The introduction to 120 Days of Sodom provided some much
needed historical context for the novel. Granted, though, it did further warp
the already disturbing book even more for me, as there is evidence to support
the theory that de Sade wrote it about his own fantasies and experiences, such
as the “little girls affair,” during which he and his wife spent a winter shut in
a chateau with several young female servants. Though disgusting, it was
interesting to learn about de Sade’s personal history and the context around
which 120 Days of Sodom was written. It
was also interesting to learn about the hands through which the book passed,
before finally returning to France, where it has today been claimed a national
treasure. The sort of mythology created around de Sade was also very
interesting, seeing how people exaggerated the already disturbing acts and
crimes he committed, as well as blaming his writing for deaths and murders. It
is frustrating to read about how de Sade avoided the judicial system a few
times because of his social status and connections. De Sade was able to avoid
trial and flee to Italy, and later he managed to save himself from the
guillotine. The wealthy and powerful always get away with concerning, dangerous
acts and crimes. I found it interesting that de Sade defended his treatment of
women by acknowledging he is a libertine and, as if claiming a moral high
ground of sorts, claims that he is “not a criminal, or a murderer.” De Sade
clearly does not recognize the abuse and rape of women as a criminal act, but
just part of his sexual interests. Given the nature of the book’s content, it
is not surprising that sexologists would be intrigued by it and want to study
it. I have learned a little about sexology in my queer literature class, so I
was surprised and interested to see them show up in this class as well, though
it makes perfect sense that they would want to study a text like 120 Days of Sodom.