Read venus in furs by Leopold von Sacher-Masoch Fernanda Savage Online

venus-in-furs

Severin is a young Galician nobleman with a secret; he can only love a woman with a ruthless heart, who will rain her whip upon him in a shower of bloody kisses. Naughty by Nature: Mischief Books.When Severin meets Wanda, the wealthy and beautiful widow living in the apartment upstairs, he wonders if she might be the one to help him realise his darkest desires. But Wanda iSeverin is a young Galician nobleman with a secret; he can only love a woman with a ruthless heart, who will rain her whip upon him in a shower of bloody kisses. Naughty by Nature: Mischief Books.When Severin meets Wanda, the wealthy and beautiful widow living in the apartment upstairs, he wonders if she might be the one to help him realise his darkest desires. But Wanda is better than she ever dreamed possible at domination – and soon Severin realises he is powerless to escape what he has begun....

Title : venus in furs
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 18848151
Format Type : Kindle Edition
Number of Pages : 122 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

venus in furs Reviews

  • PirateSteve
    2018-10-15 06:03

    //www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK8ijrapwA8 Way back in 1869 Leopold wrote this book about some fun he was having.Tis true. Leo gave the world a new label for these exploits... masochism. What we've done with it since then is our own business. Severin did get what he wanted. So many people never do. They never dare ask.

  • Paquita Maria Sanchez
    2018-10-14 13:17

    Umm, okay...The first portion of this book is wonderful. The forced lasciviousness of the female protagonist, the pathetic attempts at seeming like a banshee, a Siren, all draped in furs and spouting some bullshit about Paganism. I have met this girl before, and this boy, I have watched their pitiful dance of apathy, their ham-handed fears of monotony and monogamy, the (in my opinion) bullshit notion that caring in the romantic sense for one chosen and well-suited person with whom you specifically connect and no other (and it goes without saying, no 'many others') is selfish and demeaning to the notion of 100% Venus-like, 'hypersensual' love of sexuality/sensation, inhibits one's ability to love all other human beings genuinely, and denies pure, primitive desires, bladdy fuckin' blah. I mean, I have greeted lovers with apathy, sternness, initial doubts which reached fruition in feelings chilling, freezing, eventually frozen; I would be completely out of touch with myself if I were to believe otherwise. We have all been cruel, we have all wavered, our eyes have wandered, our emotions fallen flat. Sure, sure. What I could never stand was the hyper-rationalizing of this emotion, the forcing of it. There was always a bit of schadenfreude which set in when some of the loftier of my hippie-dippie, "I just have to be free, maaaaan" acquaintances found themselves face-to-face with their own inherent, albeit denied natures, when all their trite musings and assumed sentiments about free love came back to kick them in their collective private parts via severe jealousy and heartache. It reminded me of this conversation I had a few years ago. I was at a bar catching up with some old friends I had not seen in forever, though they were all still quite close, and seeming a little cult-y to me based on our talks that afternoon. They were discussing the various free-love, non-committed relationships they were attempting, and how this was "opening them up" to the possibilities of connection contained in any number of people. (Snicker.) After my initial, more pressing questions (e.g. "Uh, you have health insurance, right?"), I just set to half-drunkenly saying "Good luck?" and "No way, man. I have enough trouble dealing with one person. Also, I would be, you know, really depressed and completely miserable in that situation." Once I began attempting to explain the few snippets of evolutionary science I had read on the subject of jealousy, eyes glazed over, and it was clear we had reached an impasse. "Again, good luck," I said. They all shortly ended their romances. I guess people got jealous and shit got complicated. Weird.Sorry to rant. I just adored the introductory chapters of this book for the fact that the woman they present is just. So. Full of it. What's better is, her nonsense about being free from attachments, a goddess who commands the love she needs then drops the tired bits like pencil shavings, a woman incapable of loving another human being, but rather simply bent on seeking out pleasure in the most hedonistic, unashamedly egocentric sense, seems to be heading toward a serious reckoning. What's more is, the man who is painted as her future slave represents all that is flighty in the dance of romance. He only loves a woman of stone, his interest wanes at kindness, he wants the one he can't have, and it's driving him mad all over all over all over his face every single goddamn time until the very moment when she cares, when she drops her guard and loves him back, and then his foot is suddenly wedged firmly in the door and his panties are noticeably roomier. We are all guilty at some point, right? People get bored. They want excitement and unpredictability and newness. They crave the hunt. Malaise. What could be were I free? It happens. It is not ideal.Unfortunately, her reckoning does not ever really come about, and this suddenly turns into some bullshit about not letting yourself care about others, lest you be a malnourished, mistreated donkey. Exactly where I thought this was going is precisely the opposite of where it went, and not in a clever, plot-twisty sense. About midway through, I came to realize that Sacher-Masoch saw this forceably cruel woman as some sort of lesson-teacher about how cruel Women are. The smart ones, anyway! They know how to hold on to a man: treat him like shit! Okay, I admit that the two men I have been wholly unfrosty with in my adult life are the two men who have broken my heart, but I would like to think this won't always be the case, and that it is a horrifying and just awful notion that to keep someone in love with me, I have to hate his guts, or just deal with his existence begrudgingly like I deal with Austin drivers or my next door neighbor who is constantly making humping noises through the wall. These things I deal with. Companionship is often played like a chess game, but I thought the idea was to find someone with whom all that crap drops away? Ever seen an 80-something year old man carrying his similarly elderly wife's oxygen tank for her through Denny's? Did that warm your heart? Don't read this. Ever had friends who slipped into counter-culture to such an extent that your conversations suddenly turned into the dynamic of them constantly preaching and you constantly scoffing? Did it suck? Don't read this.I should write an aside here that I know that there are all types of people in the world, all sorts of romantic arrangements, etc. I'm not saying it's impossible, I just think it goes against the more common manifestations of human nature to not feel emotions of possessiveness toward a cherished lover. Even a hated lover, sometimes! Your brain, your evolutionary history, your biology is playing tricks on you at all times, it's all very complicated, and sorry to over-simplify. It just seems like a lot of this modern embrace of what it is to be an Enlightened Lover and Self-Actualized Person is quite often going against the intrinsic needs of those who proselytize about it. It's, you know, hip, like riding a fixed-gear bicycle without being able to explain to me why you prefer not having brakes, or eating the 'Organic' ramen noodles because somehow they're better in this way you seemingly haven't even bothered to contemplate yet. You may have an explanation, and you may really feel it. More power to you. I'm quizzical by nature though, and am more often than not left, in my hippie-interrogations, with vacuous stares and zero answers from the interrogated. Hence the rant.So this book: thank you for the lame female character I could make fun of, thank you for the spotty but at times quite lovely observations of human emotional chameleon-ism and the malleable nature of attachment...thanks for all that stuff. I also thank you for The Velvet Underground & Nico, which in every single song manages to explore the subjects of dominance and submissiveness, passiveness and passion in a much purer, more accurate, and rewarding way than you ever possibly could, you mediocre book, ya. And that album has not just a heroine, but heroin! I'll be your mirror, and reflect what you are, in case you don't know: an overrated book; the scenes from a porno which lead into the actual pornography, as there is no sex in this book about sex, but just the ridiculous lead-up conversations. Do you watch Logjammin' to find out if he fixes the cable? No, you don't.

  • StevenGodin
    2018-09-25 07:52

    My initial fears with 'Venus in Furs' was would it sink into the darker depths of depravity similar with that of Donatien Alphonse François (the Marquis de Sade), but didn't need to worry, because I was pleasantly surprised by it's charming and playful nature. Predominantly only two characters take centre stage, with nobleman Severin von Kusiemski falling under the seductive spell of the flame haired Wanda von Dunajew, he loves her so much to the extent of wanting to be her slave, and encourages to treat him progressively more sadistic. Severin describes his lustful expierences as 'suprasensuality', and being dominated by a women and the total control and power she holds over him clearly rocks his boat.I wouldn't exactly call the actions that unfold here as sadomasochism, at least not as it is recognized today, and there is nothing more extreme than being tied up, whipped and licking ones feet throughout the story, I think the real pain here lies psychologically, with mental anguish and humiliation in front of others that changes Severin's pleasure to one of inner turmoil, as he constantly pleads his undying love for her. His name would change to Gregor as her servant, they travel to Florence and take up residence in a villa close to the Arno river, and this luscious setting would see other gentleman catch the desirable eye of Wanda, a German painter who puts brush to canvas while in the middle of doing her portrait would suddenly declare "I want you to whip me, whip me to death!", right under the noise of the jealous Severin. The relationship would then arrive at somewhat of a dilemma, when Wanda herself meets a man to whom she would like to submit, a rich Greek aristocrat known as Alexis Papadopolis, and they congress in a sexual manner until one final act of degradation while in the presence of Wanda and Alexis, would see Severin mentally broken and feel like an inanimate object void of any feelings for his once loved dominator.I can understand why this would have caused a bit of a ruckus back in the day, but reading now in the 21st century it's about as controversial as a litter of kittens playing around in a summer meadow, and I actually found it quite delightful with moments of humour regardless of whether it was intended this way.

  • Alex
    2018-09-21 08:22

    "You interest me. Most men are very commonplace, without verve or poetry. In you there is a certain depth and capacity for enthusiasm and a deep seriousness, which delight me. I might learn to love you." (20)This line really jumped out at me, because it's just what I imagine a lot of nerds imagine some lady will say to them some day. And they'll be like yeah! I have a depth and capacity for enthusiasm! I was just waiting for someone to notice! I bet nerds really like this book, which was written by a nerd and then translated to English by a different nerd.You know that old defunct Tumblr, "Nice Guys Of OK Cupid"? It was a collection of dating profiles from guys who were all "I'm so nice, why don't any women love me? I would treat a woman like a goddess but I guess they don't want to be treated like goddesses, they all want some asshole instead! Women are such bitches, because they don't love me!" They're descendants of this loser. Masoch can't stop quoting this one line from Goethe, "You must be hammer or anvil." He thinks that "Woman demands that she can look up to a man, but one like [our dorktagonist Severin] who voluntarily places his neck under foot, she uses as a welcome plaything, only to toss it aside when she is tired of it." (105) The problem here isn't with Severin's (or Masoch's) particular fetish, which is to have ladies whip them. That's fine, man, have your fun. The problem is that he extends it to some kind of conclusion about human nature that's not at all true. Women do not by nature demand either to look up to a man or toy with them. (Men aren't like that either.) That's a dumb idea. Here's another thing that's not true: "Man even when he is selfish or evil always follows principles, woman never follows anything but impulses." (43)And it's boring! God, for a book about whipping there is none too much whipping. Instead there's a whole lot of him begging to be her slave, and then her treating him vaguely slave-y, and then him getting all indignant, and then her all "Well see, you're being a dick about it," and then him being all "Oh, you're mad at me, treat me like a slave," and then we circle back around to the beginning like fifty times. Wahhhhh, quit topping from the bottom, nerd.If you flip the characters' genders in your head while you're reading, the book goes an awful lot like that 50 Shades thing does. (I know more or less how it goes from hearing a million readers and feminists get all pissy about it. It's hard to tell who's more offended about that book - readers or feminists.) But there's a funny twist at the end (spoilers follow for this and I think 50 Shades too): you'd expect a female protagonist to win over the guy and be with him (one way or another). But here, she just dumps him. She's all "I can easily imagine belonging to one man for my entire life, but he would have to be a whole man, a man who would dominate me, who would subjugate me by his innate strength" (23) and then she runs off with a dude who's just like that. So Masoch's kink assumes that one who has it isn't enough to satisfy a woman. That's weird, and probably kindof a bummer for him.So this is a book about a self-defeating fetish for being controlled, born out of a weird hatred and fear for women. It's unpleasant, and boring, and all too familiar because I still hear that shit today, from miserable nerds.Lame, dudes. Lame.

  • Elizabeth
    2018-10-10 05:52

    "To be the slave of a woman, a beautiful woman, whom I love, whom I worship - !""And who mistreats you for it," Wanda broke in, laughing."Yes, who ties me up and whips me, who kicks me when she belong to another man."If submission and bondage is your thing, then you will probably like this book. In a nutshell, Severin likes women. Severin likes women who are filthy rich. Severin likes women who are filthy rich and treat him like shit. Wanda is that woman. That is pretty much what Venus in Furs is about. Leopold Von Sacher-Masoch apparently drew from his own masochistic experience with Baroness Fanny Von Pistor. He agreed to be her slave, and renounce all claim on his own life (she could even kill him if she wished), and this is reflected in Venus in Furs. The "contract" gives Wanda (or "Mistress") free reign to make Severin suffer in a variety of ways; whipping him regularly, kicking him around, starving him, torturing him emotionally, etc. And Severin seems to get off on it. In fact, he begs her to punish him ("I want to be your dog"). As long as she wears her furs whilst doing it, he's happy. As you can imagine, the novel caused quite a stir in Austrian society. The idea of a woman being dominant (having the whip-hand, so to speak) was ludicrous to most people. We even see Wanda feeling hesitant at first. She is reluctant to defy social norms, and I can sort of understand this. She is used to being dominated, not the other way around. She is understandably creeped out by Severin to begin with, but I think thats mainly because he keeps kissing her feet and telling her to stand on his neck. He is, to put it bluntly, a pussy. I can think of no other word for him. He also has a habit of falling in love with statues, and treating them as though they were real. Despite all this, Wanda eventually overcomes her apprehension, after realizing that she *really* likes being in control. There are many gender issues in this book, and I'm deliberately avoiding that long and winding road known as "Interpretation" as I will end up making no sense whatsoever. What I will say is that I was interested by the handsome, androgynous Alexis Papadopolis, who is so drop-dead gorgeous that literally *anyone* will fall in love with him. For example:"He was a man like a woman. He knew he was beautiful and behaved accordingly; he would change his coquettish attire four or five times a day, like a vain courtesan. In Paris he had appeared first in women's garb, and the men had stormed him with love letters. An Italian singer, famous equally for both his art and his passion, invaded the Greek's apartment, knelt down, and threatened to take his own life if his plea was not granted."See what I mean? Even Severin has a bit of crush on him. I had to keep reminding myself that this book was written in 1869. At times, it voices startlingly modern sentiments. Sacher-Masoch certainly wasn't your average Austrian. I gave Venus in Furs four stars because I enjoyed it rather more than I was expecting. The ending pissed me off a bit, as did Severin's constant cries of "Wanda!" (I counted eighteen times in 148 pages) but Sacher-Masoch writes so well that you find yourself unable to stop reading. Give it a go. I dare you.

  • Helen Ροζουλί Εωσφόρος Vernus Portitor Arcanus Ταμετούρο Αμούν Arnum
    2018-10-07 14:02

    Στο βιβλίο αυτό του Λεοπόλδου Φον Ζάχερ-Μαζόχ, απο τον οποίο προήλθε και ο όρος "μαζοχισμός",παρακολουθούμε την θλιβερή και νοσηρή ερωτική ιστορία ενός νεαρού άεργου καλλιεργημένου άντρα του Σεβερίν,με μια νεαρή ελκυστική και ανισορρόπη χήρα τη Βάντα. Ο Σεβερίν έχει εμμονή με τον πίνακα του Τιτσιάνο (η Αφροδίτη με τον καθρέφτη) και μέσα στον παραλογισμό του έρωτα και του πόθου του για τη Βάντα, την ταυτίζει με τον διάσημο πίνακα. Η Βάντα είναι η δική του Αφροδίτη με τη γούνα. Τη φαντασιώνεται ως θέα ψυχρή και αυταρχική, ανίκανη να αγαπήσει,με μοναδική της επιδίωξη την υπέρτατη ηδονή.Σταδιακά ξεκινάει μια τρυφερή σχέση μεταξύ τους όμως ο απώτερος σκοπός του Σέβεριν είναι να πείσει την Βάντα να τον κάνει δούλο και υπηρέτη της, να αποφασίζει τα πάντα γι'αυτόν,να τον κακοποιεί σωματικά και ψυχολογικά και αυτός να την υπηρετεί με απόλυτη πίστη και αφοσίωση. Μέσα απο αυτή τη σχέση ο Σέβεριν θέλει να αποδείξει την αγάπη του προς αυτήν αλλα κυρίως να απολαύσει σεξουαλικές διαστροφές που συνδέονται με τον πόνο και τον εξευτελισμό. Όταν αρχίζει αυτή η μαζοχιστική σχέση ο Σέβεριν νιώθει επιτέλους ευτυχισμένος που ζει την παιδική του φετιχιστική φαντασίωση. Η αυταρχική γυναίκα με τη γούνα που τον κακοποιεί και τον ερεθίζει ερωτικά,προέρχεται απο μια θεία του που τον μαστίγωσε όταν θεώρησε ότι της φέρθηκε με αγένεια. Φυσικά η τιμωρός θεία φορούσε μια εντυπωσιακή γούνα....Απο και και έπειτα ξεκινάει το όχι και τόσο ευχάριστο "μαρτύριο" του νεαρού μας δούλου ο οποίος φτάνει στο σημείο να υπογράψει και συμβόλαιο υποταγής. Όλη η ιστορία περιγράφεται με πολύ υποβλητικό τρόπο και ανάλογες εικόνες χλιδής και αισθησιασμού. Δεν υπάρχει κανένα στοιχείο χυδαιότητας ή πορνογραφικού περιεχομένου. Ακόμη και η φιλήδονη Βάντα- Αφροδίτη- κρύβει το γυμνό κορμί της πάντα με μια γούνα. Ίσως γι'αυτό μου φάνηκε αρκετά βαρετό το κατά τα αλλα μαζοχιστικό ανάγνωσμα. Πολλούς ασπασμούς. Καλή ανάγνωση.

  • Asma Qannas
    2018-10-07 12:59

    تحديث: صدر عن دار أثر للنشر ترجمتي لرواية ڤينوس في الفراء قراءة ماتعة يا أصدقاء (: *** "وضرب الرب القدير سبحانه فأسلمه ليدي امرأة" سفر يهوديتتراءى لي أن أنغمس في أعماق سيڤرين الجريحة، تلك الروح المتعطشة للإهانة والإذلال، الروح التي لم تكن إلا تجسيدًا مرهفا للخط الرفيع مابين الألم واللذة. سيڤرين لم يكن إلا أحد الذين تفردوا بعذاباتهم ونجحوا في الوصول لمبتغاهم -أقصى مراحل اللذة- هكذا كان الشاب العذب الذي يحمل من الوداعة والعاطفة ما يكفي؛ لجعله ينقاد لڤينوس إلهة الحب والجمال، العصية على الولوج، ذات المخالب التي اجتثت روحه. "لأنني سئمت منذ سنوات من الوجود وما يصحبه من خيبات أمل؛ فقد وضعتُ بمحض إرادتي حدًا لحياتي عديمة الجدوى" انخرط سيڤرين مع تلك الإرادة، تلك الشهوة التي سيطرت عليه لإستثارة الألم. كان عليه أن يخطو خطوات واسعة نحو حتفه ليكون عبدًا لذاك التمثال الرخامي البارد، التمثال الذي استحال جسدًا ودمًا. تلك الوثيقة التي وقعها سيڤرين تضمنت استسلامه التام وتنازله عن جميع حقوقه كعشيق، وألا يكون من الآن وصاعدًا إلا عبدًا لهذه السيدة.. وبصفته عبدها الذليل عليه أن يحمل لعنته أن يحمل اسم "غريغور" إلى الأبد، ويمكن لها معاقبته على أية تقصير أو خطأ حسب ما يسترضيه مزاجها؛ أو لمجرد التسلية فقط، ويحق لها قتله متى كان هذا مصدرًا للذة والمتعة. نرى بشكل ملحوظ ارتباطًا وثيقًا ما بين الفرو والقسوة؛ إذ تتضمن الوثيقة أيضا وجوب ارتداء السيدة دوناجوف الفرو حال إساءة معاملتها لعبدها. هنا تتجلى الفيتشيه لدى مازوخ بشكل قوي وذلك من خلال الفرو والسوط في مغامراته الشهوانية. حين ارتعشت يداه قبيل توقيعه قالت له بنبرتها الجسورة "أتخيفك سعادتك إلى هذا الحد؟" إن ڤاندا تحمل من الحب ما يجعلها تسحقه وتهينة وهي تصرخ: " أنت ما أريد.. رجلًا.. شيئًا.. بهيمة" ثم تنهال عليه بالسوط والشتائم. إن الأرملة الغنية ڤاندا تسير على خطى جوديث؛ حيث قطعت تلك الأخيرة رأس هولوفرنس ومنحته شرف الموت على يديها. ڤاندا وسيڤرين لم يكونا إلا تكرارًا لدليلة وشمشمون- هولوفرنس و جوديث، جميعهم ليسوا إلا قالبًا واحدًا من علاقة حب موشومة بالوجع والقلق. سقطت أعمال مازوخ وابتلعه النسيان في أواخر حياته ولم يبقى إلا اسمه دلالة على أشهر الإضطرابات الجنسية. تم ذلك تحديدًا بمباركة كرافت إيبنغ الذي استعار بشكل مجحف حياة مازوخ الشخصية وأعماله مشيرًا لهذا الإنحراف، ويرى فرويد أن المازوخية ليست إلا امتدادًا للسادية ومكملا لها جزءًا لا يتجزأ منها، ويضيف أن السادية ليست إلا شكلًا متطورًا من المازوخية في المقام الأول "السادي ما كان بمقدوره امتلاك فكرة الحصول على لذته من آلام الآخرين لو لم يكن قد عانى في البداية (مازوخيا)". هكذا تم تعمد نسيان مازوخ بشكل فظيع وإهانته مرة أخرى بجعله مكملًا لساد. إنه ليس إلا القدرة على قلب الأفكار والإندفاعات بشكل عكسي، أصبح مازوخ محض شبح مشوه وممسوخ عن ساد، نسخة هزيلة منه. في قراءة جيل دولوز المنصفة لهما أشار إلى الفراق الجوهري بين ساد و مازوخ أي أنهما بإختصار عالمان متغايران لكل منهما أفانينه الخاصة.يرى فرويد أن الرجل في حياته الجنسية تتضمن أفعاله عالما مستقلا من العدوان والميل الشديد للهيمنة وإخضاع الآخر، وأن العدوان ليس إلا ركامًا من الرغبة في الإفتراس ( آكلي لحوم البشر) -هانيبال ليكتر أنموذجا- ويشير أن المازوخية ليست إلى عنصرًا أنثويًا مزجه مازوخ بجوهره. كان تراث ليوبولد فون ساشر مازوخ الروائي بمثابة ثورة استطيقية تقف بجانب النظام الأمومي، وظف فيها بتمعن الميثولوجيا الإغريقية عن طريق ڤينوس رمزًا للخصوبة والتوليد. هكذا أعاد الكاتب النمساوي مازوخ للأنثى سلطتها بشكل ظاهري وكان يضمها دون شعور في مسرحه.. في لعبته الخاصة.. المسرح الكبير الذي تنخرط المرأة المتسلطة فيه. هذه السلطة والقوة في أعمال الكاتب النمساوي مازوخ ليست إلا وجها آخر من الخنوع التام (الضحية تتكلم عبر الجلاد) لم يكن كل ذلك إلا قناعًا، إن مازوخ ينسل داخل المرأة الجلادة.. يربيها ويجبرها على سحقه.. إنه يعجنها بيديه لتكون المخلّص له.. هنا نلاحظ بشكل واضح استحالة إلتقاء المازوخي بالسادية وأنه من المجحف القول بضرورة وجودهما معا. إن المازوخي لا يحتاج إلى امرأة سادية إنه يحتاج أنثى يقنعها وتتحالف معه لتدمره. إن الجلادة ڤاندا في ڤينوس في الفراء ترتدي قناع القسوة.. الرداء الذي حاكه سيڤرين لها لتذوب تمامًا وتفنى في جوهره، وهكذا دائمًا وببساطة شديدة تكون البطلة في روايات مازوخ مدفوعة ومجبرة على الإنزلاق في شهواته والخضوع التام لرغبات عبدها الذليل. يشكل الأدب المرحلة الأولى والأكبر لنفي سوء الفهم لأعمال ساشر مازوخ وساد، و ذلك لن يتم إلا عن طريق التحرر من سلطة الأطباء والأخلاقيين ومحاولة فهم المشروع المتفرد الذي انطلق على يديهما. إن ارتباط روح ساشر مازوخ باللذة والألم ليس إلا تكريمًا وتشريفًا لرهافة ميوله الذوقية، لقد كان الخالق الأول لشكل متفرد من أسمى أشكال الحب. توحد مازوخ مع ذاته وكان أكثر ترفعًا وعلوًا من أن يُنزل الشرور بأحد كان يتلقاها وحده بكل لذة.

  • Cheryl Kennedy
    2018-10-13 06:10

    The DSM-IV lists masochism as a derivation of sexual gratification from being subjected to physical pain or humiliation by oneself or another person. Pleasure is being abused or dominated. The psychiatric bible must have read Venus in Furs for its definitions. Even the word used for sexual pursuits comes from the author's name.Sacher-Masoch was an Austrian writer of letters and a journalist. I stopped counting books attributed to him when it was greater than forty. He wrote Venus in Furs in 1870 though the word, masochism's first known use was in 1892 according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.That suggests that Severin von Kusiemski, along with his mistress, Wanda von Dunajew are the originators of why and how methods of domination enhance pleasure to some people. In fact, this novella is a comprehensive study guide to the ambivalence of love.

  • Tiffany Reisz
    2018-09-27 08:16

    Strange. Very strange. I'll be thinking of it for a long time to come.

  • Khashayar Mohammadi
    2018-09-26 14:16

    I love this book so much it worries me.

  • Meredith
    2018-10-01 09:03

    Haven't reviewed on goodreads in a while, but was googling this work's translation dates and came across the negative reviews here. Thought I should contribute my defence.What Makes Venus in Furs a groundbreaking and thoroughly enjoyable work?1)Literary traditionThe finely-rendered frame structure follows the German novella tradition's strong, almost proscriptive, tradition of narrative framing (think Goethe, Storm, Hoffmann). Accordingly, it created a sensation among early readers by presenting shocking content (deviant sexuality) within a deeply conservative, conventional form.2)Interpretation (dreams and ekphrasis)What desires does a given dream or artwork represent, directly or indirectly? The novella demands that we read the layers of art within art, dream within fiction. It anticipates the work of his fellow Austrian, Sigmund Freud, particularly his Interpretation of Dreams (1900).3) Sexual TheoryVenus in Furs undoubtedly ranks in the top ten books of the nineteenth-century for advancing new ideas about sexual practice. The famous sexologist Kraft-Ebbing is deeply indebted to Sacher-Masoch, as one sees in the monumental Psychopathia sexualis (1886).4) Contract TheoryThe work carries interesting implications for the student of law in literature. The sadist Wanda and the masochist Severin set up a contract wherein he relinquishes himself utterly to her will. (The fiction's contract was based on a real contract Sacher-Masoch made with his wife!!!)5) Feminist MoralS-M concludes that as long as women do not receive the same educational opportunities as men, power differentials will exist between the sexes: "Woman...as man is at present educating her, is his enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion. .This she can become only when she has the same rights as he, and is his equal in education and work." (emphasis mine)6) Charming to ReadFrom the prose details of costume, to the outrageousness of the "perversions", to the sense of place the text creates, the reader has a rich world in which to plunge. It's not a world I'd want to live in, but certainly a delightfully cruel world to imagine.p.s. Deleuze has an interesting book on Venus in Furs--Coldness and Cruelty.

  • Greg
    2018-10-08 11:13

    How I caused irreparable harm to our entire country because of a relationship gone sour with the author of Anti-Oedipus"Confession time. I didn't really read this book, but I'm going to rate it anyway. I did read the Deleuze book Cruelty, which is him writing about Venus in Furs, and then the book itself. I remember really liking the Deleuze part, but at that point in my life I was so in love with Deleuze that he could have written anything and I would have ejaculated all over it. It was a bad time for me, I thought things were going great between me and Giles, but it was still in the early months of our relationship, and things looked rosy. I didn't realize that I would become painfully co-dependent on him and that he would plague me for the next year, taunting me, not letting me get my school work done while he kept calling to me, asking me to read just one more book of his, one more essay, telling me that the paper I was writing on him would never be good enough. "Come on, edit me one more time, I promise we will then be done and we can get on with our lives," he would say, but it wouldn't be one more time, it would be again and again and again until he had me completely ruined. And then about 20 months after our cheery romance began, I finally thought I would break free of him. I finished my stupid paper, at the price of basically ruining an entire year of school in the process, costing me more money then I make in a year in tuition, but I got it done; but Deleuze had the last laugh, the morning I finally dropped the paper into a mailbox to get it out of my life and into my professors hands he masterminded a complex plot to destroy a couple of buildings that just happened to be right across the street from the mailbox my paper was sitting in, and causing it never to make it to the professor (actually it did make it to him, but I had to resend it), but Deleuze's actions that day made me so fed up with the academic pretensions I'd been harboring that he successfully ruined grad school.1 for me. Do I really believe that a dead French philosopher did all of this? Yes, yes I do. I believe that in my solipsistic view of the world that Deleuze orchestrated 9/11, that it was my stormy relationship with him that caused the death of thousands of people, threw our country into a stupid war that will probably never fucking end, that helped make our country even worse then it was before, and make the 90's look like a great time when all we had were jackboot ATF agents and an occasional bombing on foreign countries to make us look like total assholes to the rest of the world. I don't hold Bin Laden responsible, nor George Bush for anything he did post 9/11, how could he act any differently under the all encompassing power of Giles Deleuze? Anyway, I really liked his part of the book. The part about the really fucked up relationship and fur coats and shit I didn't really like. So I thought I'd say that, just to clarify my opinion on another rating that has no review attached to it.

  • Jessica
    2018-09-23 12:16

    If I remember correctly, this book was stupid. It also seems to have contributed to a lot of ridiculous behavior, and has led indirectly to many horrendous cultural products such as "people taking their silly sex hang-ups waaaaay too seriously," "fetish nights," "vinyl outfits," and "that irritating kid in your freshman dorm who walked around with a leash around his neck."BUT, on the PLUS side, having read it made me feel way more knowledgeable about the VU song on the banana album, which I guess was pretty important to me at the time. I had to put this on here because I just reviewed SOAE and SOO, and even though this book is unfortunately not titled "Story of Venus in Furs," it's associated in my mind with the other two as the sort of matching set of crap-you-read-as-a-kid-when-you-are-intrigued-by-the-idea-of-feeling-fancy-for-reading-some-kind-of-obscurish-book-with-a-cult-following-that-is-about-omg-omg: SEX!!!!----Okay, everybody on Bookface thinks this book is like amazing, so who knows, but it seemed awful silly to me when I read it as a fourteen-year-old. Maybe I didn't get it or something because I hadn't yet had all those subsequent masochistic relationships that have since plagued my life. OR, maybe everyone else on here is crazy.

  • Ina Cawl
    2018-10-14 12:08

    what an weird and strange fetish Severin hadto feel ecstasy in pain and humiliation

  • Evan
    2018-10-10 13:53

    I wanted to write an in-depth review, quoting favorite passages from the book, but for now let's just say that this was the right read for me at the right time. I was expecting it to be titillating and dirty but instead encountered something rather lovely: a concentrated tale of obsession and longing and risky role playing that turns a woman emulating a simple ancient Grecian hedonism into a enthusiastic wielder of capricious physical and mental cruelty -- rendered to the sadomasochistic male lover who goads her into it in the first place and ends up getting more than he bargains for in the process. This is a tale dressed in elegant clothes and exquisitely described 19th-century European settings. This primal text in S&M lit must surely be one of its most poetic. I just found the whole book charming.The bonus short story, "The Black Czarina" is a superfluous leftover scrap in the same vein. You can safely skip it.This edition of "Venus in Furs" is the 1965 translation by H.J. Henning, which to my eyes is cleaner and more in the spirit of things than the commonly available and more stilted one by Fernanda Savage.

  • Tia Katrina Canlas
    2018-10-12 11:00

    It was as if Leopold Von Sacher-Masoch's translator was assigned to use the words "dilettante", "suprasensual", and "ermine" as many times as humanly possible in the course of 100 pages-- to lazily tell a story about a man who wants to be his lover's slave. The most intersting part of the book is its introduction, in which it is made known that the author lived out his own character's fantasies when a woman copied Wanda's letter and made Sacher-Masoch her slave. Hopefully, they weren't as boring as their fictional counterparts.

  • فهد الفهد
    2018-09-22 12:14

    فينوس في الفراء لم يعجبني ساد فلذا بالتأكيد لن يعجبني مازوخ، وهنا مأزق حقيقي لكل قارئ، هل يمكننا الانفصال عن موضوعات ساد ومازوخ والتعامل مع ما كتباه من دون التفكير بالسادية والمازوخية؟ لا يسهل ذلك كما أنه لا يساعد كثيراً، لو قرأ أحدهم كتاب مازوخ هذا من دون أي فكرة عن المازوخية فلن يفهم أو يتفهم البطل!! ما لم يكن هو ذاته مازوخياً، بعض الكتب تعرض تجربة إنسانية من المهم الاطلاع عليها وتفهمها ولكن لا يسهل التماهي أو التعاطف معها، أغلب القراء سيمضي في الكتاب وهو يردد في داخله – أحمق! أحمق! لا! ليس هكذا! هل جننت؟ -، هذا غير موضوع الفراء الذي لا أفهمه ولا أفهم دوره في النشوة، كما قلت هي تجربة إنسانية خاصة جداً، وكل ما على القارئ هو توسيع أفقه ومحاولة تقبل وتفهم ما يحدث، نعم لن تقارب العلاقة بين الذكر والأنثى بهذه الطريقة، ولكن تذكر الطريقة التي تناسبك تبدو مملة وقاتلة لدى المازوخي، لا حرارة فيها ولا ألم.

  • Teresa Proença
    2018-10-09 10:54

    Foi o livro Venus à la Forrure (o título em português foi dado por Ana Hatherly), de Sacher-Masoch que deu origem ao termo Masoquismo.Vai daí, já se está mesmo a ver qual o assunto tratado neste romance...que de erótico não tem nada, mas de cómico tem tudo.Séverine que, com pouco mais de trinta anos, já "quase não se podia mexer; já quase não respirava (pudera, com tanta porrada que levou...) conta a um amigo a sua louca paixão pela sádica Wanda. Ela não queria bater-lhe, mas ele pediu tanto tanto que a pobre se viu na necessidade de comprar um chicote e umas cordas. Até eu, que sou pacífica, se visse um homem tão necessitado de carinho como o escravo Gregório, por caridade, também lhe dava umas valentes coças...Que mulher pode resistir a tais súplicas?"Chicoteia-me, peço-te, é para mim um prazer!Espezinha-me! Exclamei, e prosternei-me diante dela com a cara no chão.(...)As pancadas choviam vigorosamente nas minhas costas, nos meus braços, retalhavam-me a carne e deixavam uma sensação de queimadura, mas os sofrimentos extasiavam-me porque provinham da mulher que eu adorava, por quem estava disposto a dar a vida."O amor exige tantos sacrifícios..."Moral da história: quem se deixa chicotear, merece-o."(ilustração de Suzanne Ballivet)

  • Sandy
    2018-09-21 07:10

    This book is much disadvantaged by being grouped with the books of the Marquis de Sade. It isn’t a masterpiece per se, and it does have that “unfinished draft” air, but it was interesting and grabbed my attention all through the plot, and I don’t think I felt bored or extremely disgusted while reading. What surprised me most was how the book in some parts was actually very emotional and soft in ways I couldn’t explain or comprehend.

  • Ebtihal
    2018-10-16 08:20

    في الواحدة وأربع دقائق، في الأول من ديسمبر، ألفان وستة عشر أنتيهت من قراءة ڤينوس في الفراء، ترجمة المترجمة أسماء القناص.تحديث:كان ساشر مازوخ على حق، حين كان قلقًا ولم يسعد بشهرته التي اكتسبها، عن طريق الطبيب كرافت إيبينغ، عالم النفس والأعصاب الألماني، الذي صاغ مصطلح “المازوخية”؛ لوصف إضطراب نفسي جنسي، تتحقق الإستثارة الجنسية فيه من خلال الألم الموجه نحو الذات.مازوخ أعتقد أن هذا المصطلح الطبي واستخدامه الفضفاض، من الممكن أن يتسبب في سحق سمعته الأدبية، وأن يتم احتقار أعماله على نحوٍ فظيع، وهذا ما حدث فعليًّا. تحول أسم “مازوخ” إلى مجرد إتهام بإضطراب جنسي دنيء، وتم نسيان كافة إرثه الثقافي في أدب القصة القصيرة والرواية والمسرح، لم يُعرف مازوخ كفنان ورائد لحركة أدبية في جيله، شارك في ثورة وحرب، بل كمجرد إضطراب جنسي. وكقرّاء عرب متهمون غالبًا بالمازوخية؛ لكوننا عرب، لكوننا نساء، أو كائنات صامتة في هذا المكان، أتيحت لنا فرصة التعرف على عمل مازوخ الأعظم، فرصة للتعرف على الحالة المعنية، في رواية “ڤينوس في الفراء” بترجمة أسماء القناص والصادرة عن دار أثر. وللأسف في قرائتي للمراجعات حول الرواية، نادرًا ما وجدت قارئ تمكن من تجاوز ذاتيته والشعور باستفزازه الشخصي، أو محاولة فهم الحالة دون احتقارها.“لا يمكنك أن تنكري أن الرجل والمرأة أعداء ألداء، وفي وسع الحب أن يوحدهما فترة قصيرة على عقلٍ واحد، وقلب واحد، وإرادة واحدة قبل أن يتمزقا، وأنتِ تعرفين هذا أكثر مني، إن كل من يفشل منهما في الإخضاع، سيشعر قريبًا أنه تحت قدم الآخر.” أعتقد أن مفهوم مازوخ عن علاقة الرجل والمرأة ثوريٌ للغاية، مع أنه لا يبدو كذلك، خصوصًا وإنه يسند غالبًا إلى عبارة غوته “إما أن تكون المطرقة أو السندان”. لكن في القرن التاسع عشر حين كانت ثورات حقوق الإنسان وحقوق المرأة في أوجها في أوروبا، تمكن مازوخ من التصريح/تصوير علاقة المرأة والرجل بطريقة فاضحة ومباشرة، دون تغليفها في مفاهيم عاطفية شاعرية أفلاطونية، -مع أن مازوخ في عمقه شاعري جدًا وأفلاطوني-، لم يوارِ تعابيره وخيالاته في بطولات وعذابات متعارف عليها، بصورة نزار قبانية “يا ولدي قد مات شهيدًا من مات فداء للمحبوب”، والكثير مما تزخر به أشعارنا وأغانينا عن رغبة العذاب في الحب. مازوخ أختار صورة مباشرة: أن تتعذب مباشرةً تحت سوط المحبوب، وهذا ما رأت فيه شخصية “ڤاندا” -المعشوقة في الرواية-، أنه جانب كبير من القوة في نفسه؛ لكونه تحمل كمًا هائلًا من العذاب المهين لن يحتمله أي إنسان، تقول: “ما يتبدى على أنه ضعفك، سيكشف عن نفسه على أنه قوة غير عادية”. بصيغة فيزيائية: مازوخ أعتقد بأن عظمة القوة حين تكون طاقة كامنة وليس طاقة حركية، أي قدرة هائلة على الاحتمال. بالعودة إلى المفهوم الثوري عند مازوخ، بعد أن قدم صورة فجة عن علاقة فيها الرجل سندان والمرأة مطرقة، والتي إن استئصلنا منها الجانب الجسدي وحولناه إلى عاطفي، سنجدها منتشرةً بشكلٍ واسع، في ظل إنعدام حقوق الإنسان، كنتيجة قال عن المرأة: “يمكن أن تكون عبدة له أو سيدة له، لكنها أبدًا لن تكون رفيقته، هذا لن يكون إلا حينما تكون مساوية له في الحقوق التي يتمتع بها، وتكون متساوية معه في التعليم والعمل.” وصل إلى لُب المأساة الإنسانية بشكلٍ عام، لن يكون هناك جلاد وضحية إلا حينما تُغيّب المساواة. وعلى مستوى رجل وامرأة التكافؤ أُس لعلاقة متزنة وطبيعية.أيضًا قام بثورة أستيطيقية على النظام الأبوي، من خلال العودة إلى ڤينوس آلهة الجمال والخصب، وكأنه من خلال إعطاها السوط والملكية المطلقة على حياته ومماته وتخليه عن هويته تمامًا -بتوقيع تلك الوثيقة-، حاول إعادة سلطتها السابقة ومكانتها لها. “وفي صباي الحساس والناضج وقعت في يدي كل أساطير الشهداء. أذكر أنني قرأت بنوع من الرعب المشوب بالنشوة كيف ذبلوا في السجون، وعُذبوا بالمخلعة، ثُقبوا بالسهام وتم صبهم بالزفت المغلي، قُدموا فرائس للحيوانات البرية، سُمروا على الصليب، وعانوا أفظع العذابات بابتسامة تلوح على وجههم، ومنذ ذلك الحين بدت لي المعاناة والصمود أمام التعذيب الوحشي كبهجة رائعة” أيضًا يؤصل إلى جذور هذه الحالة، التي تتمكن من الوصول إلى الاستثارة من خلال الألم الموجه إلى الذات، بتجارب في مرحلة الطفولة، بإفتتان الطفل بقصص الأبطال الشهداء، الذين كانوا يتعرضون للتعذيب في سجون الجزائر وعلى أيدي الطغاة، لكنهم كانوا يحتملون الألم ويبتسمون، ولّدت لديه رغبة في أن يكون بطل استشهادي، يتعرض للتعذيب ويبتسم. الصادم أنه تمكن من رؤية جانب شهواني في أعمال الشهداء!.سنجد أن سڤرين في عمق المأساة التي رغب وتسبب فيها لنفسه، كان يصبو إلى عمل بطولي عظيم.ثم من إفتتانه بالكونتيسة الجميلة القاسية العابثة، التي كانت تلبس الفراء، وتعرضه للجلد تحت سوطها، أعطته تقريب -مشوه- عن عذابات الاستشهاديين. حس الفنان الذي يُقدس الجمال لديه، جعله يعجب بفكرة العذاب تحت يديّ امرأة جميلة وفاتنة.. في كتاب “حيونة الإنسان” أفرد ممدوح عدوان فصلًا كاملًا عن العذاب الذي تتسبب به الضحية للجلاد، الألم الذي تسببه ممارسة التعذيب، وكم التشوه الذي يحل بروح الجلاد، وهذا ما نجده حدث مع ڤاندا، لا نجدها متسقة ومتصالحة مع ما قامت به، بل متذبذبة وكأن جانبين فيها يختصمان، مابين الوحش الذي أيقظه فيها سيڤرين والملاك الطيب داخلها، نجدها تعتذر أحيانًا، ثم تغضب وتجلد وتهين بأبشع ألفاظ، ثم تعترف أنها لم تفعل ما فعلته إلا كي لا تخسر سيڤرين، لمدى الحب الذي أحببته أياه، نوع من عذاب إرضاء المحبوب في تعذيبه.أعتقد أن ڤاندا ضحية؛ لكونها تشوهت، خاضت تجربة هي إبتداءًا رفضتها، لكنها إضطرت إليها، واكتشفت في ذاتها جانب وحشي جعلها تحتقر ذاتها ولا تتصالح معها، لكنها مضت قُدمًا بشكلٍ مبهر.سيڤرين كان يضفي على خيالاته جانب بطولي وشاعري في محاولات إقناعها بها، وهذه الجزئية كانت الأفضل بالنسبة له، كان ضحية تتكلم عبر فم الجلاد، وهو الطرف الأقوى في هذه المعادلة، لكونه يتحصل على متعة ولكون عبوديته اختيارية، بينما ڤاندا حتى وإن تحصلّت على متعة فيه غير أصيلة، طارئة من أجل سيڤرين فقط. من ضيق الأُفق قراءة “ڤينوس في الفراء” كرواية عن تجربة جنسية مستفزة، فهي تحمل مفاهيم أعمق وأبعد كثيرًا من ذلك، يمكن قرائتها ليس فقط على مستوى رجل وامرأة، بل على جميع المستويات، مدير وموظف، مجتمع، أو شعب ودولة وغير ذلك طبعًا، أو اخرجها من سياقها التاريخي ومرحلتها؛ فهي تجربة إنسانية وحتى مع رفضنا التام للعنف بجميع أشكاله، لا يسعنا إلا أن نحاول تحليلها وفهمها، وكرواية لا نحكم إلا على الجانب الفني فيها، كتبها مازوخ بطريقة مذكرات يومية، وأعتقد أن هذا في زمانه كان إبتداعًا جديدًا، كُتبت بأسلوب ذكي ومشوق وخيالات صادمة، وأظهرت مدى عمق وإتساع مدى إطلاع مازوخ وثقافته، من خلال ذكره للقصص التاريخية وربطه بين شخصيات متباينة في الثقافات المختلفة.ترجمة أسماء القناص كانت أنيقة جدًا، أستخدمت تعابير حذقة وسلسلة تمتع القارئ.

  • Christina
    2018-10-04 08:18

    This book is great, short as it is. And I was hankering to try another book on the topic of female domination after reading "Permanent Obscurity" by Richard Perez, which I truly enjoyed. "Venus in Furs" starts out a little stiffly but ups the ante as Severin gets himself into more trouble than he bargained for. Yeah, my word of caution to all you would-be male slaves out there: Be careful what you wish for! If your dream is be debased, be prepared when it happens! Come to think of it, it reads like a cautionary tale. And in the end, Severin learns his lesson. Or does he?

  • Shamus McCarty
    2018-09-29 09:22

    So I finally picked this back up and I remembered why I stopped reading it. This guy is just such a PUSSY! Nothing against Leopold, (or pussy, one of the most powerful things on Earth) he wrote a pretty progressive book for his time. But JeeeZeus! Anyways, I doubt my 1 star will hurt the ratings of this masterpiece. And I really do respect it as a masterpiece, due to the era in which it was written. But the Mona Lisa is also a masterpiece that’s not very impressive 600 years later.

  • Raphael Lysander
    2018-09-24 10:03

    It's a bewildering thing how a man who imagine himself as women's slave and dog, and kneels under their feet still finds a way to talk in a sexism way and supercilious manner about women!Still, this book is by far better than 50 Shades because it's not just short messages, teenage crush, or sexual descriptions. This book clearly shows the mentality behind such a desire, the passion, love-whether it exist in such case or not-, not merely a porn in text.

  • نضال
    2018-10-01 08:55

    قراءة مازوخ لا بُد منها وذلك لمعرفةالجذور الأساسية للمازوخية ، وكما توقعت كانت الرواية منبعثة من تجربة شخصية عاشها ليوبولد مازوخ شخصياً .

  • hypothermya
    2018-09-25 06:08

    I adored this book. I initially was worried that it would be too simplistic in its approach to sexuality, kink, and dominance & submissiveness in sexuality (much as early science fiction books are sometimes are the epitomies of genre cliches regarding time travel, this book could easily have fallen into a genre cliche of the female with the whip). And from what I had first encountered, I had plenty of reason to be expecting this.For one, it is no secret that this book contains such an extreme depiction of submissiveness and pain as a romantic outlet that it actually inspired the creation of the word "masochist", taken from the author's name, Sacher-Masoch. Then, the initial scenes were very polarized -- containing an all or nothing view of dominance, sexual martyrdom, and pain. The book continues to depict a character named Severin and his idealization of sexual martyrdom -- narrated to a friend to illustrate why one should always rule women rather than be ruled by them. But after this polar start, the Sacher-Masoch quickly enters a very captivating depiction of early love and of the formation of a very, very involved romance. From here, the story continues with an addictive narrative and plot. And the ending, which I won't spoil, left me feeling very fulfilled -- complex and well-earned by a writer who was willing to really flesh out his characters. I'm incredibly glad that I tracked this book down and read it.

  • nostalgebraist
    2018-10-13 07:07

    One of the goofiest things I’ve ever read. So many reversals on top of reversals! Such impassioned torrid writing!And yet it’s all basically about a guy and his specific fetishes and how he can’t distinguish “an approximation of a fantasy, instantiated in reality” from “the fantasy itself.” He keeps asking his lover to do the stuff he fantasizes about, but then when the situation starts to involve her free will and she doesn’t do exactly what her fantasy equivalent would, he’s like “what the hell is this crap? Exert your cruel will upon me the way I want it, dammit!” Dude, this is absurd.I guess I can sympathize, in principle with the desire for reality to perfectly match some sort of imagined “perfection,” to the point of not allowing for free will and its attendant errors. But I lose him when he doesn’t even seem to realize that these are two different things and he might be confusing them – even after the rug has been pulled out from under him for like the 20th time.

  • kaelan
    2018-09-28 14:03

    I often find that I will initially be enthralled by a new book; but, as I read on, my attention will begin to flag, and my interest wane. Venus in Furs, however, was different. Yes, I was hooked from the very first pages. And yes, I began to get—not ‘bored,’ per se, but apprehensive about halfway through. Apprehensive, as in: maybe this isn’t really as good as I thought; maybe my expectations were too high....But upon reaching the conclusion of the novel—an ending which, I must admit, I did not anticipate—and having the privileged position of viewing the entire work in hindsight, there’s really nothing I can say other than: 1) this novel is really, really good; 2) Leopold von Sacher-Masoch is a crazy fuck; and 3) I still really like the Velvet Underground song.Although it was not nearly as explicit as I was expecting (kind of like the Kama Sutra, in that respect).

  • Rebecca
    2018-10-20 07:19

    What larks. Got all political at the end, apparently us women are tyrannous in love on account of social oppression. *threatens theory with whip* ;)

  • Max Nemtsov
    2018-10-12 07:20

    Сентиментально-романтическая белиберда, томная и наивная — вот что есть эта повесть, из которой раздули культ. Даже с поправкой на время. Незрелость чувств, эмоциональная нестабильность, самолюбование — все эти штаны на лямках австро-германо-польско-русской молодежи побуждали ее прилипать к неодушевленным объектам (с ними-то проще, чем с живыми людьми, в отношениях с которыми думать надо, чувствовать, а тут — еби туфлю на здоровье, она тебе слова в ответ не скажет). Ну в общем (я по необходимости утрирую пунктиром). Оттуда же, из этого детского (маркиза де) сада человечества — всякий прочий вандерфогель, позднейшие «большие идеи» о колониальном переустройстве мира под себя: из прыщавых, дрищавых фантазий отвратительных подростков.Да, а с другой стороны у нас — несгибаемая власть, и вся повесть Захер-Мазоха в то же время — нескончаемое нытье, оправдание собственного прогиба под эту власть. Довольно тошнотворно и омерзительно, надо заметить, хотя в то же время — довольно потешно. Чтение поневоле перемежается восклицаниями: «Ну деточка, ну еб твою мать» (хотя случись такое, кто знает, до каких чудачеств это довело бы наших героев и автора заодно — было бы, наверное, еще интереснее). К чести автора надо заметить, что на тех порах он был довольно самоироничен (позднее в жизни, правда, мозги ему отключило, видимо, совсем).

  • Rachel
    2018-09-24 12:22

    This book is a fascinating, if a bit unsettling, exploration of the more aberrant relationships that can exist between the sexes. I've always been somewhat surprised that so few people seem to have read it; they may have heard of it, or know vague details as to the plot, which is still infamous even by today's standards, but it does tend to get overlooked as one of the great books of its time period. Personally, I'd recommend it highly, if for no other reason than to experience the subversive look at love that it presents.