Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Chakram
Vixen
Global user
Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 324
Karma: 4 (+4/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Disturbing Themes of Sado-Masochism?
quote:
Although I have indulged in fantasies of masochism and dominance/submission, in my actual life I am pretty fanatical about choice, self determinism and consent. what has tormented me about V is the kidnapping, the lack of consent. I understand what he did. I am not sure I can condone it. what gets me off the hook is that this is fiction.
but, those of us who's hearts beat fast at thoughts of V... let's fess up. to some extent his dominance is an incredible turn-on.
Disturbing? yes. Intriguing? OK. Maybe sexuality has to include the edgy, the mysterious?
I agree completely with the lack of consent issue, Willow.
I suppose I'm hitting a wall here with the use of the word dominance. If used as a synonym for his mastery of skills such as physical combat, oration, or his knowledge of the arts, I agree that it is a turn-on. But dominance over Evey (or placing myself in that situation) is one of his least attractive qualities to me. Near the end of the scene where they are watching the movie, I find V treats Evey in a very patronizing manner (sort of Father knows best). At that moment, I find I really don't like him.
This quality is far more prominent in the GN (though perhaps more appropriate given Evey's relative youth). I really couldn't see them having an equitable relationship until after Evey left and returned of her own accord. In some small way she has taken back her power of choice. She could have stayed away. That she chose to return is far more powerful to me (than in the GN, when she simply stays after the torture).
Hmm...I'll have to think about this some more. (Must be off now...Mother's Day and all!  )
---
V: "Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power."
|
|
5/14/2006, 11:38 am
|
Send Email to Chakram
Send PM to Chakram
|
CyranoRox
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: a garret over a moonlit street
Posts: 617
Karma: 44 (+44/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Disturbing Themes of Sado-Masochism?
Maybe we should agree on the events that are actually shown in the captivity sequence . What, after all, do we see happening to E-V in the torture sequence?
Bear with me, I've seen it twice.
She is interviewed She is shaved
She is showered with her hands bound above her head. She is in a chair in a dark room with glaring lights. She is dragged into her cell
Her food is coarse and a rat appears
Her face is plunged into water
She is told that she will be shot
She is told [by the only one, imho, HW without the mask] that she is protecting someone who does not give a **** about her.
Anything else? not in my memory. Never struck. Never drugged. Never violated.
And after all, did V have a reason to be angry? His acceptance of her offer to help is minimal, cool, distant--still delicious, of course, but perhaps not what she might have hoped for. She is lying, planning escape and betrayal, holding Gordon's address and nerving herself up to 'do it' jus before. Does he know? why else the chilly acceptance? She does betray him to the bishop; she can only expect him to die if she is believed; she offers to trade his life for her return to society. Rough play indeed.
You are right that the captivity sequence is not a gratification to either character, so you have to give up considering it S&M; merely cruelty, anger, or coldly calculated use of hard means to a serious end.
|
|
5/14/2006, 10:11 pm
|
Send Email to CyranoRox
Send PM to CyranoRox
|
Chakram
Vixen
Global user
Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 324
Karma: 4 (+4/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Disturbing Themes of Sado-Masochism?
quote:
No I think we are into a bit of somewhat subliminal S-M eroticism here (perhaps as Larry Wachowski intended).
Missed this on the first read...
I honestly think you're reaching here, pwsull. To me there is nothing in the framing of the torture sequences to suggest they are meant to titillate (such as lingering shots of Evey arching in pain, the Interrogator looming over her while both breath heavily, etc.). The "prison guards" treat Evey very impersonally, with the exception of the last sequence ("Just give them something...anything..."), and she doesn't seem to exhibit any unhealthy interest in them. Rather she seems inwardly focused, probably in part due to the personal revelations she experiencing after reading Valerie's letter.
What do you find in the torture scenes that implies a subtle or subliminal S&M theme? (Just curious...it's an interesting topic that I've seen raised elsewhere)
---
V: "Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power."
|
|
5/14/2006, 10:59 pm
|
Send Email to Chakram
Send PM to Chakram
|
pwsull
Vindicator
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 353
Karma: 36 (+36/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Disturbing Themes of Sado-Masochism?
OK...It seems I must concede a point or 2, hopefully without painting myself further into an intellectual corner position which becomes difficult to support.
When I wrote:
quote:
No I think we are into a bit of somewhat subliminal S-M eroticism here (perhaps as Larry Wachowski intended).
and Chakram responded:
quote:
I honestly think you're reaching here, pwsull. To me there is nothing in the framing of the torture sequences to suggest they are meant to titillate (such as lingering shots of Evey arching in pain, the Interrogator looming over her while both breath heavily, etc.).
I am afraid I was referring primarily to Larry Wachowski, and what he might have intended (check out the Rolling Stone article I reference in my starting post to this thread). I don’t think anyone would argue that the Wachowskis are forwarding their own agendas in this film. And as artists it is their right and duty to express and engage us in their thoughts, beliefs, and feelings. The Wachowskis have shown in all of their films that they are into those edgy, social fringe places that are frequently found in graphic novels, and outside the experience of many everyday people. And in this film they loudly express their concerns about the political and religious right and the erosion of privacy and personal freedoms those beliefs threaten. Given Larry Wachowski’s very fringe sexual orientation and interests it does not surprise me that the focus of discrimination and “genocide” in the film are lesbians and gay men ( and the other groups mentioned as discriminated against…muslims and immigrants…get no screen time at all); and further we can “fill in the blank” that Gordon Dietrich is probably killed by the Fingermen not only for his Qu’ran, but also for his collection of homo-erotic (and at times sado-masochistic) Robert Maplethorpe photographs.
I did not find anything erotic about the torture scene myself....more I was immensely moved in my empathic sadness and horror for the characters; both by what is happening to Evey and by what happened in the past to Vallerie and thousands of others silenced by Norsefire. It is what V does to Evey in that scene that I can not forgive him for, despite his supposedly noble intent to "free" Evey from her fear and complacency in the face of Sutler's fascist horrors. In my mind, at that moment V is a psychopath. No noble intent can excuse torturing another human being (and perhaps the film makers are commenting further here on present day events). But no, I will stick to my core thesis that this is in part the non-sexual sado-masochism I previously described....the admittedly warped and disturbing ways people can seek closeness and emotional connection with each other through cruelty and victimization, dominance and submission...As we often see in victims of trauma who find themselves repeatedly drawn back into abusive relationships, and/or become abusers themselves.
And CyranoRox...I think we are actually in about 95% agreement. Where we differ is in your insistence that what we SEE on the screen ain't so bad. I think it is bad psychologically, and I also think we are only shown brief flashes of the entire experience Evey went through...and that much more is left up to the imagination of the viewer. Just another example of the many ways in which this film invites us to “fill in the blanks”. At the risk of provoking your ire, I wonder if you might find it hard to keep liking V if he is, in part, kind of a psychopath. I don't have that problem. I like and admire his heroism, noble purpose, style, and romanticism while also finding parts of him repugnant and a number of his behaviors reprehensible. I can juggle those two aspects of him, but isn't that very complexity what makes him such a fascinating, tortured, compelling, and attractive character? If he was just heroic, noble, and romantic wouldn’t he be boring too? (And probably not all that sexy.) I found myself having the thought that it may be the “bad boy” aspects of V that we are attracted to; men identifying with, and women desiring. There is that phenomenon of boys revolting against their parents by trying to be dangerous, and girls revolting against their parents by dating those dangerous boys. When we grow up we look for more stability, support, and reliability in our relationships, but perhaps we still long for those reckless and “edgy” days of our youth.
V (Describing the Bishop, but also perhaps himself): And thus I clothe my naked villany/With old odd ends stolen forth from holy writ/And seem a saint when most I play the devil.
[quoting Shakespeare's Richard III, Act I Scene 3]
Last edited by pwsull, 5/15/2006, 10:33 am
--- 
"Perily, this pichyssoise of perbiage peers most perbose, so let me simply add that it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me"...... P |
|
5/15/2006, 9:01 am
|
Send Email to pwsull
Send PM to pwsull
|
Chakram
Vixen
Global user
Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 324
Karma: 4 (+4/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Disturbing Themes of Sado-Masochism?
quote:
I am afraid I was referring primarily to Larry Wachowski, and what he might have intended (check out the Rolling Stone article I reference in my starting post to this thread). I don’t think anyone would argue that the Wachowskis are forwarding their own agendas in this film. And as artists it is their right and duty to express and engage us in their thoughts, beliefs, and feelings. The Wachowskis have shown in all of their films that they are into those edgy, social fringe places that are frequently found in graphic novels, and outside the experience of many everyday people. And in this film they loudly express their concerns about the political and religious right and the erosion of privacy and personal freedoms those beliefs threaten.
While I basically agree with the points you have expressed here, I think it's probably a difficult position to prove. This would crawling into the thoughts of the artists. Is it just as possible that the Wachowskis are attracted to source material that expresses these concerns (particularly of the last sentence) as much as it is them injecting themselves (their beliefs, etc.) into the storyline?
quote:
Given Larry Wachowski’s very fringe sexual orientation and interests it does not surprise me that the focus of discrimination and “genocide” in the film are lesbians and gay men ( and the other groups mentioned as discriminated against…muslims and immigrants…get no screen time at all); and further we can “fill in the blank” that Gordon Dietrich is probably killed by the Fingermen not only for his Qu’ran, but also for his collection of homo-erotic (and at times sado-masochistic) Robert Maplethorpe photographs.
To muddy the waters a bit, in the novelization of the movie it is indicated that Gordon is actually executed because of the painting "God Save the Queen." As for the other groups...I've seen it posted on other forums that people felt somewhat bludgeoned by what they termed the Pro-Muslim sentiments. I agree the focus was on the gay and lesbian people who were persecuted, but you must remember that the majority of the flashback sequences to the time of the Reclamation come courtesy of the Valerie letter, which is written by a lesbian (and thus informed by her personal experiences).
quote:
I did not find anything erotic about the torture scene myself....more I was immensely moved in my empathic sadness and horror for the characters; both by what is happening to Evey and by what happened in the past to Vallerie and thousands of others silenced by Norsefire. It is what V does to Evey in that scene that I can not forgive him for, despite his supposedly noble intent to "free" Evey from her fear and complacency in the face of Sutler's fascist horrors. In my mind, at that moment V is a psychopath. No noble intent can excuse torturing another human being (and perhaps the film makers are commenting further here on present day events).
I agree that V could be described as a psychopath. What frightens me about that part is the compartmentalization that V is able to do in order to carry out his role-playing. I believe him when he tells Evey it was incredibly difficult for him to carry out his plan, but ultimately he did do it...and that is very unnerving.
quote:
But no, I will stick to my core thesis that this is in part the non-sexual sado-masochism I previously described....the admittedly warped and disturbing ways people can seek closeness and emotional connection with each other through cruelty and victimization, dominance and submission...As we often see in victims of trauma who find themselves repeatedly drawn back into abusive relationships, and/or become abusers themselves.
But do you really believe that it was an subliminal attempt at seeking closeness and emotional connection on V's part? I think he understood that Evey might not forgive him and actually expected that. I think he carried forth his plan despite the likelihood that it would drive her away because he believed he was performing a higher service ("freeing" Evey from her fear). The reasons why he felt he had to do this are debatable, from a genuine desire to "help" her to a rationalization that she must be strong enough to carry out her part in the revolution. And ultimately, Evey does leave him and does not return until the very last moment, as per her promise. To me that doesn't fit the typical profile of an abuse victim. I would concede that the fact that V chooses to use the same methods on Evey that molded him is closer to the stereotypical abused-turned-abuser circumstance, but I think Evey will break the cycle.
---
V: "Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power."
|
|
5/15/2006, 11:00 am
|
Send Email to Chakram
Send PM to Chakram
|
Electryone
VFAN
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: Finland
Posts: 5
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Disturbing Themes of Sado-Masochism?
Oh, it is sad that this wonderful thread is moving towards us all having to proof that we do not accept violence in real life and that the torture scenes did not "titillate" any of us! I think we all agree on that. But still, I do think one of the major reasons people are so affected by this movie are the subliminal s&m undertones. It does not mean that people who are moved by them practice s&m (but does not mean they do not, either) or that people enjoyed the torture scenes any more than feeling for the gay people's treatment makes us gay.
Some people seem to really hate the movie and are very passionate about it, then inventing that it is the gay or anti-christian or terrorism themes or whatever that stir them up (and by this I do not mean to insult any of those who have been affected by for example terrorism and actually thought the film hurt them) when the reason might be sexual.
There are so many ways of making sexual innuendos without ever actually touching the subject itself. Just as we saw in the movie, many people think it is mainly a love story even when the other messages in the movie are very strong. And there is more violence and betrayal portrayed in the relationship between V and Evey than love. After watching the film over and over again one can see the romantic tension between them from the start but I did not consciously realize it at the first time I saw it. I think this reaction very much reminds that of Evey's: I think she was attracted to V from the start but only on an unconscious level. Why? Because it would have not been suitable for her to fall in love with a mentor, a killer, a disfigured man, a man that reminded her of her father, later her torturer. These are all just the kinds of things that rise from the deepest, unconscious levels of sexuality.
I think these dark sexual undertones can even be read between the lines of us female fans' warm and humorous comments regarding our infatuation with V. The threads include all kinds of light s&m innuendos which I think all of us understand is not serious. When I first started to find out on the web if I was the only one who was attracted to V I noticed that everyone was thinking the same thing: that they were the only ones, that they were "sick"(again, in a humorous way).
I admit that from the first time I got out of the movie theatre (I have since then seen the movie several times) I knew that the "disturbing" theme and my attaction to the movie and V's character had something to do with this. Don't get me wrong - I am also attracted to other Byronian heroes and to Mr Darcy as well - but never in my life has a movie character or a movie hit me so hard ("hit" being figurative speech!). I also understood that I was attracted to the superficial levels of s&m innuendos (V's costume) but knew there was more.
When watching the movie the first time I remember one time suspecting that V might be his father (as many have), then understanding that V is otherwise like a father figure or an older mentor to her and still thinking how wonderful a love story would be between them (and at that point thinking how sick I was and totally feeling repulsed by the possibility of Evey enganging in a romantic relationship with her father or mentor!). I think the scene where Evey dresses as little girl is also constructed in order to provoke these feelings.
As Evey's character evolves after the torture scene she and V would have more of a consentual, equal relationship. When this possibility is introduced to the viewers we kind of get off the hook, not having to think about the relationship anymore. But the whole thing leaved us affected anyway.
I think the movie touches some really deep levels of human sexuality but in a very clever not-in-your-face way. Yes, there are some s&m and fetish references on the superficial level (the outfit, the dungeon, the little girl, maybe even the apron (love it) considering the Larry W. story) but this is a common feature in GNs.
But the underlying deeper notes touch all of us in different ways based on our experiences in life. I have been thinking about this for weeks and can point out the reasons why I was so affected by and yes, became very infatuated with V, but that would be too personal. It meant that I had to be very open to myself, not being afraid of what I might find and not judging my thoughts as bad or sick. And in the end, there wasn't anything horrible hiding in the darkest closets of my mind. After all, thoughts and acts are two totally separate things.
Anyway, glad to join you all, I think there are just absolutely wonderful and smart people here and it's been wonderful to read your thoughts. (And sorry for the language, English is definitely not my native language!)
Last edited by Electryone, 5/15/2006, 12:43 pm
|
|
5/15/2006, 11:15 am
|
Send PM to Electryone
|
Electryone
VFAN
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: Finland
Posts: 5
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Disturbing Themes of Sado-Masochism?
Thanks! I can't tell you how grateful I was when I saw your first post - finally someone really talked about this and I agreed with your thoughts 100%, too!
|
|
5/15/2006, 11:46 am
|
Send PM to Electryone
|
Willow7302
Vassal
Global user
Registered: 04-2006
Location: near Washington, DC
Posts: 205
Karma: 8 (+8/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: power exchange
quote:
...V carried forth his plan despite the likelihood that it would drive her away because he believed he was performing a higher service ("freeing" Evey from her fear). The reasons why he felt he had to do this are debatable, from a genuine desire to "help" her to a rationalization that she must be strong enough to carry out her part in the revolution.
thanks, Chakram.
I am thinking about power exchange, power differential in relationships. When V imprisons her he is exceeding my comfort level with "power over" BIG TIME! but it is through this harrowing expereince she is transformed. I have had my own expereinces that I would have NEVER volunteered for, but that end up having a powerful tranforming effect.
But of course, there is still that thorny issue of CONSENT.
I agree V's INTENT was not power or dominance for mere self gratification. I think he radiates a vivd and attractive, magnetic power that affects everyone who sees him, thus all those reactive threads on IMDB etc.
Also, in the GN, Delia's journal from Larkhill notes that "Magnetic personality" is a result of whatever heinous experiments thay have been subjecting him to.
I want that vividness, that courage, that transformation, and I have had some kind of tranformative expereince with V.
Electryone says it so beautifully:
quote:
But the underlying deeper notes touch all of us in different ways based on our experiences in life. the reasons why I was so affected by and yes, became very infatuated with V...meant that I had to be very open to myself, not being afraid of what I might find and not judging my thoughts as bad or sick. And in the end, there wasn't anything horrible hiding in the darkest closets of my mind.
V appears to be violent, threatening, subversive, dangerous, and singleminded. But V, fabulous archetype that he is, has liberated something in me, some courage, some clarity, some strength of purpose, that is an incredible gift.
The fact that I find the black cloak & boots thing (not to mention his articulate grace and skill in the kitchen!) incredibly sexy adds a level of intensity that makes it even better.
---
V: "There's no certainty - only opportunity."
|
|
5/15/2006, 12:19 pm
|
Send Email to Willow7302
Send PM to Willow7302
Yahoo
|
MelindaKitty
Consul
Global user
Registered: 03-2006
Location: 90 Minutes South of La-La-Land
Posts: 3484
Karma: 135 (+137/-2)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Disturbing Themes of Sado-Masochism?
OOH!!! OOOH!!!!! I take a day or two off to visit with Husband and our friends and lookie what pops up!!!
*squoobles Affirmative Action Y-Chromosome and Vixens for starting nifty new thread, then gets serious and rolls up intellectual sleeves*
There's a lot of ground to cover. Forgive me if I miss anything.
Let's start with a definition of BDSM:
BONDAGE is the use of restraint to further the state of arousal and evoke an extreme emotional response. Good bondage involves a HUGE level of trust between the person who bonds and the person who is bound. Ideally, through physical restraint, the bound person is able to release him or herself emotionally. The experience can be an absolutely transformative and freeing one. It can also be downright sick and cruel, which is why intent is so important, as is the oft-used "safe word", a key phrase or word the bound person can use to end the fantasy and get free. It's the job of the person who binds to push the bound person right up to the edge of what he/she can tolerate without violating that contract of trust. The result can be crying, screaming, withdrawal, or even sexual climax. If done well, the experience is as freeing as it is exhausting.
Hard stuff. Most people shouldn't mess with it.
DISCIPLINE is the use of physical punishment (most often spanking, paddling, or whipping) to further arousal. Discipline often goes hand and glove with bondage and can extend into the realm of emotional or psychological punishments, such as degradation, role play, or various acts of penance. The odd thing about this one is the people who most frequently are aroused by it often have the largest need in their public life to be in control, the decision makers. Like bondage, there's an inherent trust relationship that should be in place here. And like bondage, the idea is to use extreme means to get to emotional issues that are so deep-seated that normal means of arousal (or indeed any therapy) can't touch them.
The underlying idea here is that we are most ourselves when we are being intimate with someone else. Intimacy doesn't always mean sex, and the kind of things a person can learn about him/herself in the situations B&D propose are intense and sometimes frightening. Jung would term it "Shadow play".
What V does with Evey is shadow play at it's darkest, most dangerous, and most powerful. Neither of them is ever the same again.
That takes care of the B&D, let's talk S&M:
A SADIST derives sexual pleasure from the torture of others. Never let a genuine sadist perform either B or D on you. Ever. Under any circumstances. Any approach that is "sadistic" should be under a strict set of rules, pre-agreed upon, that has clear boundaries of trust and consent. As you can tell, I squick out pretty badly at any suggestion of genuine sadism in any relationship, ESPECIALLY a sexual one.
Most abusers are sadists, and that sadism extends into the bedroom. While a person who binds tends to subsume their own sexual desires in favor of fulfilling their partner's, most sadists couldn't give a rat's ass about the desires of their partner, and are threatened by the thought of their partner even HAVING sexual desires.
*gets squick back under control*
Masochism is deriving sexual pleasure from pain or torture. I'm not into this, but I know people who are. My only thing is that as long as all parties are on the same page, it's a (mostly) free country.
But let's get back to the theoretical: sado-masochism in my mind involves a highly dysfunctional give and take of pain and pleasure. One party is a "top" (the active and aggressive Dominator or Dominatrix, aka the abuser), the other is the "bottom" (the passive "victim" of the sexually-charged acts.) The idea is that there can be no balance between the two and no crossover. As such, the relationships are by definition skewed, and skewed relationships squick me out.
V4V did NOT squick me out, but there were scenes of torture, degradation, murder, and even the unrepentant confession of a Dominator. Why wasn't it squicky?
(see next post)
--- 
"Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self-confidence."
Robert Frost |
|
5/15/2006, 3:18 pm
|
Send Email to MelindaKitty
Send PM to MelindaKitty
|
Add a reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Powered by AkBBS 0.9.5b - Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
Click here to get your own free message board
|
You are not logged in (login)
Board's time is: 11/25/2009, 5:34 am
|
|
|
