Austrian writer and journalist, who gained renown for his romantic stories of Galician life. The term masochism is derived from his name. During his lifetime, Sacher-Masoch was well known as a man of letters, a utopian thinker who espoused socialist and humanist ideals in his fiction and non-fiction. Most of his works remain untranslated into English. The novel Venus in Furs is his only book commonly available in English. See
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.
"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.
My initial fears with 'Venus in Furs' was would it sink into the darker depths of depravity similar with that of Donatien Alphonse Fran莽ois (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.
"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.
Regresando a los or铆genes del erotismo con este librazo que plasma los conceptos del masoquismo a la perfecci贸n, un lenguaje sencillo y personajes que se transforman conforme avanza la lectura.
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 tradition
The 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 Theory
Venus 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 Theory
The 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 Moral
S-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 Read
From 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.
Ok - I just wanted to read this book to understand where the term masochist came from - now I do - I think - or as much as I want to understand. There are some insightful passages in this book; and it is a book that I may read again. Would be of particular interest to anyone studying the social sciences (psychology in particular).
yeah I dunno about this one repetitive not as interesting to me philosophically and his final point are women are the enemy and you should abuse them or they鈥檒l abuse you?? and then he鈥檚 grumpy the whole time she鈥檚 doing everything he鈥檚 asked her to and complains and whinges and idk idk masochism鈥檚 name sake was not it like it didn鈥檛 go that deep or even that messed up tbh, okay yes I鈥檓 too used to Sade and how nuts he is but lmao I found this tame and it鈥檚 not pornographic at all and the philosophy then doesn鈥檛 go as hard as it鈥檚 not going much to work with yea no I found this tame, repetitive and positively uninteresting
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.
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.
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.
This is a glorious work of literature. A deserved classic that not only shares the sexual torment of its characters but also deeply emotional and philosophical mood swings. As we can notice, authors name is Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, whose work and ideas inspired the modern psychological term 鈥渕asochism鈥�. In short, this is wonderfully written ancient smut, lol 馃槅
鈥淪o a woman wearing fur, is nothing but a big cat, a charged electric battery?鈥�
Venus in Furs brings sensuality to what the romantics called 鈥渢he picturesque鈥� reminiscent of the whole 鈥渂eauty is terror鈥� concept that the Greeks popularized before Donna Tartt did. It does this to a whole new level and may have even been one of the books that set the stage for the many romanticized toxic relationship portrayals in culture to come. More than that, though, it is a story about suffering and suffering's companionship with pleasure, love, and even content. With its allusions to Goethe, its enchanting imagery of natural beauty, and its obsession with what can be so simultaneously diabolical while angelic (shout-out to Henry Miller), the way I feel about Venus in Furs is the way Severin does about Wanda (the goddess herself): tormented, beguiled, speared, and wooed by the wretched beauty committed by Sacher-Masoch鈥檚 literary sadism鈥�
It is a portrayal of what an absolute force of nature human passion and lust are, and how one can and will destroy oneself if it roams untamed鈥� Even and especially when we meet (or manage to mold someone into) our 鈥渋deal鈥�. Severin is not interested in living happily ever after, he wants the person who cuts him to also be the one he bleeds for 鈥� 鈥渒ill me, but don鈥檛 push me away鈥�. The complexity of Severin and Wanda鈥檚 relationship cannot possibly be deservingly described or explored in a review. It is truly something, to explore the paradoxical connections between pain and pleasure; love and hate; hurt and tenderness 鈥� specifically, when these opposing sensations, feelings, states of being meet and overlap and maybe even fuse. When the whip, like for Severin, is a gentle kiss... And when that true, gentle kiss is lacking; when it is never, ever enough.
This exploration of paradoxes that sadomasochism exists as is and symbolizes in Venus in Furs represents the intoxicating theme I will always be (maybe too) exhilarated to swoon over and explore. Delight and horror, beauty and terror, cruelty and adoration. Venus in Furs had me splendidly bound by its picturesque complexity.
鈥淟ove knows no virtue, no merit; it loves and forgives and tolerates everything because it must. We are not guided by reason, nor do the assets or blemishes that we discover tempt us to devotion or intimidate us. It is a sweet, mournful, mysterious power that drives us, and we stop thinking, feeling, wishing, we let ourselves drift along and never ask where we are drifting."
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.
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.
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?
Iako je va啪niji za istoriju kulture nego za istoriju knji啪evnosti, Zaher-Mazohov roman predstavlja ponegde delikat(es)nu knji啪evnu poslasticu, posebno za one kojima je dekadencija srcu bliska. Pa啪nja posve膰ena enterijeru i garderoberu likova je izvanredna! Njoj treba pridodati i vrlo va啪an momenat esteticizma, gde fascinacija ne poti膷e samo od onoga za kim se telesno 啪udi, ve膰 i od umetnosti. Od rasko拧nih oblina Ticijanove 鈥濾enere sa ogledalom鈥�, finih odevnih predmeta kao objekata 啪udnje, preko ljubavnika koji imitiraju 鈥濵anon Lesko鈥�, sve do 膷injenice da sr啪 dela 鈥� zapravo delo-unutar-dela, ome膽eno okvirnom pri膷om. I naravno da je pripovedni okvir doneo potrebnu odstupnicu da se slobodno iznese ne拧to vrlo delikatno iz sopstvenog intimnog 啪ivota, ali on tako膽e pravi to razlikovanje izme膽u 啪eljenog (izma拧tanog) i realizovanog. Tu se mo啪e primetiti i zanimljiv paradoks erotske 啪udnje: 膷esto je ono 拧to je nagove拧teno ili izma拧tano uzbudljivije od realizacije, koja se lako otrgne kontroli. Umetnost predstavlja susret hipertrofije i kultivizacije 啪udnje i kada ne拧to od ta dva prevagne, nastaju problemi. Naravno, jasno je da je pripovedni okvir uveden zbog odstupnice uz pomo膰u koje bi se moglo ne拧to sasvim intimno re膰i slobodno, ali momenat esteticizma je tu vrlo va啪an. Esteticizma i artificijelnosti 鈥� o 膷emu svedo膷i 膷ak i erotski govor likova 鈥� jer pretvaranje je osnov svakog sadomazohizma, pretvaranje koje je nagla拧eno ve拧ta膷ko, a do啪ivljava se kao neuporedivo intenzivnije od svakodnevnog stanja. S tim u 膷vrstoj vezi stoji i ose膰aj kontrole, koji donosi jo拧 jedan paradoks: potrebno je izgubiti kontrolu da bi se ose膰aj zadovoljstva u redu povratio. Tako odnos superiornosti i inferiornosti dobija zna膷ajan obrt: ne zadovoljava mazohista prohteve sadiste, ve膰 i sadista mazohiste! Sadista je, 拧tavi拧e, pred svojevrsnim mazohisti膷kim sudom, koji podrazumeva stalno ispitivanje granica. Ako bi se smesta udovoljilo 啪elji, 啪elja bi se uni拧tila. Ako bi se sve namere obznanile, igra bi se okon膷ala. Zavo膽enje je vijuganje, zaobila啪enje i lutanje uz pokoji odu拧ak. Egzoti膷nost je 膷esto pogon erotskog 鈥� ono 拧to je nepoznato, strano, pomalo i mra膷no, udaljeno a dostupno, izme拧teno, nesvakodnevno. Pa i preterano. Nasilje i pot膷injenost samo raspiruju nagone i uvode pervertirani i privla膷ni red, 膷ak i smisao, mada to deluje preterano. Pritom, iako se 膷ini da ne mora da bude tako, dinamika mo膰i se tek sasvim menja u ljubavnom trouglu i to je tek tema za sebe. Kao i, na primer, polo啪aj tamnoputih likova u delu. Ili klasnih odnosa iz perspektive seksualnosti. I 拧ta jo拧 sve ne...
Priznajem, Vandu kao gordu crvenokosu rasko拧nu lepoticu zami拧ljao sam kao ne拧to puniju verziju Mar拧u Kros, dok mi je Severin ostao Zaher-Mazoh. I sve vreme mi je u glavi melodija 鈥濾enus in Furs鈥� Velvet Underground-a. (Ljubav za sve fanove albuma!) 沤ao mi je 拧to je moje izdanje romana bilo malko aljkavo, ovakve knjige zalu啪uju bogatu opremu 鈥� pakovanje koje bi bilo saobrazno sadr啪aju. Ali da je vredno 膷itanja, posebno u odnosu na teme koje se otvaraju 鈥� naravno da jeste. A ako ba拧 neko ho膰e da ska膷e u budu膰nost, Zaher-Mazohove odjeke mo啪e na膰i npr. kod Kafke. Dovoljno tema za jednu finu monografiju!
Wonderful book, You could read it as a fictional play on the master-slave dialectic by Hegel, an idea which is introduced with the first appearance of the sadistic antagonist of the novel, Wanda. A great classical read with an interesting reception through literature, philosophy and psychological assessment.
Popular in the sixties, the content was the inspiration of the eponymous song of The Velvet Underground (1967) here cited as such.
Venus in furs
Shiny, shiny, shiny boots of leather Whiplash girl child in the dark Comes in bells, your servant, don't forsake him Strike, dear mistress, and cure his heart
Downy sins of streetlight fancies Chase the costumes she shall wear Ermine furs adorn the imperious Severin, Severin awaits you there
I am tired, I am weary I could sleep for a thousand years A thousand dreams that would awake me Different colors made of tears
Kiss the boot of shiny, shiny leather Shiny leather in the dark Tongue of thongs, the belt that does await you Strike, dear mistress, and cure his heart
Severin, Severin, speak so slightly Severin, down on your bended knee Taste the whip, in love not given lightly Taste the whip, now bleed for me
I am tired, I am weary I could sleep for a thousand years A thousand dreams that would awake me Different colors made of tears
Shiny, shiny, shiny boots of leather Whiplash girl child in the dark Severin, your servant comes in bells, please don't forsake him Strike, dear mistress, and cure his heart
Summary: "she covers me in kisses. She hits me with her whip. She covers me in kisses. She's cruel to me. Oh her green eyes. She covers me in kisses. She's cruel to me".
The characters were flat and predictable. A large portion of the book was this floral back and forth of Wanda throwing her arms around him and covering him in kisses then looking at him cruelly and saying something mean, and maybe hitting him with her whip. Rinse and repeat for several chapters. In the end the plot twist is that Wanda doesn't even desire to be dominant, she is doing this only for him. This just deflates the entire story. It's not satisfying to read.
Leopold von Sacher-Masoch based this off his real life. He had a D/s relationship with a real life Wanda, complete with contract. You can read about it here:
Too bad he couldn't turn his real life experiences into an interesting book with interesting characters.
I'll give it 2 stars instead of 1 because it has moments of humor, but overall it鈥檚 not a riveting book. I expected more from this 鈥渃lassic鈥� but it was mostly a whiny guy trying to extrapolate his fetish as some huge statement on human nature and women.
One of the goofiest things I鈥檝e ever read. So many reversals on top of reversals! Such impassioned torrid writing!
And yet it鈥檚 all basically about a guy and his specific fetishes and how he can鈥檛 distinguish 鈥渁n approximation of a fantasy, instantiated in reality鈥� from 鈥渢he fantasy itself.鈥� 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鈥檛 do exactly what her fantasy equivalent would, he鈥檚 like 鈥渨hat the hell is this crap? Exert your cruel will upon me the way I want it, dammit!鈥� Dude, this is absurd.
I guess I can sympathize, in principle with the desire for reality to perfectly match some sort of imagined 鈥減erfection,鈥� to the point of not allowing for free will and its attendant errors. But I lose him when he doesn鈥檛 even seem to realize that these are two different things and he might be confusing them 鈥� even after the rug has been pulled out from under him for like the 20th time.
Read extracts of this during third year of uni but have always wanted to read the full thing. Sacher-Masoch is who the term 鈥榤asochism鈥� is named after for the themes of dom/sub sexual relationships in this book.
Venus in Furs is about a man who submits himself as a slave to a woman called Wanda as an act of his devotion to her. The story is so emotionally toiling as the mistress whips and tortures him to his pleasure and the relationship between the two becomes so complicated and messed up. I was really addicted to this and finished it in two sittings - absolutely loved the writing, the characters and the way the story was structured.
The end was so good as well. It鈥檚 a short book so would recommend if this sounds like your thing.