy, refusing to condemn the family of Madame de Montreuil. He said of his arrest: “I considered myself obliged to leave the chair to the vice-president; they wanted me to put a horrible, an inhuman act to a vote. I never would.” The connotations of Sadism in our age (cruelty, beatings, bloodshed, torture, a certain sexual extravagance) do not form a neat linear narrative to the facts and events of the life of Marquis de Sade. That, in my opinion is the real merit of this work. Simone de Beauvoir treats de Sade with the complexity he deserves.With the bare facts out of the way, would I recommend reading Marquis de Sade? Well, Simone de Beauvoir has done the hard reading for all of us. I 'tried' reading also, fearing a certain intellectual timidity in not reading a work because of its crudity. I've read his "Dialogue between a Priest and a dying man", and found it wanting, save a few witty repartees consisting mainly of the marquis rehashing old Materialist arguments against religion that had existed since Hume, and probably prior. But when I tried to tackle "Justine; or Philosophy in the bedroom", I couldn't get past half-way, and even that was a struggle. I've read, and enjoyed Oscar Wilde – and Wilde was as decadent as the best of them – so I didn't think I could really be shocked by anything in literature. But "Justine" actually offended my natural Christian sensibilities - and I'm not even religious. What he says in that book, I won't reprint here. Inquiring minds might wonder, and I say good luck to you brother.Albert Camus died in a car accident on his way to the train station - train ticket in his pocket. It's the sort existentialist death he would have welcomed, a manifestation of the spontaneous violence and 'gentle indifference of the universe' he believed in, and wrote about in L’estranger (The Stranger). Leon Trotsky, Russian Revolutionary, Old Bolshevik, intellectual and 'the greatest jew since Christ', died in Mexico, his head slashed open with a pick axe by one of Stalin's agents - a death fitting of a radical revolutionary. And the Marquis de Sade? The unabashed enemy of innocence; sexual theorist, libertine, SADIST and relentless religious antagonist; what does he get for all his mischief? He dies peacefully in an asylum next to a female admirer who had spent the previous thirteen years pretending to be his daughter. C'est La Vie.

  • Bengisu Çaygür
    2019-01-27 08:57

    Marquis de Sade ile rastgele bir kitap alışverişimde tanışmıştım. Daha önce Aylak Adam'ın aforizmalar serisinden bir kaç kitap edinip, okuduğumdan; Marquis de Sade-En Çok Kendisine Yabancıdır İnsan'ı alıp, okumamla tanımış olmuştum. Kitap içerisindeki -kimi- aforizmalardan çok etkilenmiştim; "*Tanrı öz oğlunu dananın böğrü gibi astı. Bana yapabileceklerini düşünmek tüylerimi ürpertiyor.(s7) *Ya beni öldür ya da olduğum gibi kabullen zira değiştirilirsem lanetlenirim.(s8) *Mutsuzluklarıma benim düşünce tarzım değil diğerlerinin düşünme tarzı neden oldu.(s15) *...kişiyi Yaratıcı'sına bağlayan ve varoluşu için bu ulu sahibe duyduğu minnetini ibadet yoluyla kanıtlamaya mecbur tutan antlaşmaya din diyorsunuz, değil mi?(29) *...dünyada kötülüğe izin veren Tanrı'dır oysa kudret bütün kötülükleri engelleyebilirdi." daha sonra kimdir ne değildir anlamak maksadıyla hakkında bir-iki yazı/makale okumuş ardından bir filme denk gelmiştim. Filmin adını hatırlamıyorum-zaman harcayıp aramak/bulmak da istemiyorum- kaldı ki yarısına kadar anca izlemişimdir. Okuduğum o birkaç yazı ve filmin ardından; 'Bu sözler, bu adamdan mı çıkmış yani!' diye düşünüp, umduğumu bulamadığımdan, üzülmüştüm. Kaç zamandır Simone de Beauvoir okumaları yapmak istiyordum, Sade'la ilgili bir kitabı olduğunu görünce-bir feministin diliyle/düşünüşüyle de tanımak amaçlı- ilk okuma olarak Sade'ı Yakmalı Mı?'yı tercih ettim, iyi ki de okumuşum. Sade benim gözümdeki o ilk yerini tam olarak almış olmasa da; filmin ve, o birkaç makalenin izlerini sildi. Bana kalırsa Simone de Beauvoir, Sade'ı/Sade'ın yapıtlarını(günümüze ulaşan) oldukça objektif değerlendirmiş ve Sade'ı sapkın, sadist, mazoşist olarak değil de Kişi olarak ele almış. Güzel bir okuma oldu benim için.Ekstra olarak katkısı da: Sadomazoşizm'in terim olarak Sade'dan geldiğini öğrenmiş oldum-cahillik işte-. "Uyguladığı acıların nedenini kendinde arayarak, kıyıcı da, eline geçirdiği araç, daha doğrusu nesne kadar o edilgin duruma katılmaktadır. Şu halde bu iki yönsemeyi Sade'cı mazoşizm (Sadomasochisme) adı altında birleştirebiliriz galiba."[kitabın bu bölümüne gelmeden yaklaşık 5-10 sayfa önce acaba sadomazo/Sade ilişkisi var mıdır? diye düşünürken cevap niteliğinde karşıma çıktı(=]

  • Claudio Valverde
    2019-02-06 10:11

    El Márquez de Sade por Simone de Beauvoir. Muy interesante visión del emblemático Márquez no limitándose solo a la imagen que puede inferirse de la lectura de sus escritos sino yendo también a la información histórica obre su vida. Por ejemplo el odio que sentía hacía su madre y que tal vez se trasladó en forma de desprecio a todas las mujeres.. Tampoco es un anarquista que se opone a lo límites de la sociedad salvo en un plano individual y afectivo como con su esposa y suegra sin llegar a convertirse en un “Dr. Barreda”. Sade subordin su existencia al erotismo. Al punto que ver gozando al otro va en detrimento de su propio placer, yo diría que esto expresa un despotismo erótico a rajatabla. Por otro parte conceptualiza el dolor como la sensación más activa y más segura de no pasar desapercibida. Formado en un siglo racionalista considera que no existe arma más segura que el racionalismo “….Sade presiente lo que ya se ha dado en llamar el “pansexualismo “ de Freud y transforma el erotismo en el resorte principal de la conducta humana…La libido se halla en todas partes y es también mucho más que ella misma”. En sus pensamiento podemos encontrar coincidencias con Nietzsche, en especial en su postura antirreligiosa ya que considera que el hombre al elegir a Dios a renegado de naturaleza intrínseca. Afirma “…la naturaleza es buena acatémosla… a tono con el pensamiento de la época que reivindicaba la naturaleza tirándoles a la cara a sus detractores esta idea que les pertenecía. Ya que todo lo que él gustaba hacer lo encontraba admitido según las leyes de la naturaleza. Hasta incluso podemos encontrar en su pensamiento ideas del socialismo antes que este surgiera como ideología “…es mediante la total igualdad de las fortunas y de las condiciones sociales como se debería debilitar la fuerza del más poderoso y no mediante leyes vanas…” Por otra parte cuando habiendo adherido a la revolución francesa le tocó gobernar una comarca fue rigurosamente ecuánime en los juicios que debió presidir y siempre se mostró absolutamente en contra de la pena de muerte en cualquier caso. En resumen, lectura muy interesante.

  • Yishuan Pflaume
    2019-01-27 06:58

    Chinese edition 读不下去系列

  • Czarny Pies
    2019-02-21 06:15

    I recently recommended Justine as a jest to several good reads friends. In fact leaping into de Sade would be a very bad idea. This book by Simone de Beauvoir however provides an excellent introduction to the Sade phenomenon and in fact makes a very good substitute for actual reading anything by the mentally deranged Marquis de Sade.

  • Tiina
    2019-02-07 05:55

    Interesting essays, but it would have added an extra layer if some background information had been given. To put the text in perspective. I enjoyed the literature essays the most, and the essay on Sade was thought provoking. I'll probably look for more to read from Beauvoir.

  • Lucy
    2019-01-29 03:56

    Fantastic overview of Sade's life and works that still acknowledges that he was a pretty terrible person. However, the translation I had didn't translate the explicit bits of Sade's work, so I knocked off a star for that. Sorry, de Beauvoir.

  • Paddy O'callaghan
    2019-02-05 11:51

    At last, someone who understands?

  • Roya Fourstar
    2019-01-25 07:04

  • Kecia
    2019-02-10 11:07

    Maybe I was too young when I read it, but I found this to be too disgusting for words.

  • Nicholas
    2019-02-11 10:57

    The Marquis de Sade by Simone de Beauvoir (1972)

  • Paddy O'callaghan
    2019-01-24 06:10

    Finally, someone who truly understands Sade.