Noah
Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TracyTaken I have seen some elements in books since I was a kid, but that was more seeing what was important to me. The first one I can recall would be “Little House in the Big Woods.” Norman’s following were people (young men probably) who had BDSM thoughts, and he catered to them, just as Rice catered to followers of Beauty. I think it would be difficult to set up a whole style of living based on what someone who is kink-inclined could read into a book that’s not intended to be kinky. You could create a whole society of D/s that is highly sadistic based on The Scarlet Letter, but since that was based on the practices of a real culture . . . This has a yummy dominant tone, if you read it right - - - - - - There is nothing that keeps you at any one moment out of hell, but my mere pleasure. -- By my mere pleasure, I mean my sovereign pleasure, my arbitrary will, restrained by no obligation, hindered by no manner of difficulty, any more than if nothing else but my mere will had in the least degree, or in any respect whatsoever, any hand in the your preservation. Your strength has no power to resist me, nor can anyone deliver you out of my hands. – I am not only able to cast you into hell, but I can most easily do it. Sometimes an earthly prince meets with a great deal of difficulty to subdue a rebel, who has found means to fortify herself. It is not so with me. You have no fortress that is any defense from me. You are as a great heap of light chaff before the whirlwind; or a quantity of dry stubble before devouring flames. It is not because I am unmindful of your wickedness, and do not resent it, that I do not let loose my hand. My wrath burns against you, your fate does not slumber; the pit is prepared, the fire is made ready, the furnace is now hot, ready to receive you; the flames do now rage and glow . . . - - - - - Seems like pretty hot stuff to me, and it was intended to be guidance for living. It’s part of the sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” (I tweaked with the wording) from Edwards, asshole that he was. Maybe religion veiled kink. I haven’t read Chaucer yet, but he’s on my syllabus. There have been so many great posts in this thread. I'd like to comment on a few more of them. Thanks, Tracy for your post and its wonderful snippet. Maybe religion sometimes veils kink. Maybe it sometimes reveals it. And maybe it can all be bilateral. I can't see how any instance of faith can be other than an instance of power exchange, broadly defined. People how claim there is nothing spiritual to be seen in BDSM just baffle me, but then a lot of things do. I value this snippet you offer in particular for the following reason. Gibran, quoted elsewhere in the thread, and Rumi for instance, can easily be read as "purely" religious, or as romantic, or indeed as kinky, and all sorts of alloys as well. In my experience, the fire-and-brimstone variety of Christian preaching hasn't tended to feature, even highlight, the immense emotional cross-over between holy power exchange and the unholy kind (which as I've already suggested I don't really see as unholy anyway.) Not that it isn't all there for those of us tuned to those frequencies. Your little gift shows just how well it can be done. Thanks. That Edwards, was that Jonathan? Can you tell us more about the Little House in the Big Woods? I'm unfamiliar.
|