Sirandwench
Posts: 4
Joined: 10/8/2006
Status: offline
|
alice,
I saw the movie as an 18 year old when it came out way back in November 1975. It had a very powerful effect on me. Back then, there was no term for BDSM, and certainly no public acceptance or even awareness of the idea, so it was completely shocking to me --- BUT --- it resonated powerfully with me. I knew that I had to incorporate elements of what I had seen in the movie into my life. It has always seemed to me to be a very romantic love story.
About 6 months after I saw the movie I found the book and read most of it standing in the bookstore, partly because I was a penniless student, and partly because I was terrified to take it to the register. I loved the book too, although it has a much less happy ending.
I liked and felt I knew the main characters: O, Rene, Sir Stephen, Anne Marie.
I liked the action of the plot: O's initial training at Roissy, the development of her relationship with Sir Stephen, her further development as a slave at Anne Marie's, and her triumphal debut as a fully developed slave at the end of the book. I was not happy with the two endings, as they did not seem to flow from the actions of the plot up to that point. I also have always wondered about the development of O's relationship with Rene prior to going to Roissy.
I feel that the theme of the book, that it is possible to find fulfillment as a slave and to hate the notion of being free, has truth in it. It is not a politically correct truth, but it is true, at least for some.
I enjoyed the author's style, although some aspects were difficult for me at the time. I kept in mind that the book was originally written in French by a woman who was a member of the avant garde of French literature in the 1950's, and especially after I had read more widely it became easier to me.
Many of the posters in this thread said they felt the book was unrealistic. I would be interested to hear what aspects they felt were unrealistic. One woman commented that the book was unrealistic because O was not allowed to wear panties, and therefore must never have had a period. The author doesn't mention O's periods, but then I can't think of many books that do. And this book was written in the 50's. Back then, I think the height of menstrual technology was the sanitary napkin, which as I recall, was kind of worn in loin-cloth fashion, and held in place by a separate belt. I think you could wear panties over it, but I also think a woman would have had essentially the same protection without panties.
A couple of posters commented on O's name. Long after the book was written, the anonymous author who used the pen name Pauline Reage revealed that her real name was Anne Desclos. I read somewhere that she had said that O's name is Odile (a fairly common French name) and she just decided to call her O. She said she had intended none of the orifice symbolism others have read into O's name.
Anyway, I loved the book, and it was very influential in shaping my life.
|
RE: The Story of O - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread